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
#51 TheoForever
November 24 2013, 10:31PM
Trash it!
2
trashes
Props
2
props

Don't like a trade involving Baerrtschi period. Luke absolutely sucks. It would be nice to have his brother but don't like the price.

Trading Backlund at this time is sort of stupid in general. Never deal from position of weakness. In general I would let go of Backlund as he simply doesn't fit in long term. Not enough offensive upside for top 6 and not tough enough for the bottom 6. I would like to see him on the wing, he had success playing the wing during the lockout if I'm not mistaken.

Avatar
#52 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
#53 the-wolf
November 25 2013, 10:59AM
Trash it!
2
trashes
Props
2
props
SoCalFlamesFan wrote:

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.

Yet I don't remember Colborne being benched or playing 4min/game either. Facts, indeed.

Avatar
#54 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
#55 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
#56 ?
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
#57 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
#58 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
#59 SeanCharles
November 23 2013, 08:32PM
Trash it!
1
trashes
Props
6
props

Sven will not get traded.

Avatar
#60 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
#61 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
#62 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
#63 RexLibris
November 24 2013, 09:34AM
Trash it!
1
trashes
Props
3
props

@TRAV

Ha, just waiting to warm up before going back to shoveling more snow. Had some time to kill.

Avatar
#64 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
#65 Baalzamon
November 24 2013, 10:12AM
Trash it!
1
trashes
Props
0
props

@seve927

Cundari, I have no idea. Wotherspoon has been a scratch ever since Breen was sent down for his most recent conditioning stint IIRC.

Avatar
#66 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
#67 piscera.infada
November 24 2013, 03:03PM
Trash it!
1
trashes
Props
0
props

@RexLibris

Best case scenario, in my mind, would be option #2 if Burke somehow was able to pull another rabbit out of his hat and trade Backlund (and probably a draft pick) for Brayden Schenn.

That's actually been something I've been thinking could happen. Apparently both Schenn's are on the block. So maybe you say B. Schenn & and eat L. Schenn contract for Backlund and a Second. It alleviates a little over 3 million for Philly, and we can play L. Schenn this year, and buy him out if necessary. The only drawback I can see is, B. Schenn is a leftwing, IIRC. So there's that. But, you likely re-coup the second round pick in a later trade (ie: Cammy), thus not a huge deal - if you felt it necessary maybe you ask Philly for a 3rd or 4th as compensation for the 2nd.

A little pie in the sky sure, but I dunno, just spit-ballling. Not that I think this deal get's done, but I think if the Flames are going to trade Backlund, that's the kind of thing you're going to see. They're not going to trade him straight-up for a pick.

Avatar
#68 Jeff In Lethbridge
November 24 2013, 04:43PM
Trash it!
1
trashes
Props
3
props
EugeneV wrote:

Yeah but.... regarding Yakupov

Those guys were the first building block on their teams, and didn't have anyone to play with like Eberle, Hall and The Nuge.

Oh, except Stamkos who had Richards, Vinny and St Louis, which is probably not where Yak gets to but he may get close.

And if the Oilers want to get rid of him so bad they can have any 3 players on our current NHL roster except 23 or 7.

any 3???

just say no to crack!!! :-D:-D:-D

Avatar
#69 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
#70 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
#71 clyde
November 25 2013, 07:50AM
Trash it!
1
trashes
Props
3
props
mattyc wrote:

They seem pretty into possession. Regardless, Babcock is an excellent coach.

They believe in keeping the puck for sure, they just don't worry about tracking it. He is a very god coach. We wouldn't be seeing our youth playing until he was sure they were ready too.

Avatar
#72 the-wolf
November 25 2013, 11:02AM
Trash it!
1
trashes
Props
2
props

@SoCalFlamesFan

It's the difference in how they're treated when they mistakes that I was so obviously getting at. I know, I hate it when a easily grasped point gets in the way of somone trying hard to be witty.

Avatar
#73 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
#74 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
#75 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
#76 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
#77 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
#78 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
#79 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
#80 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
#81 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
#82 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
#83 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
#84 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
#85 coachedpotatoe
November 24 2013, 07:23AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
1
props

Oops; one was supposed to be won and NC should read BC, way to early in the morning without a cup of coffee.

