Backes ? who else has heard this ?

[radoran]

  What am I missing here, does Dean not have 2 Stanley Cups in his stable, 2 SC banners hanging from the rafters? As far as Mike goes, the ends justifies the means. Winning the cup is what it is all about. Give me 2 Stanley Cups and I'll take whatever **** storm follows. Yeah, the probably win without Mike, but the fact remains, they won *with* him. I was merely pointing out, Dean saw his window open, he took the necessary steps to add to his team, go for broke as it were. Dean showed tremendous forethought, and I'm betting only he saw the potential in the 2012 team...the 2014 version did not sneak up on anyone, but Dean *knew* that Quick was a championship goalie and knew his defense had a great transition game. He should be praised, not mocked.

 

No, I agree, but your point seemed to be that Lombardi "knew" his team was "on the verge" and so made the trade to bring in Richards, while the Flyers ("not on the verge") have no "need" to bring in a Backes.

 

My point was that the Kings were hardly a team that anyone saw as "on the verge" and "a Richards" away from the Cup when Lombardi traded two young players and a second rounder to bring in the veteran Richards.

 

And, in fact, they were still not "a Richards" away after he made that trade as he also needed to deal another young player plus a conditional first for Crater.

 

And they barely made the playoffs.

 

Are we saying that Mason is not "a championship goalie"? That the core assembled is not comparable to what the Kings - 4th place finisher with two playoff rounds in eight seasons - had at the time?

 

To be clear, I'm not saying "it is" but I am saying that there's no reason to think that when Lombardi dealt three young players and second rounder and a conditional first round pick that the Kings (who snuck into the playoffs on the last day of the season) were "a Richards" away from a Cup. He was trying desperately to make the playoffs.

 

I'm not mocking Lombardi at all. I'm mocking the idea that he was a visionary that "knew" that his fourth place in the division team with two playoff rounds in eight years was thisclose to a Cup while the Flyers obviously are not.

[mojo1917]

Yeah, the probably win without Mike, but the fact remains, they won *with* him.

 

they don't, he played huge minutes in the first win, was on the ice at the end of every win locking that **** down.  Sutter used him hard... this is bullshit and people need to quit sour graping the man's contribution.  He was not "the reason" but he was "a reason" that first kings team won.  he was the veteran you traded for to put your team over the top.  

[jammer2]

@radoran  I get what you are saying. I look at it this way, Dean's job was not in jeopardy.....yet, he makes the rather bold moves of shipping off highly thought of kids, forsaking the future for the now....something motivated him to do that, I honestly believe he struck because he had the foresight to know his window was opening. He went *all in* with those moves....yeah, I believe him to be a visionary.

[jammer2]

they don't, he played huge minutes in the first win, was on the ice at the end of every win locking that **** down.  Sutter used him hard... this is bullshit and people need to quit sour graping the man's contribution.  He was not "the reason" but he was "a reason" that first kings team won.  he was the veteran you traded for to put your team over the top.  

 

 I can get behind that. Mike was much more instrumental in the first cup win than the second.....and it would not be a huge stretch to say that because the team learned how to win during the first cup run...it gave them the experience to accomplish the 2nd victory. There was a few 7 game series wins during the 2nd cup run and they counted heavily on their past experiences to put them over the hump....again.

 

 I'm not trying to diminish Mike's contributions, but that first cup, they would have never ever won without Quick being God like.

[radoran]

@radoran  I get what you are saying. I look at it this way, Dean's job was not in jeopardy.....yet, he makes the rather bold moves of shipping off highly thought of kids, forsaking the future for the now....something motivated him to do that, I honestly believe he struck because he had the foresight to know his window was opening. He went *all in* with those moves....yeah, I believe him to be a visionary.

 

I like Lombardi fine and would much rather the Flyers have kept him than gone with Homer.

 

But if I'm looking at the current Flyers roster aside from the obvious difference in Doughty on the blue line, I see a team that has more offensive firepower and more potential than a Kings team that was fourth in their division with two playoff rounds in eight seasons.

