Flames Fan Ask - November 23, 2013

Justin Azevedo
November 23 2013 11:45AM

 

It's time for another round of Fan Ask. Go Dinos.

Q: If Backlund does get traded, to where and what kind of a return could we possibly see?

A: At this point, I'm thinking like St. Louis or Detroit would be the two teams most likely to be interested. The issue with trading Backlund - other than the fact that you're getting rid of your second best centre - is that you're not going to get anywhere near fair value in return for what he brings a team.

He out-possesses top-6 players. Theoretically, that makes him a top-6 player. The going return for that type of player is a 2nd or 1st round pick. I'll say at absolute best he'd bring back a second, but it would likely be something along the lines of a 3rd and a middling prospect. Not worth it. Unfortunately, I'm pretty sure a Backlund trade is inevitable now, so resign yourself to the fact that they won't get fair value. I'm pretty sure this is the next move to go down. 

Q: What the hell happened to Janko?

A: Jankowski's current scoring struggles were talked about in the last edition of our NHLE updates, and what I said at the time is that he needed to increase his shots per game. If he was averaging 3 shots per, the scoring struggles wouldn't be an issue.

Unfortunately, he isn't really even close to that marker. Janko's now dropped back almost to where he was last season (~1.7 SH/G) and is only averaging ~1.9 SH/G. He's still shooting 30%, too. Because of his talent we might not see that drop below 15% but that still indicates he's been twice as lucky as he should've been. The assists - or lack there of - are starting to worry me as well. The NCAA is 1/4 of the way through their season too, and even though Jankowski is getting PP time and Providence has scored 44 goals, he still only has the one assist. I'm still willing to chalk that up to bad luck but if he can't get assists long-term it suggests he's just a peripheral player.

So, in short, nothing "happened" to Jankowski, but he isn't doing the things he needs to be doing right now.

Q: Chances Monahan goes to the WJC?

A: I can't see them releasing Monahan to the WJC. It's painfully obvious that the people around the team expect them to stay as competitive as possible. You're not going to send away one of your best-scoring forwards if that's the case. Plus, he'd likely have to go to orientation camp, which is even more time spent where he's not on the roster.

I would send him to the WJC for sure, but I'm not the one in charge.

Q: Why are fans of the Flames franchise so defensive of Face Punchers, or make excuses for them when they are visibly and quantifiably bad?

A: I don't think that the love for goons is simply a Calgary thing. The reason people love goons is because, at some primal level, most people enjoy bloodsport. The goods provide.

They're uniformly terrible at hockey, though, so I wouldn't want them on my team. I don't buy that there's a tangible impact on a game after a fight, but some do.

Q: Why is Sven sitting at all?

A: See the two above answers. Sven makes mistakes (because he's 21 and he's supposed to) but in the minds of the Flames brain trust a competitive team can't make those mistakes. He really should have just played all of these past two seasons in Abbotsford.

Q: I have been curious what is up with Sieloff. How is the development of guys down in Abby, like Granlund, going? Also, what you think is going to happen with all our college prospects this season?

Sieloff is still recovering from surgery on his broken face. There is an infection and he's out indefinitely until everything is completely clean and healed up. In terms of the guys in Abby, I update the prospects NHLE here every couple of days. Granlund is producing a lot of shots, which is good. Knight has been the best prospect in Abbotsford thus far. Reinhart's scoring will get up to a PPG at some point so that's really good too.

Arnold and Agostino are the two seniors we really have to worry about. Neither really have the cache needed to be guys that are lured away. In saying that, Arnold is scoring at a really good pace right now and I've considered him to be a guy with 3rd line potential for years - so hopefully that contract comes soon after BC is done for the year. Gilmour has had a really good start, too. I wouldn't be surprised if all of the rest of them went back for one more year, including Gaudreau. 

Q: @thefanblogger was saying that Baertschi is on the block and will be traded before Christmas. Who do you think he'll be traded to and for who?‎

If they trade him now, they're just as bad as the Oilers are. With that caveat in mind, any trade that doesn't have, at the very least, a first-round pick plus more coming back is simply a massive waste of an asset. I just can't think of a single compelling reason for the Flames to trade him - which means that of course he'll be moved. All of this is thanks to Burke.

Q: How much wood would a Klimchuk chuck if a Klimchuk could chuck wood?

A: Probably 16.

A9d138d0e612f28cd46f9b7057ed715d
Justin is a 23-year-old Flames fan who also happens to be pursuing a double major at the University of Calgary. He has played hockey at high levels, enjoys wearing shorts and tends to drink far too much Grasshopper. Please don't hate him.
Avatar
#1 Ryan Pike
November 23 2013, 11:52AM
Trash it!
1
trashes
Props
2
props

I believe that Sieloff got a staph infection related to his hip injury last year, and then got an infection from the injection used to treat the staph infection.

Avatar
#2 vowswithin
November 23 2013, 11:54AM
Trash it!
7
trashes
Props
0
props

Q: How much wood would a Klimchuk chuck if a Klimchuk could chuck wood?

A: Probably 16.

Yes I strike again! ;-)

Avatar
#3 RTZ15
November 23 2013, 11:55AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
3
props

In my opinion, Ramo def. should get the next start. But since Berra won last game and has already beaten Chi, he'll get the green light. With a back-to-back upcoming Vs ANA/LA. I wouldn't wanna see a cold Ramo in net. But, what do you think?

