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 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
#2 ?
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
#3 loudogYYC
November 24 2013, 03:07PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
16
props

@please cancel acct

Jankowski was labelled a project from day 1, I don't see how that kind of label can change in a matter of 17 months. If he ends up surprising and starts developing at a faster pace, then awesome but personally, I'm not concerned about Jankowski until his senior year in 2016.

I still think picking a "project player" in the 1st round is a bad idea, but it's done now so whatever, let the kid develop.

Avatar
#4 RexLibris
November 24 2013, 09:49PM
Trash it!
3
trashes
Props
16
props

@Primo

Perhaps you ought to.

Avatar
#5 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
#6 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
#7 ?
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
#8 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
#9 jonahgo
November 24 2013, 10:32AM
Trash it!
2
trashes
Props
9
props

if these rumors are true... why is this team looking to move good young players under team control? backlund is exactly the type of player they should be holding on to. he's already a legitimate nhl caliber player, and unlike the rest of the non-sveanahan forwards, he'll still be in his prime when the team is competitive again. he's the perfect player to bridge the gap between rebuild and competitiveness.

not to mention, if they trade him relatively soon, it'd be terrible asset management. they've tanked his value by sticking him on the fourth line and giving him tough minutes when he's not there. i don't see how they can expect to get good value by trading backlund at this point. at least pump up his value with offensive-zone starts, low quality of competition, and pp time, before trading him...

Avatar
#10 Michael
November 24 2013, 12:13PM
Trash it!
26
trashes
Props
9
props

Bluntly, Backlund is NOT a top six forward, he has simply not shown over his 190 odd NHL games, anything like the goal scoring needed to rate that high. He is a defensive minded, possession driving third liner, who has adds value to the bottom six. For a defensive minded third line center he needs to improve in the face off circle. I wouldn't trade him, but you have to question whether Backlund himself is happy with the way he is being used, and whether we can resign him once his RFA status expires.

Janko, is beginning to fade into obscurity... he was a pick that the Flames simply couldn't afford to make.

Monahan, forget short term team needs, he needs to go the WJC to continue his development. We just need to look at Sven to see what happens when you take developmental short cuts. You get some short term gain in return for long term losses.

I wonder if the owners really have the stomach for this version of the Feaster rebuild. Things aren't off to a great start, the goal tending is sub par, the d corp is weak, development is questionable for Backlund, Sven and Monahan, and with vets like Cammy likely to be traded, things are only going to get worse. Feaster isn't the man for the job, and does not survive the season as GM.

Avatar
#11 Jeff In Lethbridge
November 24 2013, 12:48PM
Trash it!
3
trashes
Props
9
props

@Michael

they arent off to a good start????

I disagree... I mean, yes, they are not batting 1000, but they've done exceptionally well at addressing the depth of this team and getting rid of a bunch of tired vets with little resale value and bad contracts.

Sure, they swung for the fence with Janko, but so what. Sure, many of us outsiders are perplexed over the treatment of Backlund and Sven. So what?

For your information many of us fans are happier with what we are watching on and off the ice then we have been in 4 years... yes they have laid a couple of eggs but they have also had many games where they gave it 110%, left it all on the ice, got off to a good start, etc etc :-)

Avatar
#12 piscera.infada
November 24 2013, 01:37PM
Trash it!
2
trashes
Props
9
props
RKD wrote:

Dreger along with LeBrun and Bobby Mac are top insiders. If he said 4-5 teams are kicking the tires on Backlund and the Flames are ready to move him then there's a good chance it will happen. Trading Sven would be a mistake, look at what happened to Monahan when they started Baertschi. Sean started going cold, he has chemistry with Barts. You shouldn't trade away chemistry. I feel bad for Backs he's had some injury issues in the past and that's hindered some of his progress. Trading away a centre isn't a good idea when the organization doesn't have depth there anyways.

If you think Backlund is a #1 or #2 centre, then yes, trading him away is a bad call because we don't have depth there. I don't think he is a top-six centre, as such you're trading away a #3 or #4 centre - something that this team actually does have depth at, in terms of prospects who are ready to make the jump very soon or have made the jump (ie: Knight, Colborne, etc.), and guys on the way (ie: Arnold, Granlund (although some might say his ceiling is higher - which would be great), etc.). Therefore, I'll say again, if he doesn't fit in to what the "plan" is, then you have to trade him.

Not that I want him traded, I just don't see it being as brutal an idea as a lot of people seem to suggest. Trade Backlund, bring up Knight - see what he can do.

And for all the talk of "bad asset management" - which is ludicrous, because we have no idea what the asking price even is - I'm not sure you understand that this team has a finite number of spots open to develop young players. You can't just keep claiming "bring up the young guys, give them a shot", when there aren't any spots for them to play in.