Who from the Flames will play during the Olympics; I suspect Hudler for sure, Berra a strong possibility, where does Sven fit in. I'm not sure anyone else gets an invite.

That two week break will probably be good for Monahan as it is often suggested that rookies struggle near the end of the season because of fatigue.

Avatar
#86 Kurt
November 24 2013, 08:06AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
2
props
coachedpotatoe wrote:

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?

One his teams CHL season is over Monahan is free to play in Abby. Regardless if he played NHL games or not. This is what if hoped they is with him along. CHL plus a cup of tea in the AHL, hopefully a deep playoff run.

That's what Edmonton did with Eberle (2 years in a row). One of the very few things I respect them for doing properly in their rebuild.

Avatar
#87 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
#88 redricardo
November 24 2013, 03:07PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
1
props

@RexLibris

By far B. Brayden Schenn would be awesome.

As I said in my previous post, the leaugue is littered with young players that were either given up on or misused by the previous team. If he is traded, Backlund will be one of those too.

Getting one back is best case scenario. Asset for asset. If we're selling low, find someone else who's selling low.

Avatar
#89 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
#90 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
#91 loudogYYC
November 24 2013, 03:42PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
3
props

@RexLibris

I'd prefer a package that included Sean Couturier coming to Calgary, but that's not likely.

I can see the B. Schenn scenario working, specially cause I think Philly would also like to dump some salary and that won't come cheap. I can see B. Schenn + L. Schenn for Backlund and 2015 5th. This would free up $3M for Philadelphia moving forward.

No matter what trade happens, I wouldn't move the 2014 2nd as it's gonna be awfully close to the 1st round this next draft. Flames will likely pick in the top 4 which would mean the 2nd is at least 33rd overall because of NJD forfeiting their 1st.

Avatar
#92 mattyc
November 24 2013, 07:40PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
1
props
clyde wrote:

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

They seem pretty into possession. Regardless, Babcock is an excellent coach.

Avatar
#93 piscera.infada
November 24 2013, 09:39PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
1
props
Baalzamon wrote:

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.

Totally agree, I don't know why either. It has however, been discussed. I can't remember whether it was Dreger, Le Brun, or Mackenzie that was saying that B. Schenn is on the table if there is a package to take some salary, and send back a young roster player.

...And thanks for the heads up on him being a centre. I remember him playing centre when he was in Junior, but I just kind of assumed it didn't work out, or whatever in the show.

Avatar
#94 RexLibris
November 24 2013, 10:08PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
3
props

@loudogYYC

Couturier is Holmgren's ace card. He isn't trading that for a handful of 7s and 8s.

When the Yakupov to Philly rumours were flying the discussions were Yakupov and a 1st for Couturier and maybe, perhaps, Coburn.

I don't think Backlund gets you there. It'd be nice, but unless you've got something to slip in Holmgren's drink before the negotiations start...

Just to confirm, you are suggesting that both Schenns could be had for Backlund and a 5th round pick next year?

Actually, if the Flames were being aggressive they might be able to offer their 2nd round pick to the Devils in exchange for a young player or prospect. It reduces the development time for the Flames and provides a more tangible asset than a draft selection.

That or explore trading a supposed second 1st round pick in this year's draft from the presumed trade of Cammalleri for a prospect or player. Outside of Henrique, Schneider, Zajac, Elias, Larsson and Merrill, I'm not sure if anyone there is really unattainable at that price.

Avatar
#95 loudogYYC
November 25 2013, 10:43AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props
clyde wrote:

They believe in keeping the puck for sure, they just don't worry about tracking it. He is a very god coach. We wouldn't be seeing our youth playing until he was sure they were ready too.

Who ever said the Red Wings don't pay attention to possession stats? That team is all about possession, I don't believe for one minute they're not versed in #fancystats.

Avatar
#96 clyde
November 25 2013, 11:06AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props
loudogYYC wrote:

Who ever said the Red Wings don't pay attention to possession stats? That team is all about possession, I don't believe for one minute they're not versed in #fancystats.

One of their coaches said they don't when I asked him. I do believe him because he is a former teammate and friend. You can believe what you want though.

Comments are closed for this article.