Avatar
#4 vowswithin
November 23 2013, 11:57AM
Trash it!
5
trashes
Props
0
props

@Ryan Pike

Also when can I hear another three a$$holes podcast?

Avatar
#5 Southbound J
November 23 2013, 12:11PM
Trash it!
4
trashes
Props
7
props

Can you explain how they would be "just as bad as the Oilers" please enlighten the masses.

Avatar
#6 loudogYYC
November 23 2013, 12:29PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
6
props

This isn't the first time Dreger has talked about the Flames considering moving Backlund. This time around he's not saying the Flames are shopping him, but that 5 or 6 teams are kicking tires.

IF he gets traded I can see it being as part of a package where the Flames take on a big contract in return with a top prospect/draft pick coming back. As much as MSM is talking about who will include a 1st or 2nd in a trade that clears cap space, I just don't see it happening. A player as good as Backlund is probably what it will take for cap strapped teams to part with a high pick.

Avatar
#7 ?
November 23 2013, 12:34PM
Trash it!
5
trashes
Props
21
props

If Baertschi does get traded, I will be extremely disappointed. Trading away bluechip prospects isn't how you develop them (lol), and it sure as hell isn't how you rebuild a hockey team.

And if it happens, I want a 2 Minutes Hate devoted entirely to Brian Burke :)

Avatar
#8 TRAV
November 23 2013, 12:47PM
Trash it!
3
trashes
Props
31
props

"It's painfully obvious that the people around the team expect them to stay as competitive as possible."

Of course they do. I don't find it painful in the least that the team aspires to be as good as possible. In fact I would find it quite painful if the team was "trying to be okay, and accepting losing as a natural part of the rebuild."

You do not develop players by teaching them that losing is okay. (see Edmonton) You teach them that hard work, time spent in the gym, putting team before individual stats, dedication/ effort are all the right way to belong to a winning organization. (you teach them to be as competitive as possible!)

I would argue that the Flames are doing a great job of being competitive while developing players... See Monahan, Brodie, Colborne, Knight, Ferland, Granlund..

I would also say that the lessons that Sven is learning now will pay off in the long run. Players need to learn to compete, to play with hunger and to avoid complacency. I see a noticeable difference in the way Sven is competing the last few games with how he started. I agree that we need to be mindful of his confidence but we are trying to develop a complete player. Sitting out a few games over the course of the season is not going to wreck our prospect.

Finally I don't mind carrying a tough guy on the team. (I would prefer that he could add more than just toughness) I don't like a tough guy because I love bloodsport. In fact I hate seeing a guy get really beat up. I don't like it when I have my young daughter at a game with me and I have to explain it and I don't like staged fights. So why would I carry a tough guy on my team?

I have played the game when the other team had a player who would openly skate by our bench and mock us, take liberties slashing our goalie, or our top players. I have seen guys shrink when the other side intimidates you and it doesn't feel very good. Looking at the guy next to you and knowing that he is tough, mean and will answer any comers makes you play better. It gives you confidence. It really is difficult to explain and to quantify. I get it. I can just tell you that there is a reason that when you ask players who have played at a high level if they like having a guy on the bench who can fill the role, the vast majority will answer yes. That sentiment is quantifiable and there is a reason for it. Not the strongest argument but it is the way I feel.

Avatar
#9 Colin.S
November 23 2013, 12:57PM
Trash it!
6
trashes
Props
6
props

@loudogYYC

Nobody is giving the Flames a first/second pick for Backlund at this point in time, they are using him as a fourth line center. The best they are going to get for him is a third rounder. I think the biggest comparable is Colborne to be honest, he's younger, drafted a bit higher, but close and both are centers with bigger expectations. With the way the Flames have used and deployed him there's no way that we get a first/second/top prospect without including other big pieces.

@Southbound J, we are already as bad as the Oilers. And if we start moving out the pieces that are actually moving the puck and creating positive scoring chance counts (As Kent has been putting out on Twitter, Baertschi's chance count compared to the rest of the flames is just silly), we are not going to be improving, at best we would be standing still at worst, ugh, I don't even want to think about it.

I don't see any compelling reason to trade Baertschi at all, we don't exactly have a ton of young wingers in this organization who will be around for the long haul. Camms will probably be moved shortly and at the latest the trade deadline. Stempniak is as good as gone, whether it's through trade or as a UFA this year. And once you start moving them out I don't see Huddler wanting to stay with a team projected to be bottom 5 again, and with his production and not much longer on his contract would probably be easy to move as well.

Unless you were getting one of Floridas, Carolinas, NYI, Columbus, Nashvilles or Winnipegs 1st ronder, which all of them have a good chance to be in the top 10, I don't see the upside in trading him.

Avatar
#10 Southern_Point
November 23 2013, 12:58PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
2
props

Re: Jankowski

I'm interested if any else sees Joe Colborne as Jankowski comparable: both were drafted out of non-traditional junior sources after putting up close to 2 ppg in their respective leagues. Colborne started scoring in college at a slightly better pace than Jankowski, but still finished under 1ppg after two seasons before hitting the AHL.

