[Signing] Jets sign Bryan Little to extension (6 yrs, $5.291 mil AAV)

[GreenLantern2814]

Originally Posted by CorsiHockeyLeague

To people saying Backlund should get less than this, would you trade Backlund for Little straight up? Because I sure as hell wouldn't.

Well no, but the Flames have elite centre depth. If each was my team's best center, I think I might trade Backlund to get Little.

[PegCityFlamesFan]

Originally Posted by CorsiHockeyLeague

To people saying Backlund should get less than this, would you trade Backlund for Little straight up? Because I sure as hell wouldn't.

Really? Little is severely underrated.

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

Originally Posted by GreenLantern2814

Well no, but the Flames have elite centre depth. If each was my team's best center, I think I might trade Backlund to get Little.

Pfff, no they don't. They have a decent #1 center, and a really high end two way second line center. Crosby / Malkin territory, this ain't.

And if you had the choice between those two as your best pivot, you'd wait for your lottery pick and improve your team, because that's just sad.

Originally Posted by PegCityFlamesFan

Really? Little is severely underrated.

I think so too. Just not as much as Backlund is. Backlund is an great defensive center who can also put up somewhere in the vicinity of 50 points. If Patrice Bergeron wasn't a thing, he'd be a threat for the Selke. It's hard to think of a better guy to have in the #2 spot, if you're not lucky enough to hit the jackpot in the draft or in trade (seriously, Jim Nill, wtf).

[Oling_Roachinen]

Originally Posted by CorsiHockeyLeague

It's hard to think of a better guy to have in the #2 spot

I would say a defensively responsible 30-35-65 center who can win face-offs would be. If healthy, that's what Little's been projected to be for a bit now.

Little's point-per-game over the last couple years is better than Bergeron's, and Monahan's, and Toew's, and Kesler's. He's right there with O'Reilly, Kopitar, Thornton and Carter at ~0.80.

His faceoff percentage has been top tier for the last 2 seasons, he can kill penalties and contribute on the powerplay. He's getting to be ideal all-around 'secondary' player.

At worst he's been a weaker first line center since the Thrashers became the Jets. But as a second line center, or on the wing, he's one of the best.

His injuries have underrated him, and as a smaller player (I guess I should say Little player...) it's a bit of a concern, but they haven't been reoccurring, they are all pretty different. A full season of him playing like last year and this contract would look like an absolute steal when compared to his peers.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by PegCityFlamesFan

Really? Little is severely underrated.

So is Backlund.

I wouldn't trade Backlund straight up either. Nonetheless, this is a good contract for Little and I would be happy to give Backlund the same deal.

Also, I expect Backlund will maintain his value and productivity longer than Little will, as they age.

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by CorsiHockeyLeague

Pfff, no they don't. They have a decent #1 center, and a really high end two way second line center. Crosby / Malkin territory, this ain't.

Well, duh—the Flames do not have the League's best 1–2 punch down the middle. There is no team that can roll out anything akin to Crosby/Malkin, but that does not detract from the solid depth the Flames have down the middle.

And if you had the choice between those two as your best pivot, you'd wait for your lottery pick and improve your team, because that's just sad.

This is pure hyperbole and I suspect it stems from your tendency to criminally under-rate Sean Monahan.

I think so too. Just not as much as Backlund is. Backlund is an great defensive center who can also put up somewhere in the vicinity of 50 points. If Patrice Bergeron wasn't a thing, he'd be a threat for the Selke. It's hard to think of a better guy to have in the #2 spot, if you're not lucky enough to hit the jackpot in the draft or in trade (seriously, Jim Nill, wtf).

I agree, but I will not be the least but surprised to see a lower cap-hit for Backlund on a similar contract by simple virtue of the fact that he does not have the same offensive numbers as Little on his resumé. Teams still pay a premium for high scoring totals with less regard for how or why players arrive at them.

[ricardodw]

Originally Posted by Samonadreau

So in 3 years if Bennet hits those levels and you have another capable 3rd line center you can make a trade. RIght now the flames need Backlund. Are you saying Backlund doesnt deserve to get paid 5M or are you saying we dont need him if he wants 5M? Im confused.