 

Their leading scorers the year before the deal were Kopitar (73 points) and then Dustin Brown and Justin Williams with 57 apiece and Ryan Smyth with 47. Quick was 2.24/.918.

 

Last year the Flyers had Voracek (81), Giroux (73), Streit (52) and Simmonds (50). Mason was 2.25/.928.

 

Why were the Kings "thisclose" to the Cup that they could deal three young players, a second and a first (and make the playoffs on the last day of the season) but the Flyers are obviously no where near that?

 

Now, no way do I deal a Provorov and picks for Backes (which I do believe is approaching what it might take to get it done) but if the deal is BSchenn and Gudas for Backes (as was postulated in the thread) I think it's certainly worth looking at.

[J0e Th0rnton]

 Just gonna point out, Carter was one of those 30 goal guys, and all it took was Jack Johnson and Marko Dano to get the trade done. I'm of the opinion that Provorov is worth more than Johnson and Dano combined, much less adding in picks. Provorov *and* picks for a 31 year old Backes, who will be demanding a costly multi year contract and is on the wrong side of 30.....outrageous.

Backes will likely be much cheaper than that.

 

I am not disputing that. I am merely saying if you want another goal scorer of that caliber, everyone on the list above him will cost more than Backes and will likely cost you that. Which is why Backes looks more enticing.

 

I think you misinterpreted. I was not suggesting Backes himself will cost Provorov. Just that guys above or near him i quality will.

[mojo1917]

Now, no way do I deal a Provorov and picks for Backes (which I do believe is approaching what it might take to get it done) but if the deal is BSchenn and Gudas for Backes (as was postulated in the thread) I think it's certainly worth looking at.

 

the trade was mentioned in the article i posted...the idea for it came from ...not here that's for sure.

 

The Kings back slid (slided) ? the year prior to winning the cup but were on the right path, plus they had some darn good pieces in place,  bringing in Mike Richards who had won everything but a Stanely Cup was a good move; bring in a guy that wins and shows up at the biggest moments and he can show these other guys how to do it.  At this time we had the dry island fiasco but the depth of Richard's issues wasn't fully known.  

 

i totally agree this group of Flyers isn't a Backes away.  I am excited to see what becomes of this group though, because i do think there are some talented players in place as the core.  This season should be interesting.

[radoran]

The Kings back slid (slided) ? the year prior to winning the cup but were on the right path, plus they had some darn good pieces in place, bringing in Mike Richards who had won everything but a Stanely Cup was a good move; bring in a guy that wins and shows up at the biggest moments and he can show these other guys how to do it.

 

They were 46-27-9 in 09-10 and 3rd in the division, losing in the first round to the Canucks

 

They were 46-30-6 in 10-11, 4th in the division, losing in the first round to the Sharks.

 

Previous to that they hadn't made the playoffs since three years before the lockout.

 

Not really seeing the "back slide" in 10-11. If anything, the "back slide" was in 11-12 when they went 40-27-15 and made the playoffs on the last day of the season after trading three young players, a 2nd and a 1st to get Richards and Crater. (And they had "Cup winning" veteran (and eventual Conn Smythe winner) Justin Williams in the locker room already).

 

And, as I noted to jammer, the Kings didn't have a top tier pair like Giroux/Voracek. They had Anze Kopitar who had 73 points and then two guys with 57. Obviously a major difference is Doughty on the blue line, but Quick had, essentially, statistically the same season that Mason just put up (with more wins). The Kings also fired their coach early in the 11-12 season.

 

Backes answers a lot of problems for this team right off the bat - a legit, proven 2nd line center who would look (IMO) great centering Simmonds and give them the legit scoring depth that they simply don't have at the moment.

 

i totally agree this group of Flyers isn't a Backes away. I am excited to see what becomes of this group though, because i do think there are some talented players in place as the core. This season should be interesting.

 

"A Backes away" from a Cup? No. But I think he puts them closer than BSchenn + Radko Gudas.

 

Again, I don't see that deal happening, but if that's the price I don't see the point in dismissing it out of hand.

[J0e Th0rnton]

I like Lombardi fine and would much rather the Flyers have kept him than gone with Homer.