Then obviously you have the style comparisons with Colborne at 6'5 vs Janko at 6'2 Both skate well for their height and have decent hands, but for whatever reason never put it all together, and yet GMs coaches go on wild goose chases trying to make them into the next Joe Thornton.

Yes Colborne had a decent performance last night, and a couple eye popping moves to score a goal and in the shootout in the two games before that.

Avatar
#11 TRAV
November 23 2013, 01:05PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
4
props
? wrote:

If Baertschi does get traded, I will be extremely disappointed. Trading away bluechip prospects isn't how you develop them (lol), and it sure as hell isn't how you rebuild a hockey team.

And if it happens, I want a 2 Minutes Hate devoted entirely to Brian Burke :)

Well I mostly agree with you but... If Baertschi was traded for Crosby and a first I would love it. (absurd I know) I'm just saying that Sven isn't untouchable nor is anyone on our team. Everyone is available for the the right price, and listening and knowing when to act is exactly what Feaster and company should be doing. It just better be a great return or moves like this one can set a rebuild back...no question!

Avatar
#12 RexLibris
November 23 2013, 01:31PM
Trash it!
6
trashes
Props
6
props

@Colin.S

And to Southbound J

I'm not certain I get the "bad as the Oilers" reference either, given the context.

Moving a 21 year old player who is just about to leave his ELC isn't something the Oilers have done that much of.

A trade of Backlund is closer to what Lowe did when he traded Brodziak (and perhaps that offers a fair career comparable). But if you want to compare Baertschi to an Oilers prospect why not start with Eberle.

Both are small to average sized wingers, both have some high-end skill and both became noted junior players. The Oilers left Eberle in junior for two more years, with some AHL time at the end of each CHL season. Then transitioned him to the NHL along with Hall and Paajarvi.

Baertschi finished his last year in junior then split last season between the AHL and NHL before moving to the NHL full-time this season.

The most significant difference between the two in terms of development time is the number of WHL games played (254 to 113) because Baertschi came to N.A. later in his junior career.

I've argued that Baertschi might develop into a player along the lines of an Ales Hemsky, a very good complementary player. But at this stage, the best thing for Baertschi's development would have been to spend his entire ELC in the minors with call-up duty in his third season.

At his age now he is beginning the transition from development to remedial stage. You only trade him if you can get a solid, fully-formed, under-24 player back in return.

Avatar
#13 piscera.infada
November 23 2013, 01:33PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
7
props
TRAV wrote:

Well I mostly agree with you but... If Baertschi was traded for Crosby and a first I would love it. (absurd I know) I'm just saying that Sven isn't untouchable nor is anyone on our team. Everyone is available for the the right price, and listening and knowing when to act is exactly what Feaster and company should be doing. It just better be a great return or moves like this one can set a rebuild back...no question!

Thank-you. I've been on this for a while re: Backlund, and everyone seems to think I'm in favour of trading Backlund.

I would think that in a rebuild no one is untouchable, as you correctly state. Over and above this though, the Flames (or any rebuilding organization) can't afford to stay status quo for the simple reason that "that player may be better down the road". Early in a rebuild you need to assess what you have, thereby assessing who can be let go. The last thing management can afford to do is be indecisive and sit back while awaiting draft picks.

So again, I'm NOT saying trade Backlund or Baertschi, but at the same time, no one should be off limits until they've proven they are - and even that needs to be reassessed (see, the Iginla cycle).

At the same time, if you deem someone is trade-able you need to be able to maximize that player's value, or the whole thing runs completely contra to what you're doing in the first place. It's a fine line, but I think for anyone to get worked up at the mere fact that trades are being talked about is completely ridiculous - that's what we should be talking about.

Avatar
#14 RexLibris
November 23 2013, 01:35PM
Trash it!
1
trashes
Props
4
props

@Colin.S

With regards to the Backlund trade rumours.

Above I've mentioned Kyle Brodziak as a trade comparable, and you've mentioned something more recent but similar in the Colborne trade.

Colborne went for a 4th round pick and Brodziak went with a 6th round pick for a 4th and a 5th round pick (both of which were essentially blown on Kyle Bigos and Olivier Roy).

While I hold Backlund in higher regard than that, I think we may be close to the determining the lower end value for this player.

Avatar
#15 Colin.S
November 23 2013, 02:23PM
Trash it!
3
trashes
Props
1
props

@RexLibris

I think most people here at FN hold Backlund in higher regard that most outside the site because we know what else he brings to the table besides points.

However when you look at the Brodziaks and Colborne's, he probably fits right in there. He's going to fetch at BEST by himself a third round pick, maybe a second if is a team that picking in the 55-60 range. But the realistic expectation from me is a fourth, that's where I set the bar. The sad part is, that's what he's probably gonna get, and the guys at the Fan960 and other places will say it's a good trade because he was never going to be more than 3rd/4th line guy here and we need more picks in the rebuild. Meanwhile with the 4th they pick another face puncher because grit chart.

I hope if they do trade him, they can put him a package of sorts that doesn't include our 1st/2nd rounder this year but maybe will get a much better pick/prospect than what Backlund will get by himself.

Avatar
#16 RexLibris
November 23 2013, 02:44PM
Trash it!
5
trashes
Props
2
props

@Colin.S

The funny thing is, up until the emergence of Arcobello, Backlund was looked on by some rather covetously here in Edmonton as a solid 3rd line center.