If Bennett moves past Backlund on the depth charts and becomes a 60-80 pt centre Backlund would be a fantastic 3C, but to expect any more than 30-40 pts from a 3C is not reasonable.

Similarly if Roslovic or Petan do much better than forecast and replace Little as 2C and Little puts up 30 pt seasons he will not be tradedable at 5.3M /yr.

Because of the higher top end of Bennett I would suggest the Flames sign Backlund for 3 years at a higher rate. 3x6 ?

[Oling_Roachinen]

Originally Posted by ricardodw

Because of the higher top end of Bennett I would suggest the Flames sign Backlund for 3 years at a higher rate. 3x6 ?

I don't really see that working for anyone. Backlund will be 29 when his next contract kicks in, he's primed for a retirement contract that brings him to his mid thirties. That's a hard type of contract to pass up. There's too much risk with injury or his play faltering, that he could be looking at a huge paycut when he signs his next contract at 32.

Lucic, Okposo, Backes, Eriksson, Ladd, Steen, Oshie there's a lot of 50-60 point players making in that 6M range but seeing them reach their 35+ birthday. I don't see a reason why Backlund doesn't look at a 6 or 7 year contract at 5.5M+ as well if he has another good season. They hand them out like candy nowadays.

And with the Flames, they can't afford a potential 3C at 6M if things do go well for them. Probably better to either stick with Backlund, and get a lower cap-hit while the window is open.

[robaur]

Cmon guys. Little > Backlund.

And I'm the biggest Backlund fan.

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by ricardodw

If Bennett moves past Backlund on the depth charts and becomes a 60-80 pt centre Backlund would be a fantastic 3C, but to expect any more than 30-40 pts from a 3C is not reasonable.

Similarly if Roslovic or Petan do much better than forecast and replace Little as 2C and Little puts up 30 pt seasons he will not be tradedable at 5.3M /yr.

Because of the higher top end of Bennett I would suggest the Flames sign Backlund for 3 years at a higher rate. 3x6 ?

It would be very difficult to get Backlund back on a three-year term. The reason I said I would be thrilled with four years is because I don't really see any realistic scenario in which he signs for any less than five years.

As to the bolded portion I would accept this as true under normal conditions, but I would be surprised to see Gulutzan ice a lineup this year with much disparity in ice time between the top three lines. If the Bennett line and the Backlund line end up splitting time fairly evenly as I suspect they will, then I most definitely see potential for Backlund to continue to be a regular +40-point player.

[ricardodw]

Originally Posted by Oling_Roachinen

I don't really see that working for anyone. Backlund will be 29 when his next contract kicks in, he's primed for a retirement contract that brings him to his mid thirties. That's a hard type of contract to pass up. There's too much risk with injury or his play faltering, that he could be looking at a huge paycut when he signs his next contract at 32.

Lucic, Okposo, Backes, Eriksson, Ladd, Steen, Oshie there's a lot of 50-60 point players making in that 6M range but seeing them reach their 35+ birthday. I don't see a reason why Backlund doesn't look at a 6 or 7 year contract at 5.5M+ as well if he has another good season. They hand them out like candy nowadays.

And with the Flames, they can't afford a potential 3C at 6M if things do go well for them. Probably better to either stick with Backlund, and get a lower cap-hit while the window is open.

If Bennett is #2 in 2019-20 The Flames can't afford a #3C at 5-5.5M for the last 5 years of his contract either.

I agree that a 3 year deal doesn't work for Backlund..... but it works for the Flames...

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by ricardodw

If Bennett is #2 in 2019-20 The Flames can't afford a #3C at 5-5.5M for the last 5 years of his contract either...

Can the Flames afford to pay $17.5–18.0 m for their top three centres as a group? Pittsburgh paid $20.1 m for their top three the past two years; Edmonton is paying at least $18.5 m for just their top two centres starting next year; Anaheim pays $18.125 m for their top three; Washington will pay $17.5 m this season.

