Speculation: Armchair GM and Rumors Thread XXIII - FLAMES RELATED (Mikael Backlund Appreciation)

Status
Not open for further replies.

Volica

Papa Shango
May 15, 2012
21,390
11,074
If the first two don't happen then the playoffs, let alone contention, will be out of reach for the foreseeable future anyways. The Flames should enter into a full tear-down if the new Monahan is actually the Monahan of the future and Bennett can't figure out C.

I'm not even sure Calgary can really go tear-down. I like parts of this team, really outside of a handful of players, everyone is really underperforming. Do you trade 20-24 year olds for rookies?

Really what this team needs is:
1 more top 4 Dman, and 2 competent depth D. Please no more Vet contracts; there's so much youth in this system/team that bringing a bloated carcass like Engelland on is just stupid moving forward. Likely will have to wait until the summer until Vegas has done their scavenging.

Bennett to move back to C, and give him Gaudreau when he's healthy. Those two have games that really compliment each other. They're probably the two highest skill players on this team and both have some good speed. Bennett has the most potential to be a game-breaking centre for this team; let him have it. I haven't seen a tonne of difference from his play at C vs as LW this year. Give him skill he can play with on the wings and let him roll.

Monahan has decent IQ, and a good set of mitts. If I'm the management staff, I'm telling him to work with some of the major trainers in the off-season to increase speed and work on his positioning with other coaches. There's no reason this guy couldn't figure out the defensive side of the game. The guy is literally the same size as Ryan Kesler, that should be his goal; it's not like Kesler's a speed demon, but he's a defensive beast. Monahan needs to get there. Having a guy who can score 20-30 goals and 15-30 assists a year anchoring your 2nd line would be fantastic.
 

Mr Snrub

I like the way Snrub thinks!
Oct 12, 2016
5,713
2,410
So, just thinking out loud here. What s the Flames start talking to Backlund about an extension around January 1st (he wouldn't be able to actually sign until July 1st) and it looks like they won't be in the same ballpark? Do we move Backlund this trade deadline in order to maximize his trade value?

The team can't afford to lose Backlund right now with the way Monahan and Bennett have played. I think there'll be considerably more give from management than there was on, say, the Gaudreau contract.

That being said, if Backlund and Treliving appear to be far apart at the deadline, I still wouldn't trade him. I see it as a game of odds - the chance that Backlund's camp would cave during the summer and be more open to management's offer is worth risking a smaller return we'd get if we traded him during the summer as opposed to the deadline.
 

Anglesmith

Setting up the play?
Sep 17, 2012
46,441
14,715
Victoria
Are you kidding me?

Completely serious. Literally the only criticism anyone has (and can have) for Backlund is that he doesn't put up more points. And if that's the only analysis done, he looks like a bottom-six forward.
 

Lunatik

Normal is an illusion.
Oct 12, 2012
56,176
8,336
Padded Room
I think I would consider moving Backlund at the draft but not this years deadline. I think the expansion draft will lead to alot of wheeling at the entry draft.
 

Calculon

unholy acting talent
Jan 20, 2006
16,578
4,035
Error 503
Backlund's trade value would likely be higher at draft than at the trade deadline because of extra year on his contract coinciding with the expansion draft. But I don't see him returning more than a late first and a marginal prospect which is why I'd much rather they re-sign him to a five year, 4.5 to 5.5M per deal.

And yeah, if Monahan doesn't turn things around and Bennett stays on the wing, then the Flames have to re-sign Backlund, even if it means exposing Brouwer in the expansion draft to free up cap space.
 

BigRangy

Get well soon oliver
Mar 17, 2015
3,407
1,110
I'd be a lot happier spending Brouwer's money on Backlund than on Brouwer, that's for sure.
 

SmellOfVictory

Registered User
Jun 3, 2011
10,959
653
Backlund's trade value would likely be higher at draft than at the trade deadline because of extra year on his contract coinciding with the expansion draft. But I don't see him returning more than a late first and a marginal prospect which is why I'd much rather they re-sign him to a five year, 4.5 to 5.5M per deal.

And yeah, if Monahan doesn't turn things around and Bennett stays on the wing, then the Flames have to re-sign Backlund, even if it means exposing Brouwer in the expansion draft to free up cap space.

I wouldn't even put it as "even if". Brouwer has been fine, but he's done nothing to convince me that he's so valuable he needs to be sheltered from the expansion draft. With that contract he's the definition of decent but expendable.
 

Mr Snrub

I like the way Snrub thinks!
Oct 12, 2016
5,713
2,410
I wouldn't even put it as "even if". Brouwer has been fine, but he's done nothing to convince me that he's so valuable he needs to be sheltered from the expansion draft. With that contract he's the definition of decent but expendable.

