GDT: Oct. 28: Flames @ Senators [5:30pm MT - SN1]

[King In The North]

I would just keep Backlund as our 3rd line C

 

[Dertell]

Can someone explain to me what's wrong with Backlund being the 2C?

 

[tmurfin]

Can someone explain to me what's wrong with Backlund being the 2C?

1) He doesn't have the offensive prowess to consistently produce at that level.
2) He's been horrible this year, although practically everyone has.

I think he's fine there as a stopgap, but I think the hope is Bennett takes that role ASAP, and Backlund goes to where he can thrive, as the #3 shutdown C.

 

[Dertell]

1) He doesn't have the offensive prowess to consistently produce at that level.

His scoring rate was right in the middle of the pack last season as far as 2Cs goes (not including Malkin-esque "2C", of course) and that it, while being buried in the d-zone and playing in Hartley's non-existant offensive system.

 

[OvermanKingGainer]

2) He's been horrible this year, although practically everyone has.

Monahan hasn't exactly lit the world on fire, either. He just gets a free pass for being 21.

1) He doesn't have the offensive prowess to consistently produce at that level.

Posted this in another thread, might as well re-post:

Backlund does score enough to be very good in a top 6 role, though. Last year was an outlier year where he was on an essentially disfunctional power play unit with Mason Raymond and Joe Colborne, with Raphael Diaz being the point trigger man. Between 2010-2014 he averaged 4.64 PP Points/60.

At even strength, Backlund's scoring is also strong: from 2012-2015 he's averaged 1.41 ES Points/60. That's tanked heavily by the 2013-14 season, as in both the 2014-15 and 2012-13 seasons he was up around 1.6 ES Points/60.

These point scoring statistics, combined with the absolutely defensive top 6 usage (Quality of Competition = 1.015, Offensive Zone Start% = 38.5% in 2014-15, QoC = 1.0, OSZ% = 47.1% in 2013-14) as well as his strong positive influence as a possession driver (+5.2%CRel in 2014-15, +16.6%CRel in 2013-14) all point to a player who is a top 6 centre, albeit not a first liner. The above stats are all pretty comparable to reputable top 6 guys like

Tomas Plekanec
1.55 ES Points/60 from 2012-2015
4.97 PP Points/60 from 2012-2015
QoC = 0.653, OSZ% = 45.3% in 2014-15
QoC = 1.39, OSZ% = 38.0% in 2013-14

or

Ryan Kesler
1.41 ES Points/60 from 2012-2015
3.57 PP Points/60 from 2012-2015
QoC = 1.267, OSZ% = 47.1% in 2014-15
QoC = 1.258, OSZ% = 48.2% in 2013-14

or

Mikko Koivu
1.57 ES Points/60 from 2012-2015
4.51 PP Points/60 from 2012-2015
QoC = 0.237, OSZ% = 55.3% in 2014-15
QoC = 0.927, OSZ% = 60.1% in 2013-14

If Backlund doesn't score enough to be a top 6 guy, neither do these three players.

 

[Ace Rimmer]

1) He doesn't have the offensive prowess to consistently produce at that level.
2) He's been horrible this year, although practically everyone has.

I think he's fine there as a stopgap, but I think the hope is Bennett takes that role ASAP, and Backlund goes to where he can thrive, as the #3 shutdown C.

I kind of disagree with part of #1, the problem is he's the real Mr. Glass, and he can't consistently do something (anything) if he's out significant numbers of games every season with an injury.

 

[Master Bill]

1) He doesn't have the offensive prowess to consistently produce at that level.
2) He's been horrible this year, although practically everyone has.

I think he's fine there as a stopgap, but I think the hope is Bennett takes that role ASAP, and Backlund goes to where he can thrive, as the #3 shutdown C.

God, it's ridiculous how people say this just because he's not getting the points. How exactly has he been horrible? He's expected to play a stable two-way game which he has done exactly as expected.