I think the solution is to re-think how lines are deployed and how individual teams distribute their cap costs.

[ricardodw]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

Can the Flames afford to pay $17.5–18.0 m for their top three centres as a group? Pittsburgh paid $20.1 m for their top three the past two years; Edmonton is paying at least $18.5 m for just their top two centres starting next year; Anaheim pays $18.125 m for their top three; Washington will pay $17.5 m this season.

I think the solution is to re-think how lines are deployed and how individual teams distribute their cap costs.

lol you are saying the Flames should follow the Oilers model for success!!

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by ricardodw

lol you are saying the Flames should follow the Oilers model for success!!

I most certainly am not. If anything, the Flames are constructed almost entirely antithetically to the "Oilers model." Unlike the Oilers, the Flames DO NOT have +$20.0 m tied up in two players.

I am saying that the way that Gulutzan has the team playing combined with the players who look to be on the roster in three year's time show that having three +$5.0 m centres on the roster is not necessarily a problem. But you did not answer the question: "Can the Flames afford to pay $17.5–18.0 m for their top three centres as a group?"

[the2bears]

Originally Posted by ricardodw

lol you are saying the Flames should follow the Oilers model for success!!

I have no clue how you came to this conclusion after reading what you quoted.

[ForeverFlameFan]

Originally Posted by CorsiHockeyLeague

To people saying Backlund should get less than this, would you trade Backlund for Little straight up? Because I sure as hell wouldn't.

Little > Backlund

Defense is a slight edge to Backs, but Little is a better offensive option. Not to mention, the guy could go RW with Monahan and Gaudreau if he had to.

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

Well, duh—the Flames do not have the League's best 1–2 punch down the middle. There is no team that can roll out anything akin to Crosby/Malkin, but that does not detract from the solid depth the Flames have down the middle.

The claim was that they have elite center depth. I think not. Calgary's center depth is, at best, slightly above average.

Originally Posted by Textcritic

This is pure hyperbole and I suspect it stems from your tendency to criminally under-rate Sean Monahan.

What the #### are you talking about? How did Monahan get into this? If Backlund or Little are your #1C, you're probably in some trouble. Maybe if you have the best blue line in the league, like Nashville, you could get away with it, or if you ride percentages and good goaltending like Columbus. But it's not a recipe for success.

Originally Posted by Oling_Roachinen

I would say a defensively responsible 30-35-65 center who can win face-offs would be. If healthy, that's what Little's been projected to be for a bit now.

Little has never hit 65 points in his career, and he's 29. He's also almost never healthy. If you're realistic, you can expect 45-50 points from him on average. Points per game is great, unless you've got a long track record of never playing a full season. So I guess I'll agree with you if he manages to pull together 75+ games per season on this deal, but I doubt that will happen.

And he's not a liability defensively, for sure, but he's also not Backlund. Like I said, I do think Little is underrated, but given the choice between the two, I easily take Backlund.

[Flames Draft Watcher]

Originally Posted by ricardodw

lol you are saying the Flames should follow the Oilers model for success!!

Way to demonstrate your complete lack of reading comprehension

[calgaryblood]

Originally Posted by Oling_Roachinen

I would, yes. Assuming the same contract, Little is the better player.

No he's not.

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by CorsiHockeyLeague

What the #### are you talking about? How did Monahan get into this? If Backlund or Little are your #1C, you're probably in some trouble. Maybe if you have the best blue line in the league, like Nashville, you could get away with it, or if you ride percentages and good goaltending like Columbus. But it's not a recipe for success.

My apologies. I misread the post to which you were responding.

The claim was that they have elite center depth. I think not. Calgary's center depth is, at best, slightly above average.

I do take some issue with this, however. Perhaps it is quibbling, but I would characterize the Flames centre depth as slightly above average at worst. Sean Monahan is at worst a slightly above average top-line centre, and Backlund is an exceptional second line centre. Round that out with Bennett, Stajan and the addition of Jankowski to that mix and I think that from top to bottom that sets the Flames in very good shape down the middle.