Who knows, maybe if he'd had better linemates...

In terms of our range, I think Brodziak is at the top end and Colborne, at this stage, the lower end. Backlund, to me, sits somewhere closer to Brodziak than Colborne, but it is a narrow gap.

Hate to say this, and I'm not trying to start anything, but I'd get a good laugh if the Oilers were able to trade the 4th rounder they got for Mike Brown for Backlund.

Avatar
#17 ?
November 23 2013, 02:46PM
Trash it!
1
trashes
Props
9
props

@Colin.S

For me, it really depends on how much confidence you have in your current scouting staff. Backlund is already a bonafide NHLer, and he's also fairly young, so if you're willing to trade him just for a small chance at drafting another player (3rd/4th rounders), you must have a helluva lot of faith in your scouting staff, or must really like a guy projected to go late in the draft.

If Backs was 34 years old, I'd probably deal him. But he's not. Listen to offers 100%, but I don't wanna see a deal made for a middling, unproven commodity that will take years just to get to Backlunds current level. I know that's kinda unfair, since you never know who's gonna be available as a 3rd/4th rounder, and the player chosen could be better than Backs, but I feel Backlund is more valuable than another bullet in the barrel.

Backlund is young enough that when the Flames are truly ready to compete again, he could be 26-27 years old and evolve into a Martin Hanzal type player. Strong 2 way guy, although Backlund would have to get a whole lot stronger physically.

Avatar
#18 MichaelD
November 23 2013, 02:58PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

I've heard that Evander Kane may also be on the trading block. Do you think theres a potential move there?

Avatar
#19 redricardo
November 23 2013, 03:08PM
Trash it!
1
trashes
Props
6
props
MichaelD wrote:

I've heard that Evander Kane may also be on the trading block. Do you think theres a potential move there?

IF we end up trading Backlund, which I agree, looks almost inevitable at this point, (and would also be a HUGE mistake that I would have issues with as a fan) that's what I would rather see. A swap, as opposed to draft picks.

Find another team that has a young player they've given up on, or used incorrectly (just like we have with Backlund) and pick up a young guy with potential.

The leagues littered with players that the original team gave up on too soon. Backlund will be another one that we'll regret if the trade happens. So if we can pick up a similar player back and they pan out here... That's best case scenario.

Avatar
#20 mattyc
November 23 2013, 03:20PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
6
props

Trading Backlund for a mid-round pick is a total waste. You're essentially trading a middle tier forward with some (potential) upside for a ~5-10% chance at getting a middle tier player in a couple years.

The only way I can see a Backlund trade worthwhile is if you trade him for a comparable player in a similar situation, and hedge your bet that the new guy will outperform the old. A "change of scenery" type trade. I'd have to think they'd be looking for a 22-27 year old Dman that's been pushed down the depth-chart.

Avatar
#21 Colin.S
November 23 2013, 03:21PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
2
props

@?

I agree a LOT with your first point. But even if you have a lot of faith in your scouting staff there is not guarantee that the guy you drafted there ever makes the NHL for any number of reasons. So even if they draft a guy who could develop into a top 9 forward like Backlund already is, with injuries and all theres not guarantee he gets there.

The biggest problem I have with trading him for just a pick(s) is you have given up on a legit NHLer who is still young, in the middle of a rebuild for magic beans. The only reason that anyone says for a reason to trade him is because he doesn't put up big point totals. But for some reason the team doesn't want him in a defensive role because he doesn't fit the "mold" or something of a defensive center. That's what scares me the most, that if the player they drafted/traded for/acquired doesn't fit the mold they have thought of for him, he is dead weight, even if the player might be an otherwise legit NHLer.

Avatar
#22 Colin.S
November 23 2013, 03:27PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

@mattyc

I like that option opposed to a mid round pick because at least you may get some half decent value, where as the pick like you say is at best a 10% chance of making the NHL nevermind actually making some sort of impact.

Another suggestion is you can trade him for an older player that you can flip at the deadline. Doing that might acquire you a better pick in the end.

Avatar
#23 BJ
November 23 2013, 03:32PM
Trash it!
2
trashes
Props
3
props

Cant see either B getting traded... Backs is our shutdown center and Baertshi has a lot of potential.... that said they cant help a contender out enough that they would part with what we need to make a deal work.

I imagine they will still be Flames come the summer.

Avatar
#24 Kurt
November 23 2013, 03:39PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
3
props
mattyc wrote:

Trading Backlund for a mid-round pick is a total waste. You're essentially trading a middle tier forward with some (potential) upside for a ~5-10% chance at getting a middle tier player in a couple years.

The only way I can see a Backlund trade worthwhile is if you trade him for a comparable player in a similar situation, and hedge your bet that the new guy will outperform the old. A "change of scenery" type trade. I'd have to think they'd be looking for a 22-27 year old Dman that's been pushed down the depth-chart.

^^ this. Completely agree. I prefer to keep Backlund. I think the expectations on him were/are completely unrealistic (I vividly recall people on this blog last year arguing he was a better player than Nugent-Hopkins...) But he is the type of piece we will regret moving IMHO.

IF thye do move him, at least get a player back. I loathe the idea of trading Backs for a middling draft pick. I remember reading the article below a few years back and its stuck with me. A quick Google search turned it up... (Its Jason Gregor from CoilerNation but fight through your urge to shoot the messenger... lots of good info).