Vegas will be trying to reach the cap floor. I bet the Flames are at this point expecting to expose Brouwer. Taking that contract off the books and signing Backlund to one of equivalent value leaves you Backlund's current salary that can be used to acquire more depth. Flames drop an overpaid UFA, re-sign one of their biggest impact players long-term and have room to improve. It's ideal
 

Lunatik

Normal is an illusion.
Oct 12, 2012
56,176
8,336
Padded Room
I'd be a lot happier spending Brouwer's money on Backlund than on Brouwer, that's for sure.
Brouwer provides elements this team desperately needs, in fact I would argue we need more not less of those elements. Ferland and Tkachuk could potentially be the more we need, but beyond them there is nothing in the system that will be ready in the next few years. Where as with Backlund at the very least there is hope that Jankowski and Klimchuk can develop into similar players (Klimchuk obviously is not a center though, so Frolik would be a better comparable).

Also don't understand the hate Brouwer gets, sure he has his struggles at times but all players do. He is just barely under his pace from last year at the moment on a team where very few players are going well.
 

Dertell

Registered User
Jul 14, 2015
2,923
474
Completely serious. Literally the only criticism anyone has (and can have) for Backlund is that he doesn't put up more points. And if that's the only analysis done, he looks like a bottom-six forward.
We must have a different definition of stat watchers then. I (well, we the people "obsessed" with advanced stats) have taken enough crap from other people last year for saying he's as 2C, let alone better than Ryan Kesler.

But yeah, his scoring rate has been on 2C in four of the past five years now, so they must be looking at little more than his hockey card stats.
 

Johnny Hoxville

The Return of a Legend
Jul 15, 2006
37,549
9,343
Calgary
It's actually a hard situation with Backlund, a lot like what happened with Kadri for the Leafs. We need him today and probably for tomorrow. But I don't think there's any question that the expectation is that Monahan and Bennett pass him and that Jankowski will be a more than capable younger, cheaper 3C. But yeah we absolutely need him right now, he's one of our top players.
 

Dertell

Registered User
Jul 14, 2015
2,923
474
A key difference between Kadri's situation and Backlund's is age. Kadri's was 26 at the end of his deal whereas Backlund will be 29. At that point, will we want to keep him for his 30s? Hopefully we can ink him for only three more years in July, and find a way to get rid of Brouwer. Oh and please brad don't bring in Alzer or any vet like him.
 

Johnny Hoxville

The Return of a Legend
Jul 15, 2006
37,549
9,343
Calgary
A key difference between Kadri's situation and Backlund's is age. Kadri's was 26 at the end of his deal whereas Backlund will be 29. At that point, will we want to keep him for his 30s? Hopefully we can ink him for only three more years in July, and find a way to get rid of Brouwer. Oh and please brad don't bring in Alzer or any vet like him.

I agree but the situation facing the respective teams in regards to their young players is very similar. I don't think it makes sense to sign Backlund longterm.

Also, I do want Alzner or Stone. We don't have any guys like that in our system either.
 

Anglesmith

Setting up the play?
Sep 17, 2012
46,441
14,715
Victoria
We must have a different definition of stat watchers then. I (well, we the people "obsessed" with advanced stats) have taken enough crap from other people last year for saying he's as 2C, let alone better than Ryan Kesler.

But yeah, his scoring rate has been on 2C in four of the past five years now, so they must be looking at little more than his hockey card stats.

I was still using a traditional definition of "stat watchers" in that post, yes. There are still plenty of them.
 

Fig

Absolute Horse Shirt
Dec 15, 2014
12,955
8,449
Backlund is a decent LWer if not played at C. I don't mind keeping him in the long term plans a la Stajan.

2/3C +2LWer like what Bennett is playing today.

Anchors 3C, plays 2LW to jump start Bennett or Monahan if need be long term.
 

L13

Registered User
Oct 1, 2015
1,226
93
Re-sign Backlund when the time comes or this team will go deeper into the dumpster until it drafts a superstar centre in the top 3. We cannot afford to lose him. (We may struggle to afford to keep him, of course, but when you insist on throwing money at players like Brouwer in free agency, you reap what you sow.) Right now he is our best forward and I live for the day Gaudreau and Backlund are put on the same line.
 

OvermanKingGainer

#BennettFreed #CurseofTheSpulll #FreeOliver
Feb 3, 2015
16,133
7,107
2022 Cup to Calgary
I would say the only difference between our rebuild and Edmonton's is that we had Backlund, Giordano, and Brodie while they did not. It could get real ugly if we traded one of those three. People who think Sean Monahan could carry the mail need only look at Ryan Nugent-Hopkins' "success" until he was relegated to essentially 3C on the Oilers.
 

Skobel24

#Ignited
May 23, 2008
16,789
920
Winnipeg
Bennett to move back to C, and give him Gaudreau when he's healthy.

I've been saying this for a while.

Gaudreau - Bennett - Brouwer

That should be a line. It would also allow Brouwer to play to his strengths. Get in along the boards, get in front of the net, stand up for them if need be. Keep it simple for him. I still think Bennett is more effective on the wing, but I'd be fine with him at center if he's with Gaudreau.

Tkachuk - Backlund - Frolik

That line is obvious.

Versteeg - Monahan - Ferland

I like Versteeg and Ferland with Monahan.

Stajan - Jankowski - Hathaway

Shutdown line that can provide some energy. Shelter Janks a bit.

Rotate Bouma in as needed.
 

