If Backlund plays out this contract here and stays relatively healthy (about 75 games a year or so) this will put him right at around the 1000 games mark with the Flames.
The Following User Says Thank You to Jiggy_12 For This Useful Post:
You’re right, Bergeron and Toews are definitely next level and shouldn’t be used as comparables. If Bergeron were a 28 year old heading for UFA with an 80m cap, he’d almost undoubtedly get 8m plus. So you can’t honestly use his contract as a comparable. And obviously Toews is 10.5m, almost literally twice as much. Backlund gets over 6 on the open market. This is a great deal.
Also you mentioned that Backlund likely won’t get 50 points again, but he’s barely under that pace right now, a slight uptick over the last 25 games and he’ll get there. Regardless, combined with his FANTASTIC defensive game, he is easily a 2nd line centre on most teams. If Mikael Backlund becomes your third line center then you have a very very good problem on your hands.
I agree, if Backlund were putting up those kinds of offensive numbers this is easily $8M +. I have no issues with that.
But he never has, isn't now, and isn't likely to moving forward, so the argument isn't really very applicable.
And I agree that he is currently producing at a second line centre rate, and I think he will continue to do so for another couple of years. It's the 4 years beyond that where I think this contract becomes more of an issue.
Nothing against the player or the value he adds to team now and over the short-term. Unfortunately history is full of examples of how these contracts are a problem for teams when the player is heading into that 32-35 age range.
That's my biggest concern.
Last edited by Brad Marsh; 02-16-2018 at 07:48 PM.
Anyone that is worried about the term is struggling with the reality that the current window is 4-5 years....tops. after that Backlund will either be the trade deadline veteran teams will look at or the anchor we have to carry for 1-2 years like Wideman. Best case scenario in 5 years we have a new guard like the Coutures in San Jose up and coming to take over from Sean and Johnny. More likely we will have to make tough decisions about whether to give Johnny and Monny the big payday and cruise to irrelevance like the Hawks for a couple of years.
Love this deal and gives the team some cost certainty to maybe make a move for a signed impact player to take some solid runs the next 3-4 years.
Man Backlund is under appreciated sometimes here - luv the signing; the guy bleeds Flames.
That would hurt like hell but Mikael is badass enough that it probably doesn't even phase him, these are the types of players we need. I like the deal.
Also notable in that clip is maroon looking like a confounded moron and getzlaf whining to the refs after the goal.
Also noteable in that clip is how many terrible player we had on that team. Jooris. Ramo.David Jones. Colburne. Diaz (I actually had to sit here and think who the hell was this. And what was his first name, for a few mins before remembering).
Yikes. Backlund's shooting percentage is the lowest it's been in 7 years, his oiSH% is the lowest it's been in 7 years, and his PDO is the lowest it's been in 7 years.
Despite having an incredibly unlucky season, he still ranks 56th among NHL centres in production and is still on pace for 48 points and yet you think he won't reach 50 points again? Yikes. Last season, he ranked 35th among centres in points and considering advanced stats tend to normalize after an unlucky season 99% of the time, the chances are Backlund will be back to producing the way he was last season either nearing the end of this season or next season.
However, Backlund's offense isn't why he's so important to us. Yes, it's great he produces very good offensive numbers, but his defense is as good as any player's in the NHL. He gets buried defensively facing opposing teams' top lines every night and absolutely dominates them night in and night out despite getting buried in defensive zone starts. He's among the elite of the elite defensively.
His contract extension is an absolute steal and anyone who thinks otherwise hasn't done their homework
I have a few concerns about some of this. First of all, I don't think Backlund has just been unlucky. He's never been overly productive offensively. This season is only the fourth in his entire career that he's scored above 30 points. He turns 29 next month. I don't know about you, but I'm betting on a decrease in production over the life of the contract.
I'm not taking a huge risk when I predict that he may not hit 50 points again. He's only done that once in his career, and it's something that's going to become increasingly difficult as he continues to age. There has been a lot of evidence published that player scoring output is negatively correlated with age.
I agree that he's been an elite defensive player, and he can play on my team any day. I'm just suggesting that this contract may not appear to be as much of a bargain in years 4-6 as perhaps it seems to be today.