If being the 2nd best defensive forward after Frolik is considered horrible play, then I wonder what your standards are. He's not garbage offensively either. He's been maintaining the puck better than most forwards on this team. He's struggling to make offensive plays but who else other than Gaudreau has done that?

 

[Johnny Hoxville]

Heres some more numbers, in his previous 6 NHL seasons, he's played over 70 games twice and has never played a full season. In that span, he has broke 30 points only twice and his career high is 39 points.

Again I like Backlund, overall he's a very useful player. He's got a good attitude, he works hard, and he's very solid in his own end and he's average in size. Ideally I'd want someone like a Hanzel, who's good at FO's (Backs has never recorded over 50% once), is 6'3 or bigger and can be relied on to score over 45 points at the 2C spot.

Like 100TG said ideally we would keep Backlund, but what futures do we have to get that type of player? If we can get it by moving Granlund and Tspoon, show me where to sign.

 

[Calculon]

Backlund and who's ever on his line have generated a ton of chances the last few games; just no finish. Given the teams record, stuff like this gets magnified. And of course, the usual haters gonna hate.

The points will come, not that it'll make a difference for those who have already made up their minds. Once Bennett gets comfortable and takes over second line centre position, people will be able to relax. Of course, that's a year or two away sooo . . .

 

[tmurfin]

Heres some more numbers, in his previous 6 NHL seasons, he's played over 70 games twice and has never played a full season. In that span, he has broke 30 points only twice and his career high is 39 points.

Again I like Backlund, overall he's a very useful player. He's got a good attitude, he works hard, and he's very solid in his own end and he's average in size. Ideally I'd want someone like a Hanzel, who's good at FO's (Backs has never recorded over 50% once), is 6'3 or bigger and can be relied on to score over 45 points at the 2C spot.

Like 100TG said ideally we would keep Backlund, but what futures do we have to get that type of player? If we can get it by moving Granlund and Tspoon, show me where to sign.

This. On pace means absolutely nothing, if Backlund can come in, stay healthy, and be a consistent secondary scoring option at center, than I will call him a #2. At this point he's a good #3/tweener #2. He has done absolutely nothing to prove he's a #2 or even capable of playing that role on a competitive team consistently.

And yes, Backs has been horrible. He's had his moments with Frolik, but other than that he's been seriously soft on the puck and can't make anything happen. BUT like I said, everyone's been horrible.

At OKG, I never said Monahan was playing good. ONCE AGAIN, everyone not named Gaudreau, Brodie and somewhat Bennett, has been horrible. Period.

And please, I'm far from a "hater". I've always backed Backlund and pulled for him, still do.

 

[Johnny Hoxville]

Backlund and who's ever on his line have generated a ton of chances the last few games; just no finish. Given the teams record, stuff like this gets magnified. And of course, the usual haters gonna hate.

The points will come, not that it'll make a difference for those who have already made up their minds. Once Bennett gets comfortable and takes over second line centre position, people will be able to relax. Of course, that's a year or two away sooo . . .

Calcs, I hope that you don't think I'm a Backlund hater, I truly do like him (especially his mane). But he's been around enough where we know what he is, which is absolutely fine and he's an important player on pretty much any team. Look at how good Frans Nielsen is for NYI. But we have a hole upfront and it's at 2C. Monahan probably isn't even truly a top 1C yet and should probably be playing 2C minutes. I'd just like to see us get bigger there, stronger on the dot and more offence until Janko is ready which could be a while.

 

[Dertell]

Heres some more numbers, in his previous 6 NHL seasons, he's played over 70 games twice and has never played a full season. In that span, he has broke 30 points only twice and his career high is 39 points.

Irrelevant stat. Point production on the PP has nothing to do with ES positions (in this case, PP). Also, usage does affect point production If you're worried about his injury history that's fine, but 1) I think it made him cheaper on the cap and 2) it doesn't change whether he's a 2C or not when he does play; what he does on the ice determinate that.

 

[herashak]

If the flames had good winger depth Backlund could do his thing as the 2c. When you don't have good scoring depth on the wings and need Backlund to push the offensive play you probably won't get great results.