Calculon

unholy acting talent
Jan 20, 2006
16,578
4,035
Error 503
Dreger: ‘There’s a lot of things percolating in Calgary’

The latest batch of grist for the mill came via Toronto’s TSN 1050 Tuesday morning, beginning with Darren Dreger being asked if he feels there’s anything to the suggestion that the Leafs and Calgary Flames are discussing potential trades.

“Uh, no. There’s nothing official,†said Dreger. “I think that the Toronto Maple Leafs would have interest in upgrading their blueline in any way, and if Dougie Hamilton were actually on the market, why wouldn’t Lou Lamoriello and the Toronto Maple Leafs express some interest. The fit has to be right for both Calgary and Toronto to make it work. That’s obvious.

“So I think Toronto should be intrigued by Dougie Hamilton. But as Ray Ferraro just pointed out there (in the preceding audio clip), Hamilton is valued by the Calgary Flames. His game has improved over the last three weeks to a month.â€

Dreger then noted that big, young, right-shot defensemen are hard to find, and that the Flames committed to Hamilton when they made the trade by signing him to that six-year, $34.5 million pact – “So they’re not pushing him out the door.â€

“It’s a story that we have to continue to follow,†observed Dreger. “And I’ll tell you this much – what was real was the dialogue between, say, Arizona and other teams with Treliving the Calgary Flames around draft time specific to Dougie Hamilton.â€
Dreger was asked where he thinks the Flames are on this scale concerning Dougie Hamilton.

“Good question, and it’s a good way to qualify,†said Dreger. “I think on that scale, Treliving is in a place where if someone is calling, he’s willing to listen. But we in the media have done the bidding, right. Hamilton’s name is out there because we continue to talk about it, right or wrong.

“… I think that Calgary is at least willing to listen, but they know that if they make a deal like this, especially as fragile as the organization is – and maybe that’s a bigger story than Dougie Hamilton potentially being trade bait here. That team is wildly inconsistent. There’s already questions, of course, around Treliving’s future as the general manager, around newly-hired coach Glen Gulutzan. And that’s not unusual for a team that has high expectations that is struggling with consistency. We just saw what happened on the weekend with Gerard Gallant and the Florida Panthers.

“So there’s a lot of things percolating in Calgary. So maybe Treliving does something significant like this, not just with Toronto, but moving Hamilton or a bigger piece to try and shake up the core.â€
Does Dreger directly ask the general managers if they’re talking trade? Does he get an answer? Does he believe that answer?

“I do ask it that directly,†said Dreger. “And sometimes it’s just simply a text that just says, ‘Are you hearing anything out there? There’s some rumor and speculation around you guys that you might be willing to do this.’ And you throw out a name. Or you keep it more broad, more vague.

“And it’s like fishing. Sometimes they’ll bite and they’ll give you more than you were expecting. Sometimes you’ve got to work at it a little bit.

“But just to circle back to the Toronto Maple Leafs and the Calgary Flames, specific to the rumors over the past day or two – I asked Brad Treliving point-blank yesterday if he had anything going on with the Toronto Maple Leafs. I didn’t suggest Hamilton. I just said ‘Anything.’ And his response was: ‘Nothing. Zero.’

“So when managers tell you that that specifically – that bluntly – then that means that they don’t want that conversation to continue on because there’s nothing there, at least for the moment.â€
So then the natural question would be what if something was going on, but he didn’t want Dreger to know about it. How would Treliving have handled that?

“Good question. He probably wouldn’t answer,†said Dreger. “Brad is media-friendly. I’m not saying that he leaks information. He doesn’t. He’s very careful and protective of his organization. But he’s not afraid of the media. And I’ve known him a long time. If there was something that was going on that was significant, he’d lay low. He’s not going to spill the beans. But that wasn’t the case. The response was fairly swift.

“Now, I did hear probably a couple or three weeks ago that there was some contact with the Toronto Maple Leafs, but it seemed like it was on a smaller scale. Like he was looking at Leipsic or maybe an American Hockey League fit. And that happens all of the time.
 

Flames Fanatic

Mediocre
Aug 14, 2008
13,329
2,888
Cochrane
Lots of good info in there Calc, thanks for sharing.

The highlight for me was this:

Treliving is in a place where if someone is calling, he’s willing to listen. But we in the media have done the bidding, right. Hamilton’s name is out there because we continue to talk about it, right or wrong.

Particularly the latter half.
 

Rangediddy

The puck was in
Oct 28, 2011
3,710
809
Really disappointing. Guy's game just kinda fell off a cliff after his injuries, he's an AHL player at this point.

Yup, Ferland and Tkachuk have added more toughness and infinite more skill than Bouma. I don't miss him.

I think a contender could use someone like him for a playoff run though. Those kind of guys can be the difference when you get into the later rounds. Not much we'd get for him though
 

Rangediddy

The puck was in
Oct 28, 2011
3,710
809
Lots of good info in there Calc, thanks for sharing.

The highlight for me was this:



Particularly the latter half.

For discussion's sake though, would Nylander be a good return? I don't like that we'd be left short on D, but we're definitely not getting Reilly back. Don't need another center either...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->