Last edited by Brad Marsh; 02-16-2018 at 07:38 PM.
Well done Treliving. Well-deserved for the player and a solid signing for the team. Like that he got it done early. Now let's go secure our playoff spot.
I feel like this is too much. I think 5x5 would of been the max for me. I like Backlund I’m pretty sure this will become a boat anchor in the near future though.
Once the points drop off in two years he’s basically a third line defensive specialist. I don’t know, I like him but I just don’t have a good gut feeling on this one. I hope I’m wrong.
Trade him at the deadline and undermine the team's core this season (and probably next if you get back picks and maybe a prospect); or
Keep him for the remainder of the season and lose him for nothing in the offseason.
For those who don't like the deal, which other option do you opt for?
So I don't hate the deal, I'm just concerned about the term. You can certainly make an argument that the Flames did the right thing today.
If it were me, and it seems like the majority here will be glad that it's not, I would have went for option #2.
But I'm not of the opinion that the Flames are a real contender this year anyway. I would have traded him. I think the Flames could have recouped a first rounder + for him at the deadline.
I actually don't mind the Flames depth at centre right now (and still believe that Bennett is part of that depth). Could have used this money to upgrade scoring on the wings.
But I also am happy to have Backlund. Could there have been a 4th option that saw a deal for higher AAV but shorter term? We may never know.
Anyone that is worried about the term is struggling with the reality that the current window is 4-5 years....tops. after that Backlund will either be the trade deadline veteran teams will look at or the anchor we have to carry for 1-2 years like Wideman. Best case scenario in 5 years we have a new guard like the Coutures in San Jose up and coming to take over from Sean and Johnny. More likely we will have to make tough decisions about whether to give Johnny and Monny the big payday and cruise to irrelevance like the Hawks for a couple of years.
Love this deal and gives the team some cost certainty to maybe make a move for a signed impact player to take some solid runs the next 3-4 years.
I think this contract will be pretty good value for the first couple of years of this 4-5 year window that you're referring to.
But do we forget the problems we had/have with contracts like the Wideman contract? They become real problems with real consequences in those final years, and the result of them is limited options for filling other holes.
We shouldn't forget about that just because the first half of the contract is likely to turn out pretty good, IMO.
The Following User Says Thank You to Brad Marsh For This Useful Post:
I have a few concerns about some of this. First of all, I don't think Backlund has just been unlucky. He's never been overly productive offensively. This season is only the fourth in his entire career that he's scored above 30 points. He turns 29 next month. I don't know about you, but I'm betting on a decrease in production over the life of the contract.
I'm not taking a huge risk when I predict that he may not hit 50 points again. He's only done that once in his career, and it's something that's going to become increasingly difficult as he continues to age. There has been a lot of evidence published that player scoring output is negatively correlated with age.
I agree that he's been an elite defensive player, and he can play on my team any day. I'm just suggesting that this contract may not appear to be as much of a bargain in years 4-6 as perhaps it seems to be today.
Backlund has scored at an above 40 point pace 5 times in his career + a 50 point season.
Backlund has also scored at a 47-53 point pace over his last 3 seasons and that's despite the numbers showing he's been incredibly unlucky this season. It's fine if you don't think he's been unlucky but the numbers are proof.
Having one of the very best defensive players in the NHL on your team who can score 50+ points a season for only $5.35M a season is a steal.
Even if you only look at his point totals and rely on the eye test (although though's are always incredibly biased), he's still worth the payday. But in the analytics community, he's worth much more than what he got and it's simply a steal of a deal.
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to AustinL_NHL For This Useful Post:
Good for Backlund. He's a Flame thru and thru. There is still a part of me that's a big believer in culture and I think Backlund is a guy along with Gio who can benefit some of the good young players the Flames have.
__________________ "Some guys like old balls"
Patriots QB Tom Brady
This is all great and good but....I wonder if anyone has asked what Brad Marsh thinks? Cause that's the most important thing to consider right now
The point of message boards is to discuss and debate within specific communities of people, such as fans of a sports team. I don’t understand what your point is.