 

[Volica]

Irrelevant stat. Point production on the PP has nothing to do with ES positions (in this case, PP). Also, usage does affect point production If you're worried about his injury history that's fine, but 1) I think it made him cheaper on the cap and 2) it doesn't change whether he's a 2C or not when he does play; what he does on the ice determinate that.

Irrelevant stats 101. Games played and points produced. NHL 2k16 life.

 

[Calculon]

Calcs, I hope that you don't think I'm a Backlund hater, I truly do like him (especially his mane). But he's been around enough where we know what he is, which is absolutely fine and he's an important player on pretty much any team. Look at how good Frans Nielsen is for NYI. But we have a hole upfront and it's at 2C. Monahan probably isn't even truly a top 1C yet and should probably be playing 2C minutes. I'd just like to see us get bigger there, stronger on the dot and more offence until Janko is ready which could be a while.

Just to be a little more clear, in no way, shape or form does criticism of a player mark someone as a 'hater'. When it comes to Backlund, it seems like most people here are largely ambivalent with no strong feelings either way. There's really only a couple of posters who can be categorized as 'haters'; I would have thought it was fairly obvious as to who they are. Basically the ones who pretty much can't accept that Backlund's value is more than just the points he puts up, that he drives possession and that that's a good thing. But to be fair, he hasn't been his usual beastly forechecking, turnover causing self over the last 10 games.

But anyway, yeah there is a hole at centre on the second (and a hole on the second line LW and a couple of holes on the RW and a hole in net). And it seems like almost everyone acknowledges Backlund's not the long term solution - down the road, he'll either be the teams' 3rd line shutdown centre, 2nd or 3rd line LW, or traded/let go via free agency.

So, I guess the divergence comes from wanting to solve the issue now via a trade versus waiting until Bennett or Jankowski or someone else emerges as a viable solution, and in the meantime, letting Backlund act as a stopgap. I just don't see the urgency to make a move right now though; the Flames aren't cup contenders and adding a second line centre won't change that. Now, if the right deal comes along that provides the Flames a long term solution at an affordable price, then by all means, Treliving should pull the trigger. But that's also exceedingly unlikely; realistically, the only centres available are old or declining, mediocre or worse and have terrible contracts that will handicap the team moving forward. Guys like Hanzal (seemingly even more injury prone than Backlund; reached 40 points just once; career high of 16 goals), Sutter (living off his last name), Lecavalier (lol), Gagner ("+/- is like golf, right?"), Bozak (worse version of Stajan) etc., all have their warts too. So unless you want to give up Brodie for ROR or Pavelski, there's nothing to be done other than wait.

 

[Johnny Hoxville]

Irrelevant stat. Point production on the PP has nothing to do with ES positions (in this case, PP). Also, usage does affect point production If you're worried about his injury history that's fine, but 1) I think it made him cheaper on the cap and 2) it doesn't change whether he's a 2C or not when he does play; what he does on the ice determinate that.

While it's nice he has a good contract, I'm fine with paying someone who produces. How moronic would it be to state I want Gaudreau to only score 30 points this year so we don't have to pay him over 3 million next season?

I also never talked about his production on the PP or ES, not sure what your point is.

 

[Lunatik]

Backlund apologists out in full force I see. As an apparent "Backlund hater", I'd like to point out that he hasn't been as good defensively this season as he has in years past and he's playing soft like he did when he first came into the league. I don't know if he's scared of getting injured or what, but he is in no way, shape or form the player he was last year at either end of the ice.

 

[hangman005]

Backlund apologists out in full force I see. As an apparent "Backlund hater", I'd like to point out that he hasn't been as good defensively this season as he has in years past and he's playing soft like he did when he first came into the league. I don't know if he's scared of getting injured or what, but he is in no way, shape or form the player he was last year at either end of the ice.

I'm very non caring about Backlund, he's just one of the guys that are on the team, but I don't have any feeling for either ways.