If you don't want to read it all... the conclusion:

"It seems pretty clear that after the first round (60.5%) your chances of finding a decent NHL player become increasing lower. A second round pick will give you a 23.7% chance, you'll have a 15.8% in the 3rd round, only 8.6% in the fourth, 7.1% in the fifth, a little boost up to 9.1% in the sixth and 9.7% in the 7th round.

None of these numbers are shocking, but when people suggest that getting a 2nd rounder for "fill in the blank" is a good trade, keep in mind that you essentially have a one in four chance of turning that pick into a player. I understand that when a team is trading away an UFA that getting something is better than nothing, but unless that something actually pans out, the draft pick, in many cases, turns out to be a whole lot of nothing."

http://oilersnation.com/2011/2/25/value-in-acquiring-draft-picks

Avatar
#25 ?
November 23 2013, 04:27PM
Trash it!
2
trashes
Props
0
props

@Colin.S

I absolutely agree. The only reason I mention the scouting staff is because I think the Flames mgmt (Feaster, mostly) has a lot of faith in the new scouting approach of the Flames. I believe that if Backs is moved for a 4th round pick and a 'Ben Hanowski caliber' prospect, which I think would be a total backwards move by the org, Feaster might be ok with it because it gives CGY another kick at the can to grab another Johny Gaudreau late round steal.

Obviously, a lot of that is just speculation on my part, seeing as I don't actually know if Feaster trusts his staff enough to give up on a legit NHLer like Backs for magic beans, as you said.

Avatar
#26 ?
November 23 2013, 04:32PM
Trash it!
4
trashes
Props
1
props
MichaelD wrote:

I've heard that Evander Kane may also be on the trading block. Do you think theres a potential move there?

If there is, I believe that Feaster/Burke would probably have to include Baertschi or Monahan in any trade scenario, or their 2014/2015 first rounder.

If Jets were looking to trade Kane, I could see a trade looking like this between them and CGY (Note, this is a scenario that I think MIGHT look like, not necessarily SHOULD):

Baertschi, Backlund, and a 2nd rounder (if Feaster hasn't already dealt it ala Darryl lol)

for

E. Kane

Interesting deal...? Personally, if that were on the table and I was WPG, I'd probably decline. Kane is their franchise player

EDIT: Obviously, Kane being legitimately on the market would be HUGE around the NHL. 4th overall in 09 I think, and a young guy who looks like he could be a legit star.

Avatar
#27 Kevin R
November 23 2013, 04:53PM
Trash it!
4
trashes
Props
12
props

Holy smokes, if some people that are posting values for Backlund were realtors, I wouldn't want them selling my house. That's for sure.

Backlund is young enough, cap friendly enough & possession number decent enough to get more than a 3rd or 4th round pick. You think a team like the Leafs wouldn't covet a centreman like Backlund. Backlund + for Gardiner + salary dump....possible? I guess I am in the camp no one is expendable but the return needs to be decent. Backlund is undervalued here because the Flames have so many up & coming centres that are at very similar stages of development. Right now we got Backlund, Colburne, Knight, Reinhart all capable of developing further on the 3rd line & any of them could potentially take that next step & be a great 2nd line centreman given the right circumstances. One thing I noticed with Colburne, that kid has such a large frame & reach, if that ever develops, well........... lets just say that trade would even out the Dion & Gilmour fiascos.

Trades are not only part of a rebuild but very necessary & I for one am glad that Burke is part of a consensus with Feaster & Weisbrod as to whether to pull the trigger on some of these deals.

Rex, I love your input & perspective but I find you like to pigeon hole players based on some similar stats to support the comparison, but ultimately at a huge reduction in the players ceiling. & I wind up shaking my head thinking what an ingenius way of trolling.(I know you're not by the way) Brodziak compared to Backlund or even Colborne? I guess it depends what side of the glass you are looking at. I would be really curious debating Yapukovs trade value & if you would consider him a comparable to Daigle? A 3rd or 4th for Backlund has to be the most absurd thing I have heard. Give away players that are just short of taking that next step as a type of player a team would consider must have for a 3rd or 4th? Well people have been trashing on the Oil for how they do things lately but even they don't give up on their young guys that easily. I actually tip my hat to MacT for weathering this last sh*tstorm.

Avatar
#28 Walter White
November 23 2013, 04:56PM
Trash it!
25
trashes
Props
3
props

Backlund for Abdelkader. WW

Avatar
#29 coachedpotatoe
November 23 2013, 05:06PM
Trash it!
7
trashes
Props
7
props

Thanks for the update on Sieloff, now we know and for those of who pray can keep him in our prayers. We can worry about the hockey stuff later. THose that don't pray my apologies if I have offended you.

Avatar
#30 ?
November 23 2013, 05:21PM
Trash it!
4
trashes
Props
1
props

@Kevin R

I think the impact of Mikael Backlund on this team is enormous, no doubt. Without him, the club loses alot of depth and experience at centre in a hurry; he is

a) The club's best possession forward

b) An excellent penalty killer

c) The club's best shutdown centerman

Having said all of that, I don't think many teams in the NHL are going to pay a premium price for a young shutdown centerman who has never surpassed 25 points in a single season in the NHL (of course, last year he was on pace for a 41pt campaign over a full 82 game schedule, so take 25pts with a grain of salt).