Avatar
#13 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
#14 chillout
November 24 2013, 06:47PM
Trash it!
1
trashes
Props
8
props

@EugeneV

aaaaaannnnnd you're still on crack. let's just send giordano, glencross and cammi for piece of garbage no defense, no passing yak. you're brains must have melted out of your ears.

Avatar
#15 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
#16 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
#17 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
#18 please cancel acct
November 24 2013, 12:30PM
Trash it!
10
trashes
Props
7
props

Janko's potential is dwindling away.It sure would be nice to be talking about Olli Maata instead of Janko right now.

Intelluctual honesty required

Avatar
#19 SeanCharles
November 24 2013, 01:00PM
Trash it!
3
trashes
Props
7
props
please cancel acct wrote:

Janko's potential is dwindling away.It sure would be nice to be talking about Olli Maata instead of Janko right now.

Intelluctual honesty required

One day when Sieloff is delivering thunderous hits on the backend for the Flames you'll forget about Maata.

It was a 2 NHL prospects for 1 deal. When talking about it you have to consider Sieloff.

The Flames were so high on Sieloff they would have drafted him if Janko was taken.

Give the kids time to develop before you judge this deal.

At the 2012 draft it was clearly stated that the picks were about the long term future and not the immediate.

I know Hertl and Maata look good but give it some time before you judge.

Sieloff has had an infection and hasn't played. But when he finally gets back and establishes himself in the organization I think it will lighten the blow of Janko not being ready as early as many hoped.

Avatar
#20 Baalzamon
November 24 2013, 03:29PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
7
props

@piscera.infada

Schenn is a center. He may be playing wing right now, but at worst the team could convert him to the right side and move Jones back to the middle. Or maybe call up Knight.

I don't know why the Flyers would move him, to be honest. He's second on the team in points.

Avatar
#21 SoCalFlamesFan
November 25 2013, 09:07AM
Trash it!
2
trashes
Props
7
props

@the-wolf

2) Baertschi has been given more ice time the last few games. Even more than Colborne. I know, I hate it when facts get in the way of a good rant.

Avatar
#22 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
#23 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
#24 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
#25 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
#26 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
#27 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
#28 SeanCharles
November 23 2013, 08:32PM
Trash it!
1
trashes
Props
6
props

Sven will not get traded.

Avatar
#29 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
#30 please cancel acct
November 24 2013, 02:00PM
Trash it!
3
trashes
Props
6
props
SeanCharles wrote:

One day when Sieloff is delivering thunderous hits on the backend for the Flames you'll forget about Maata.

It was a 2 NHL prospects for 1 deal. When talking about it you have to consider Sieloff.

The Flames were so high on Sieloff they would have drafted him if Janko was taken.

Give the kids time to develop before you judge this deal.

At the 2012 draft it was clearly stated that the picks were about the long term future and not the immediate.

I know Hertl and Maata look good but give it some time before you judge.

Sieloff has had an infection and hasn't played. But when he finally gets back and establishes himself in the organization I think it will lighten the blow of Janko not being ready as early as many hoped.

They could have taken Matta with the 21 pick and still had Seiloff.

I actually didn't mind them taking a swing at Janko,and yea, he may still be valuable down the road,but another part of me feel's you should take the best player when drafting on a rebuild.

Avatar
#31 the-wolf
November 25 2013, 07:37AM
Trash it!
3
trashes
Props
6
props

I have to agree with the article and I've posted the same a couple of times previously.

Backlund is worth more to the team than he is as a trade asset. I just can't see equal value coming back.

As for his potential, he's a 3rd line center as far as offense goes, I agree, but he has enough offensive smarts that along with his ability to drive possession, he could be a very useful 2nd line center if playing between 2 skilled wingers. The defensive conscience of the line, so to speak.

Moving Baertschi at this stage is stupid. Plain and simple. Hartley so obviously plays favorites it's sickening. People like to say, "you don't know what's going on in practices" and crap like that, but that's exactly what that is, 'crap.'

1) The person saying that doesn't know what goes on in practices either.

2) Baertschi was praised by Flames management for his work ethic and we were told glorious stories of him riding the bike hard after games and practices, etc. Now suddenly that's changed?

Monahan and Colborne get all the time, linemates and circumstances to work through their struggles (as they should) while Backlund and Baertschi are nailed to the bench for every slight offence. It kills a player's ability to perform when you're constantly worried about being punished for the slightest error.

The Flames suck. The Flames should suck. They're in a rebuild. Fans who thought the Flames rebuild was going to put the Oilers rebuild to shame and that it would all be over in 2 seasons are deluded.

Develop the kids. That's done by playing them. Move Stajan to clear up the logjam at center. That means Colborne, Backlund and Monahan can all receive substantial ice time, you juggle their line status based on who's hot that night.

Harltey needs to realize he's not coaching a Cup cotnender here and ownership nees to realize the Flames are a sports franchsie, not an oil company.