But this season Backlund has been much like my feelings for him, he's not been bad and he's not been good he's just sort of been.

 

[Lunatik]

I'm very non caring about Backlund, he's just one of the guys that are on the team, but I don't have any feeling for either ways.

But this season Backlund has been much like my feelings for him, he's not been bad and he's not been good he's just sort of been.

I think it depends on your definition of bad. For me when I say he is terrible, I don't mean he shouldn't be in the NHL. I just mean based on what I expect from him due to past performance, he is not living up to those expectations.

 

[Dertell]

While it's nice he has a good contract, I'm fine with paying someone who produces. How moronic would it be to state I want Gaudreau to only score 30 points this year so we don't have to pay him over 3 million next season?

I also never talked about his production on the PP or ES, not sure what your point is.

That's not what I'm saying. A better comparison: "Gaudreau will be cheaper if he gets an injury or two". It's not about being cheaper because you're a worse player, it's about being cheaper because that player is more likely to get an injury.

We're talking about whether he's a 2C or not. 2C is a even strength position, so if he produces points on ES at the same rate as the other 2Cs in the league, then he's a 2C. One buried in the d-zone every year with, usually, crap quality of teammates, in Hartley's offensive "system" of 'score on zone entries or retake possession'.

 

[InfinityIggy]

We should use Bollig as our 2C. He is gritty.

 

[Volica]

Backs has been really bad this season. This is coming from someone who likes him some Backlund; I've been a fan of his since he was drafted by the Flames.

I thought he'd have a killer season with Frolik on his wing. Instead he's been bad at the dot, pretty pedestrian in the offensive end and not great on the defensive end.

Honestly, in my 3/4th C, I really want a guy who can win a ton of draws, have good possession of the puck and chip in with some points. Honestly, this entire team is horrible at draws outside of Staj. Monny and Bennett are below 45%, Backs isn't much better at 47%. We don't start with the puck enough; and it definitely hurts us.

 

[Johnny Hoxville]

That's not what I'm saying. A better comparison: "Gaudreau will be cheaper if he gets an injury or two". It's not about being cheaper because you're a worse player, it's about being cheaper because that player is more likely to get an injury.

We're talking about whether he's a 2C or not. 2C is a even strength position, so if he produces points on ES at the same rate as the other 2Cs in the league, then he's a 2C. One buried in the d-zone every year with, usually, crap quality of teammates, in Hartley's offensive "system" of 'score on zone entries or retake possession'.

Backlund is in his 7th season, there's enough consistency is his games played and production over his career to draw real conclusions about his game. He can absolutely fill in as a 2C, but other than hot stretches, he has only produced in 1 season in what I deem worthy of "decent" production at that spot.

And while it sounds like I'm knicking Backlund, I just have particular expectations at a certain spots that I'd like to see and right now they aren't being met and haven't been in sometime.

At 3C, Backlund during stretches is among the best in the league. For a 2C, I'd like to see other elements brought to the table. Being over 50% on the draw would be a start.

 

[SmellOfVictory]

Heres some more numbers, in his previous 6 NHL seasons, he's played over 70 games twice and has never played a full season. In that span, he has broke 30 points only twice and his career high is 39 points.

Again I like Backlund, overall he's a very useful player. He's got a good attitude, he works hard, and he's very solid in his own end and he's average in size. Ideally I'd want someone like a Hanzel, who's good at FO's (Backs has never recorded over 50% once), is 6'3 or bigger and can be relied on to score over 45 points at the 2C spot.

Like 100TG said ideally we would keep Backlund, but what futures do we have to get that type of player? If we can get it by moving Granlund and Tspoon, show me where to sign.

Hanzal is awesome, but he spends as much time on IR as Backlund does. If the injury thing is really a concern, I don't think he's the player you'd want to replace Backs with.

 

[Johnny Hoxville]

Hanzal is awesome, but he spends as much time on IR as Backlund does. If the injury thing is really a concern, I don't think he's the player you'd want to replace Backs with.

I wonder if the Kings would entertain Carter for cap reasons?