In addition, I'm sure most GMs across the league know that Backlund has spent time on the 4th line this season. That sounds like "buy low" territory if you ask me. I don't think we can expect a first rounder for Backs if he gets dealt, but you never know I guess. Will certainly be interesting to see what Feaster does.

Avatar
#31 FireOnIce
November 23 2013, 05:30PM
Trash it!
3
trashes
Props
6
props

Trade 'em all. The bums. Trade Gio while he's on IR to Ottawa for their first. Trade Iginla too, he hasn't been producing near enough for the Flames, and he's been invisible to boot.

/sarcasm

Seriously though, I hope they don't trade Mickis. Or Sven. Trade the vets - Cammy, Stajan, GlenX. That's who gets you value. Take on a bad contract, use that cap space, but don't trade your players just because Hartley doesn't like the cut of their jib.

Avatar
#32 Kurt
November 23 2013, 05:33PM
Trash it!
4
trashes
Props
3
props

@Kevin R

"Backlund, Colburne, Knight, Reinhart all could potentially be great 2nd line centreman" - Yikes... ease off the koolaide!

And comparing Yakupov to Daigle? What does that even mean? I get we have prospect envy here, but common... I saw a graph on TSN the other day saying Yakupov's stats after 65 NHL games are comparable to Tavares, Nash, Stamkos & Lecavelier. I can't imagine where the Daigle dig comes from except Oiler hate. Which isn't a bad thing, but a bit silly.

But I do agree being are undervaluing Backlund (after grossly overvaluing last year). Keep him and see what happens.

Avatar
#33 Walter White
November 23 2013, 05:37PM
Trash it!
15
trashes
Props
4
props

Who exactly are you "Backlund for Abdelkader" haters expecting Detroit to give up for Backlund?? zetterberg, Datsyuk, Helm, Franzen??? Keep dreaming. Detroit does not give up high draft picks in trades, especially for a guy who can't crack the Flames lineup. So who are you expecting back from Detroit? Abdelkader is a young big forward who is off to a slow start. WW

Avatar
#34 MichaelD
November 23 2013, 05:42PM
Trash it!
3
trashes
Props
1
props

@?

I agree. I wouldn't like to see Backlund of Barertschi traded, but if it turns out Burke is showing them the door then this would be the type of deal i would like to see Feaster make.

Avatar
#35 Kurt
November 23 2013, 05:47PM
Trash it!
1
trashes
Props
2
props

@Walter White

I actually don't think Detroit would do that trade... But Flames fans hate it. Sort of shows the disconnect.

Avatar
#36 Walter White
November 23 2013, 06:06PM
Trash it!
14
trashes
Props
5
props
Kurt wrote:

I actually don't think Detroit would do that trade... But Flames fans hate it. Sort of shows the disconnect.

A lot of teams overvalue their own players.......fans especially overvalue their own players.

WW

Avatar
#37 thymebalm
November 23 2013, 06:10PM
Trash it!
4
trashes
Props
9
props

Terrible analysis of Jankowski...

Jankowski scored late to tie in his last game when Gillies went down with the injury. (aka clutch) 7 goals this season matches his total for the year last year. (huge step)

That's second on team scoring. He's got 1 assist, and a lot of that has to do with the fact that nobody other than Janko and Mauermann are scoring for this club, and Janko isn't on his line.

Janko is making big strides, but not by metrics you use to further your obvious narrative.

Avatar
#38 mattyc
November 23 2013, 06:14PM
Trash it!
3
trashes
Props
13
props

@Walter White

We have a bunch of comparable players to Abdelkader.

Personally, if we're dealing with Detroit, Id like Backlund, Feaster and Hartley for Babcock and Holland?

Avatar
#39 loudogYYC
November 23 2013, 06:40PM
Trash it!
2
trashes
Props
5
props
Colin.S wrote:

Nobody is giving the Flames a first/second pick for Backlund at this point in time, they are using him as a fourth line center. The best they are going to get for him is a third rounder. I think the biggest comparable is Colborne to be honest, he's younger, drafted a bit higher, but close and both are centers with bigger expectations. With the way the Flames have used and deployed him there's no way that we get a first/second/top prospect without including other big pieces.

@Southbound J, we are already as bad as the Oilers. And if we start moving out the pieces that are actually moving the puck and creating positive scoring chance counts (As Kent has been putting out on Twitter, Baertschi's chance count compared to the rest of the flames is just silly), we are not going to be improving, at best we would be standing still at worst, ugh, I don't even want to think about it.

I don't see any compelling reason to trade Baertschi at all, we don't exactly have a ton of young wingers in this organization who will be around for the long haul. Camms will probably be moved shortly and at the latest the trade deadline. Stempniak is as good as gone, whether it's through trade or as a UFA this year. And once you start moving them out I don't see Huddler wanting to stay with a team projected to be bottom 5 again, and with his production and not much longer on his contract would probably be easy to move as well.

Unless you were getting one of Floridas, Carolinas, NYI, Columbus, Nashvilles or Winnipegs 1st ronder, which all of them have a good chance to be in the top 10, I don't see the upside in trading him.