 

But if I'm looking at the current Flyers roster aside from the obvious difference in Doughty on the blue line, I see a team that has more offensive firepower and more potential than a Kings team that was fourth in their division with two playoff rounds in eight seasons.

 

Their leading scorers the year before the deal were Kopitar (73 points) and then Dustin Brown and Justin Williams with 57 apiece and Ryan Smyth with 47. Quick was 2.24/.918.

 

Last year the Flyers had Voracek (81), Giroux (73), Streit (52) and Simmonds (50). Mason was 2.25/.928.

 

Why were the Kings "thisclose" to the Cup that they could deal three young players, a second and a first (and make the playoffs on the last day of the season) but the Flyers are obviously no where near that?

 

Now, no way do I deal a Provorov and picks for Backes (which I do believe is approaching what it might take to get it done) but if the deal is BSchenn and Gudas for Backes (as was postulated in the thread) I think it's certainly worth looking at.

That's what I was getting at.

 

Backes, for his caliber, will be cheaper than the other names you would get at his level

[flyerfan2]

Not sure why so many are against getting Backes, even if it were to cost an unproven prospect.

 

It;s not like a 31 year old player is at the end of his career , especially in todays NHL were players are in great condition,(excluding Kessel}

 

Simmons and Backes on the same line would give depth most teams would kill to have.

[murraycraven]

I would be all for the Gudas/ Schenn deal for Backes... if they want Prov, Sanheim, Morin, Gost then I would tell them to pound sand.   I dont foresee the Blues dealing Backes anyway and still think this is a fantasy trade.   But then again we are in the slow days of summer...

[ruxpin]

Not sure why so many are against getting Backes, even if it were to cost an unproven prospect.

 

It;s not like a 31 year old player is at the end of his career , especially in todays NHL were players are in great condition,(excluding Kessel}

 

Simmons and Backes on the same line would give depth most teams would kill to have.

 

Here's why:  

1. Backes has played LW, but he's a center.  We have centers, including one who was just signed to a 6 year deal to play the position Backes is best-suited for.
2. Backes is in the last year of his contract.   This is likely his last under-35 contract coming up.   He's going to want a raise from his current $4.5M cap hit.  Even if he stayed the same, no.  I don't want that kind of money tied up there when there are cheaper options.  And I'm not trading two young guys for a rental.  I'll move the guys but I'd rather similar age or prospects/picks.
3. Again, if it's not a natural left winger that can play top 2 lines, I'm not really interested.  If Gagner ends up being a pleasant surprise, maybe that's not as big a necessity.
4. It's just so the antithesis of what Hextall seems to be preaching.  No thanks.   

[TropicalFruitGirl26]

 

Here's why:  

1. Backes has played LW, but he's a center.  We have centers, including one who was just signed to a 6 year deal to play the position Backes is best-suited for.
2. Backes is in the last year of his contract.   This is likely his last under-35 contract coming up.   He's going to want a raise from his current $4.5M cap hit.  Even if he stayed the same, no.  I don't want that kind of money tied up there when there are cheaper options.  And I'm not trading two young guys for a rental.  I'll move the guys but I'd rather similar age or prospects/picks.
3. Again, if it's not a natural left winger that can play top 2 lines, I'm not really interested.  If Gagner ends up being a pleasant surprise, maybe that's not as big a necessity.
4. It's just so the antithesis of what Hextall seems to be preaching.  No thanks.   

 

 

This makes sense on so many levels...hard to believe @ruxpin posted it!!  

 

Seriously though, this x100.

David Backes would best be a fit on a team that is a piece or two away from making a serious Cup run NOW.

 

That's NOT the Flyers at this point in time, whom I believe, may continue to 'take their lumps' for another 2 seasons or so, while they build up and round out their young players into real Stanley Cup performers.

[Claude Monet]

You all talking about the Kings have not mention the most important piece to their quick turnaround.

The coaching change.

[radoran]

We have centers, including one who was just signed to a 6 year deal to play the position Backes is best-suited for.

 

And has never actually shown the ability at the NHL level to play. In fact, he's never even scored forty points in the NHL.