Avatar
#32 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
#33 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
#34 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
#35 BurningSensation
November 24 2013, 09:46AM
Trash it!
1
trashes
Props
5
props
Walter White wrote:

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

There are two guys who I think Detrot would part with that are much better than Abdelkader;

- Tatar and Smith (though we would have to send them a Dman in the deal if it is for Smithl)

Tatar and Smith have been on the fringe for the Red Wings for the last two years, but havn't been able to take the next step (just like Backlund). Jarnkrok, Nyqvist or Anthony Mantha would all be nice, but would probably require us to spice up our offer.

Avatar
#36 please cancel acct
November 24 2013, 11:36AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
5
props

I doubt his value is as low as some have suggested. I'll bet there are GM'S out there who would place Back's on the "talented but need's a change of address" list.

Hartley's world is " Black and White". He has said as much in 2 interviews with the Herald. He believes that thinking that way is a benefit as a coach.

His treatment of Backlund supports that belief. I don't think that approach work's with young guys whose game is stuck in the gray area

Avatar
#37 TheoForever
November 24 2013, 12:47PM
Trash it!
4
trashes
Props
5
props

@Michael

Janko is not fading into obscurity, he his improving although perhaps not as fast as some would want, a project right. How Is Monahan development being jeopardized? Sending him to WJC is optional, it would be nice if he went, although not necessary for his continued development which is just fine. Benching of Sven and applying different measuring stick was a head scratcher, but the fact he is getting better and competing more in the last few games, so perhaps he is on track as well. We knew goaltending would suck. Having said so, there is Ortio and Gillies on horizon. Berra is showing flashes but has a way to go. If you going to go out and get a goaltender then after this season there will be lots of them around as free agents.

Defensive corps is what it should be at the start of a rebuild. Giordano return will help, Russell was a great addition, same goes for Smid. I got no problems with Wideman and Brodie is a good young player. We have several young Dmen that are promising. Top paring defensemen don't grow on trees.

If Flames didn't have problems they would not be rebuilding.

Avatar
#38 bilman
November 24 2013, 01:04PM
Trash it!
2
trashes
Props
5
props

If they in fact trade Backlund in the near future, I will be thoroughly disgusted in this team. Talk about bad "asset management". This would remind me a little bit of the Marc Savard fiasco (albeit to a much lesser extent) - allow the coach to completely diminish the value of the player, then trade him. If Backlund is to be traded, then at least give him a chance to improve his offensive numbers (ie powerplay time and top 2 line time) before you do.

Avatar
#39 jonahgo
November 24 2013, 02:04PM
Trash it!
1
trashes
Props
5
props

@piscera.infada

"And for all the talk of "bad asset management" - which is ludicrous, because we have no idea what the asking price even is - I'm not sure you understand that this team has a finite number of spots open to develop young players."

the point is that backlund's value right now is low relative to what it was last season and at the start of the season. the team can affect his value by putting him in a position to succeed, to score more, to demonstrate that he can hold his own in a top-6 role. based on the way they are currently deploying him, they are demonstrating that they do not value him highly. this should affect the types of offers they will receive.

teams are likely trying to trade for backlund right now precisely because there appears to be a major disconnect between how the flames view backlund's value as a hockey player and what that value actually is.

Avatar
#40 loudogYYC
November 24 2013, 11:08PM
Trash it!
1
trashes
Props
5
props

@RexLibris

It's kinda what I'm suggesting I guess. A little lopsided for sure, but Philly's also in a really tight cap position for the next few years with B. Schenn and Gustafsson needing an extension/raise next summer and more holes to fill in the lineup.

Even if you balance that trade out, it can't be much more than both Brayden & Luke Schenn for Backlund + Butler + a 2015 5th. Cap space is king!

I like the idea of extracting a prospect out of the NJD system at next years draft, but I don't think the Devils are deep enough in any position at the prospect level. If anything, Pittsburgh may be without a pick in the top 60 next draft and they have a nice pool of D prospects that could be used to get into the 1st or 2nd.

Avatar
#41 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
#42 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
#43 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
#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 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
#46 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?

Avatar
#47 Jeff In Lethbridge
November 24 2013, 12:43PM
Trash it!
3
trashes
Props
4
props

this team has way too many 22-26 year-old's for a good rebuild!

wait... never mind

Avatar
#48 Primo
November 24 2013, 02:39PM
Trash it!
3
trashes
Props
4
props
please cancel acct wrote:

Janko's potential is dwindling away.It sure would be nice to be talking about Olli Maata instead of Janko right now.

Intelluctual honesty required

I would not hire you as my GM...giving up on a 20 year old for no apparent reason. I admire your patience and ability to manage player development of young players....Intellectual Honesty!

Avatar
#49 Primo
November 24 2013, 09:46PM
Trash it!
5
trashes
Props
4
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.

Seriously, if I wanted to read a book I would go to the library!

Avatar
#50 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?

Comments are closed for this article.