I don't think Backlund alone gets you a 1st or a 2nd, I think the combination of Backlund and unloading a bloated contract gets you a 1st or a 2nd. MSM has been talking about which team may be willing to include a 1st rd pick to entice a team with cap space to take on a heavy contract. I think it only happens if the team that gives up the 1st also gets a player with promise in return.

@Walter White

Abdelkader is a 27 year old checking winger that has never amassed more than 22 points in the NHL. Flames have TJ Galiardi already, Abdelkader would not only be redundant, but also a terrible return for Backlund. I doubt 5 or 6 teams kick tires about Backlund because they think he's a 4th line centre. The simple fact that there's that many teams calling Feaster about him tells me they see him as more.

Avatar
#40 Kevin R
November 23 2013, 07:12PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
3
props
Kurt wrote:

"Backlund, Colburne, Knight, Reinhart all could potentially be great 2nd line centreman" - Yikes... ease off the koolaide!

And comparing Yakupov to Daigle? What does that even mean? I get we have prospect envy here, but common... I saw a graph on TSN the other day saying Yakupov's stats after 65 NHL games are comparable to Tavares, Nash, Stamkos & Lecavelier. I can't imagine where the Daigle dig comes from except Oiler hate. Which isn't a bad thing, but a bit silly.

But I do agree being are undervaluing Backlund (after grossly overvaluing last year). Keep him and see what happens.

No prospect envy, like anything in my life I'd rather we do it ourselves. I meant that comparing Backlund/Colborne to Brodziak who really never amounted to anything is way of saying the player aint worth sh*t. I used Yaks comparison to Daigle because Daigle wound up being a highly rated dud 1st overall, so if that's what perception is, then what value would Yaks have if you compare him to Daigle. I personally don't think that but that's the problem when you start pigeon holing players as the same as others. Everyone wants to be compared to Crosby, not many to Brozniak. Know what I mean. & yes if Backs is only worth a 3rd or 4th then you would have to be an idiot to trade him at this point.

Avatar
#42 SeanCharles
November 23 2013, 08:32PM
Trash it!
1
trashes
Props
6
props

Sven will not get traded.

Avatar
#43 Walter White
November 23 2013, 08:52PM
Trash it!
11
trashes
Props
8
props

Kesler is a super douche.....!

Hawks dominated that period until the diving started.

WW

Avatar
#44 RexLibris
November 23 2013, 09:24PM
Trash it!
9
trashes
Props
4
props

@Kevin R

Backlund is a great possession player, stands out as a shutdown center and has a decent frame with enough skill to create some chances.

His point ceiling may not have been reached, but I'm not sure he is that far off.

He is not the 2nd coming of Mike Peca or, more recently, Jarret Stoll.

I think the Brodziak comparison is decent, although a more thorough search around the league may provide a better list of names.

Brodziak was traded by an organization just entering a rebuild and with a new GM who had zero loyalty to those players he inherited.

It was an incredibly short-sighted move.

Can you say that there isn't at least a chance that the Flames, given some similar circumstances, aren't vulnerable to making the same error? I didn't say they WOULD trade him for a 4th round pick, but rather that it had been done before and I couldn't see them trading him for less. Don't forget, these trades don't necessarily reflect perceived value. Smid was moved quietly, much as Phaneuf was, and both were later said to have been acquired for far less than "market value".

As to Yakupov, sure, let's discuss.

Daigle? No. Daigle had some problems from day one and the Senators were a dysfunctional organization (moreso even than the Oilers are said to be) who needed him to step in and be "the man". Not the case for Yakupov.

True, both play(ed) wing and both shoot (shot) left. Daigle had ridiculous numbers in junior and Yakupov broke Stamkos' records in Sarnia.

Temperament is very different, nationality and the pressures that brings are different, and the environments into which they are (were) introduced are markedly different.

Yakupov's trade value right now? He has value as a blue-chip offensive player on an ELC and with less KHL baggage than many Russian-born players of his caliber.

Darren Dreger said Reimer would be fair value - maybe. I think Dreger was wrong.

I believe, based on as objective an analysis as can be expected from a fan, that Nail will outperform Taylor Hall in points though influence the game less in terms of underlying statistics. He has a shot that, no word of a lie, could become as feared in our time as Al McInnins' was in his day. His passing is very underrated and he has a very strong sense of offensive soft spots and can dart to the scoring zones quickly and effectively.

This debate raged across the Oilogosphere a short while ago and one item that was more or less established was that a straight up trade of Yakupov for Couturier might improve the Oilers as a team, but in the end they would lose that trade by virtually every other metric.

If I were GM of the Flames I would be more willing to trade Baertschi than Backlund at this stage. My untouchables would be Brodie, Gillies and Monahan. Backlund doesn't rate, but he wouldn't be my first move. The Flames need to retain their core young players, but just as it is with the draft, who determines the player that has value is the real question.

Avatar
#45 RexLibris
November 23 2013, 09:32PM
Trash it!
5
trashes
Props
3
props

@Kevin R

One last point about the Backlund Brodziak comparison.

You think Brodziak hasn't amounted to, well, a hill of beans, let's say?

Brodziak's point totals since entering the NHL are 31, 27, 32, 37, 44, and 12 in the lockout year last season.

Backlund's highest is his '10-'11 season with 25 and if we added together his games from '11-'12 and '12-'13 it would be 27.