 

I understand "giving guys a chance" but if we can have that type of depth down the middle (essentially having a 2nd line center playing third line) I think it's worth at least discussing.

 

I don't want that kind of money tied up there when there are cheaper options.

 

What are the cheaper options, exactly? Couturier, who has 45 career goals just got a $4.3M contract. Backes has 53 goals in the past two seasons. Brayden Schenn has 38 goals in his past two seasons - what do you think his raise on $2.5M is going to be?

 

Moreover, who plays Couturier's role? Laughton? Lecavalier?

 

Honestly, if they didn't have VLC and Umburglar eating up so much cap, I don't even see where this would be an issue. And, again, I wouldn't be going in to the $6M range for Backes (and would get permission to speak to his agent before making any kind of deal).

 

Again, if it's not a natural left winger that can play top 2 lines, I'm not really interested. If Gagner ends up being a pleasant surprise, maybe that's not as big a necessity.

 

I just don't see the logic in this stance. Where is this natural left winger who makes less than $4.5M and will continue to make less than $4.5M after cementing the left side of the VeeGees?

 

It's "the grapes are probably sour" from where I'm sitting.

 

It's just so the antithesis of what Hextall seems to be preaching. No thanks.

That's NOT the Flyers at this point in time, whom I believe, may continue to 'take their lumps' for another 2 seasons or so, while they build up and round out their young players into real Stanley Cup performers.

 

What was the last team to be entirely home grown with no additions from the FA/trade ranks that won a Cup?

 

There, honestly, really isn't one in recent memory. (@TFG Ryan Callahan says "hello" )

 

Again, I see Backes as making the team more competitive than keeping BSchenn and Gudas (both of whom are in their last year of a deal and will both likely require raises).

 

I see him immediately making the second line a serious scoring threat and allowing Couturier to develop into the offensive dynamo Many seem to think he is* while still playing the third line center role for which he's shown a tremendous ability.

 

I'm not in "win now" mode, but I see Backes as the kind of player who will still be effective at 33/34/35. Which is exactly the time frame I think we're all looking at.

 

I can see where the asking price would be too high. I can see where his agent might want too much money. I really don't expect this to happen.

 

But I don't understand simply dismissing it out of hand.

 

 

 

 

* I like Couturier.

[radoran]

You all talking about the Kings have not mention the most important piece to their quick turnaround.

The coaching change.

 

really?

 

The Kings also fired their coach early in the 11-12 season.

 

Which, again, draws more similarity to the Flyers' current situation than detracts from it.

[ruxpin]

@radoran

*** Responding to such an involved post on the phone is a pain and sometimes my tone reflects the frustration with the keyboard and fat fingers rather than the subject or the recipient. Bear with me

I'll just respond to this part: there isn't a left winger (other than the one we inexplicably traded to Columbus -- just being snarky). None that I can think of that would be workable (or attainable without selling the farm.

The statement I've made (that keeps getting taken a different way than I mean it) is "unless it's a natural left winger, I'm not interested." Maybe it's easier if I flip the sentence: I'm not interested unless it's a natural left winger.

In the absence of a realistically available or attainable left winger, where does that leave me: I'm not interested.

That means no move.

Why?

Because anything else (IMO) doesn't help the team enough to bother with the effort.

If VLC and Umberger...but they ARE. And that isn't changing. So I wait. There's no reason to trade guys for a guy who will be 33 or 34 and cost you roughly $14M by then before VLC is gone and the defense is about ready to compete (by that time, I hope a goalie is ready or we trade guys for one).

Sorry, I'm not talking about building an entire team of home growns. That doesn't happen. I'm just talking about patience and not making such moves until it's prudent... Or at least has a point to it.

Once again, I like Backes. He is not good enough to make enough of a difference that it's worth it. And, of course, it's all imaginary anyway (Chip Kelly is with the other Philly team).

[ruxpin]

This makes sense on so many levels...hard to believe @ruxpin posted it!!

Seriously though, this x100.

David Backes would best be a fit on a team that is a piece or two away from making a serious Cup run NOW.

That's NOT the Flyers at this point in time, whom I believe, may continue to 'take their lumps' for another 2 seasons or so, while they build up and round out their young players into real Stanley Cup performers.

If I haven't said so recently, I like you.

[radoran]

Sorry, I'm not talking about building an entire team of home growns. That doesn't happen. I'm just talking about patience and not making such moves until it's prudent... Or at least has a point to it.

Take the sorries to Peachtree Street buddy

If they can get Backes for BSchenn and Gudas and and extension below $5.5M AAV I'd say it's worth it more than keeping Bschenn and Gudas for the same money.

[ruxpin]

@radoran

What are the cheaper options, exactly? Couturier, who has 45 career goals just got a $4.3M contract. Backes has 53 goals in the past two seasons. Brayden Schenn has 38 goals in his past two seasons - what do you think his raise on $2.5M is going to be?

Well the very pieces we'd be giving up, not to put too fine a point on it.

Both Schenn and Backes have this year left. Schenn is $2M cheaper and 7 years younger. No, he's not as good. But since neither one makes the team a playoff team, why?

Both are in contact years. If both "play to a new contract," Schenn gets $4.5M and Backes gets $6M (this will be his last under 35 contact most likely. He goes for years and as much as he can get) . On phone, is Schenn going to be an RFA or FA? If RFA, you do a bridge and nothing more. He's offer sheeted, take the picks. If you think you can't sign, trade at the deadline.

Stay the course. That course is simply patience until there's good reason to jump.

[ruxpin]

Take the sorries to Peachtree Street buddy

If they can get Backes for BSchenn and Gudas and and extension below $5.5M AAV I'd say it's worth it more than keeping Bschenn and Gudas for the same money.

Well, then there's Gudas. If he's recovered, I want to keep him.

I really don't see the value of purpose to Backes on the Flyers. I see the value of Backes. Just not on the Flyers. Not without a better team. We are a non-playoff team with or without Backes. I'm okay without.

[ruxpin]

@radoran

Sorry.

[Claude Monet]

really?

Which, again, draws more similarity to the Flyers'

current situation than detracts from it.

The Kings were outside the playoffs, fired the coach and brought in the new guy (sutter?) they were the hottest team down the stretch and made the playoffs.....and won the Cup

Yeah, Really. That coaching change turned their season around and they won the Cup.

[radoran]

The Kings were outside the playoffs, fired the coach and brought in the new guy (sutter?) they were the hottest team down the stretch and made the playoffs.....and won the Cup

Yeah, Really. That coaching change turned their season around and they won the Cup.

 

Your point was that nobody had mentioned the coaching change. My point was that it had, in fact, been mentioned.

 

That said, the Kings fired Murray on December 12 and hired Sutter on the 20th (Stevens coached on an "interim" basis in between)

 

Even with that, they were a sub-.500 team (8-9-6) in January and February prior to:

 

They acquired Jeff Crater for Jack Johnson and a first rounder on February 23.

 

Then went 13-5-3 after the trade.

 

The coaching change had an impact, no doubt, but I'd say that the Crater trade had more of an obvious, immediate effect in terms of their being the "hottest team down the stretch".

 

Even with that, they picked up five points in their last four games, beating Edmonton and losing shootouts to Minnesota and San Jose before losing in overtime to the Sharks to back into the playoffs on the last day of the season.

[Claude Monet]

Your point was that nobody had mentioned the coaching change. My point was that it had, in fact, been mentioned.

That said, the Kings fired Murray on December 12 and hired Sutter on the 20th (Stevens coached on an "interim" basis in between)

Even with that, they were a sub-.500 team (8-9-6) in January and February prior to:

They acquired Jeff Crater for Jack Johnson and a first rounder on February 23.

Then went 13-5-3 after the trade.

The coaching change had an impact, no doubt, but I'd say that the Crater trade had more of an obvious, immediate effect in terms of their being the "hottest team down the stretch".

Even with that, they picked up five points in their last four games, beating Edmonton and losing shootouts to Minnesota and San Jose before losing in overtime to the Sharks to back into the playoffs on the last day of the season.

Fair enough. I did not realize that had been mentioned at the time I posted and damn you and your stats in regard to carter!