The difference between the two is that Backlund has only recently been deployed specifically as a depth center whereas Brodziak has been classified as one for the majority of his career.

As I've said before, I like Backlund and I'd take him for the Oilers as their 4th line center over Will Acton, but if age weren't a consideration I might almost take Brodziak instead.

Avatar
#46 TRAV
November 23 2013, 11:27PM
Trash it!
2
trashes
Props
5
props
RexLibris wrote:

Backlund is a great possession player, stands out as a shutdown center and has a decent frame with enough skill to create some chances.

His point ceiling may not have been reached, but I'm not sure he is that far off.

He is not the 2nd coming of Mike Peca or, more recently, Jarret Stoll.

I think the Brodziak comparison is decent, although a more thorough search around the league may provide a better list of names.

Brodziak was traded by an organization just entering a rebuild and with a new GM who had zero loyalty to those players he inherited.

It was an incredibly short-sighted move.

Can you say that there isn't at least a chance that the Flames, given some similar circumstances, aren't vulnerable to making the same error? I didn't say they WOULD trade him for a 4th round pick, but rather that it had been done before and I couldn't see them trading him for less. Don't forget, these trades don't necessarily reflect perceived value. Smid was moved quietly, much as Phaneuf was, and both were later said to have been acquired for far less than "market value".

As to Yakupov, sure, let's discuss.

Daigle? No. Daigle had some problems from day one and the Senators were a dysfunctional organization (moreso even than the Oilers are said to be) who needed him to step in and be "the man". Not the case for Yakupov.

True, both play(ed) wing and both shoot (shot) left. Daigle had ridiculous numbers in junior and Yakupov broke Stamkos' records in Sarnia.

Temperament is very different, nationality and the pressures that brings are different, and the environments into which they are (were) introduced are markedly different.

Yakupov's trade value right now? He has value as a blue-chip offensive player on an ELC and with less KHL baggage than many Russian-born players of his caliber.

Darren Dreger said Reimer would be fair value - maybe. I think Dreger was wrong.

I believe, based on as objective an analysis as can be expected from a fan, that Nail will outperform Taylor Hall in points though influence the game less in terms of underlying statistics. He has a shot that, no word of a lie, could become as feared in our time as Al McInnins' was in his day. His passing is very underrated and he has a very strong sense of offensive soft spots and can dart to the scoring zones quickly and effectively.

This debate raged across the Oilogosphere a short while ago and one item that was more or less established was that a straight up trade of Yakupov for Couturier might improve the Oilers as a team, but in the end they would lose that trade by virtually every other metric.

If I were GM of the Flames I would be more willing to trade Baertschi than Backlund at this stage. My untouchables would be Brodie, Gillies and Monahan. Backlund doesn't rate, but he wouldn't be my first move. The Flames need to retain their core young players, but just as it is with the draft, who determines the player that has value is the real question.

I actually appreciate your insights. But with all due respect you may have too much time on your hands :)

Avatar
#47 Baalzamon
November 23 2013, 11:36PM
Trash it!
1
trashes
Props
6
props

@RexLibris

"I like Backlund and I'd take him for the Oilers as their 4th line center over Will Acton"

That's... almost an insult.

What about that trade I suggested last year: Yakupov and a 1st for Oliver Ekman-Larsson. Would you do that? Phoenix probably wouldn't but I want an Oilers fan's opinion.

___________________________________________________________

Anyone else find it slightly depressing a convincing argument can me made that Joni Ortio is currently the best goalie under contract with the Flames?

On a related note, how long before they call him up for a short look? I remember before the season Feaster mentioned that Ortio wasn't too pleased about all the goalies being brought in and Feaster had to assure him he was right in the mix. Might be time for the Flames organization to put their money where their mouth is and show him they're paying attention to his strong start.

Avatar
#48 clyde
November 24 2013, 12:53AM
Trash it!
1
trashes
Props
4
props
mattyc wrote:

We have a bunch of comparable players to Abdelkader.

Personally, if we're dealing with Detroit, Id like Backlund, Feaster and Hartley for Babcock and Holland?

The Detroit brass isn't big on the Advanced Stats thing so I don't know if you want that.

Avatar
#49 jeremywilhelm
November 24 2013, 04:42AM
Trash it!
1
trashes
Props
1
props

@thefanblogger is a certifiable moron, do not worry about anything that guys tweets.

Avatar
#50 coachedpotatoe
November 24 2013, 07:14AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
4
props

Good to see Gilles back in net for Providence, they one again, NC lost but Johny G got a point. Heat win Ortio gets shut out, Granlund scores again. I'm wondering if all the chatter about either Backs or Sven is because both Knight and Granlund seem to be ahead of schedule.(Note i would not move either of them without getting fair value; Backs is 2-4 center who can play every shift, play PK and can drive possession and is more valuable than management seems to think, and it's tp early to give up on Sven) If this team is shopping around it seems what we need is a big strong defenceman who is about 25-27 years old or a skilled centerman.

Someone asked the question should the Flames allow Monahan to play at the WJHC, I would and here is my reasoning; while he is at the WJHC it would be a great time to see if Knight is NHL ready.

Here's a question. What happens when the Flames season ends and the Heat are in the playoffs, could Monahan play for the Heat?

Comments are closed for this article.