David Backes Extended

[cprice12]

We're paying 3 dollars per hot dog and 8 bucks per piss beer. Obviously money is not that important to us.

I've only bought a beer at a Blues game once...and that was because I was there as part of a bachelor party.
I was given club seats once with all you can eat hot dogs, pretzels, peanuts and all you can drink beer...so needless to say I had quite few at that game.

But I just can't bring myself to pay $8 for a beer...I can almost get a 12 pack for that at Schnucks.

I bought a beer at a Cardinals game once...but that was only because it was my first game at new Busch...the 3rd game in the new stadium...it was a special occasion.

If I want to drink with friends and watch the game, I'll go to a bar and save $100.

[WaukeeBlues]

Good, I can comfortably buy his jersey now

[JWatt (formerly PMS)]

Backes has the potential to be one of the better power forwards the NHL has seen in some time. YES you pay him handsomely and hope he fulfills his potential. Plus, he's one of this team's leaders. The fixation on quantitative reasoning by some of you motherfreakers is asinine.

This is a no-brainer.

Potential? What potential? He's a 40-50 point player, max. He's ALREADY in his prime. Most forwards are in their prime from 25-31. How many players over 31 were in the top 50 in scoring last year? The answer is 4. Yes, that's it. FOUR. Hockey is a young man's game, especially at the forward position. So, players who hit UFA age aren't going to suddenly reach the potential they've never reached before. By the time you reach UFA, you are what you are. David Backes is 40-50 point player. I didn't realize those types of players deserve $4.5MM/yr these days. So he hits people. BFD. I would pay players on production, not entertainment value. If you can correlate how his hits translate to wins for the team, I'm all ears. In the meantime, I'll continue to moan about players the Blues have paid $4+MM/yr to, and how they have all been a waste of money (McKee, Brewer, Boyes, Kariya, McDonald). If paying Backes keeps us from affording players that have more impact on whether we win or lose games, then this was a poor signing. I think this was a panic move because we were afraid to lose him.

[goon attack]

Backes has the potential to be one of the better power forwards the NHL has seen in some time. YES you pay him handsomely and hope he fulfills his potential. Plus, he's one of this team's leaders. The fixation on quantitative reasoning by some of you motherfreakers is asinine.

This is a no-brainer.

Potential? What potential? He's a 40-50 point player, max. He's ALREADY in his prime. Most forwards are in their prime from 25-31. How many players over 31 were in the top 50 in scoring last year? The answer is 4. Yes, that's it. FOUR. Hockey is a young man's game, especially at the forward position. So, players who hit UFA age aren't going to suddenly reach the potential they've never reached before. By the time you reach UFA, you are what you are. David Backes is 40-50 point player. I didn't realize those types of players deserve $4.5MM/yr these days. So he hits people. BFD. I would pay players on production, not entertainment value. If you can correlate how his hits translate to wins for the team, I'm all ears. In the meantime, I'll continue to moan about players the Blues have paid $4+MM/yr to, and how they have all been a waste of money (McKee, Brewer, Boyes, Kariya, McDonald). If paying Backes keeps us from affording players that have more impact on whether we win or lose games, then this was a poor signing. I think this was a panic move because we were afraid to lose him.

You can't judge his worth until this team plays better overall and makes the playoffs a few times. I don't give a flying fukk what he does in the regular season... if he's a physical machine in the playoffs and pots a few goals, he's worth every penny. Every team need a big guy like Backes who will hit and fight. Got any bright ideas about who would fill his role if he left?

[cprice12]

Backes has the potential to be one of the better power forwards the NHL has seen in some time. YES you pay him handsomely and hope he fulfills his potential. Plus, he's one of this team's leaders. The fixation on quantitative reasoning by some of you motherfreakers is asinine.

This is a no-brainer.

Potential? What potential? He's a 40-50 point player, max. He's ALREADY in his prime. Most forwards are in their prime from 25-31. How many players over 31 were in the top 50 in scoring last year? The answer is 4. Yes, that's it. FOUR. Hockey is a young man's game, especially at the forward position. So, players who hit UFA age aren't going to suddenly reach the potential they've never reached before. By the time you reach UFA, you are what you are. David Backes is 40-50 point player. I didn't realize those types of players deserve $4.5MM/yr these days. So he hits people. BFD. I would pay players on production, not entertainment value. If you can correlate how his hits translate to wins for the team, I'm all ears. In the meantime, I'll continue to moan about players the Blues have paid $4+MM/yr to, and how they have all been a waste of money (McKee, Brewer, Boyes, Kariya, McDonald). If paying Backes keeps us from affording players that have more impact on whether we win or lose games, then this was a poor signing. I think this was a panic move because we were afraid to lose him.

Backes' role isn't to lead the team in scoring. I'm not sure why you think that.
He would have easily gotten $4.5+ on the open market. Letting him walk would have been a HUGE PR disaster and may have bit them in the ass on the ice had he gone to Detroit or Chicago. We've seen Detroit pick up guys we let go and win cups with them. And I guarantee Vancouver would have taken a serious run at him.
Backes is a keeper and he was a must sign. You don't just let him walk. $4.5 million isn't a terrible price for him.

[JPonder94]

Backes' role isn't to lead the team in scoring. I'm not sure why you think that.
He would have easily gotten $4.5+ on the open market. Letting him walk would have been a HUGE PR disaster and may have bit them in the ass on the ice had he gone to Detroit or Chicago. We've seen Detroit pick up guys we let go and win cups with them. And I guarantee Vancouver would have taken a serious run at him.
Backes is a keeper and he was a must sign. You don't just let him walk. $4.5 million isn't a terrible price for him.

I don't doubt that we would all be pissed if he ended up going to DET, CHI, VAN or whoever. I just think we jumped the gun. If Backes continues his lack of production, I think he drops his asking price in January-ish. I think we could have gotten him for $4M if we waited. I think the Blues were just looking to give Blues fans something to cheer about right now, because they knew hard times would be afoot with the injuries to Perron and Oshie.

[kodos]

Last night on the VS broadcast, the announcer said, "hmm, speaking of David Backes, we haven't really seen much of him tonight."

I said to the TV, "Yeah, that's our David Backes."

[WaukeeBlues]

Backes has the potential to be one of the better power forwards the NHL has seen in some time. YES you pay him handsomely and hope he fulfills his potential. Plus, he's one of this team's leaders. The fixation on quantitative reasoning by some of you motherfreakers is asinine.

This is a no-brainer.

Potential? What potential? He's a 40-50 point player, max. He's ALREADY in his prime. Most forwards are in their prime from 25-31. How many players over 31 were in the top 50 in scoring last year? The answer is 4. Yes, that's it. FOUR. Hockey is a young man's game, especially at the forward position. So, players who hit UFA age aren't going to suddenly reach the potential they've never reached before. By the time you reach UFA, you are what you are. David Backes is 40-50 point player. I didn't realize those types of players deserve $4.5MM/yr these days. So he hits people. BFD. I would pay players on production, not entertainment value. If you can correlate how his hits translate to wins for the team, I'm all ears. In the meantime, I'll continue to moan about players the Blues have paid $4+MM/yr to, and how they have all been a waste of money (McKee, Brewer, Boyes, Kariya, McDonald). If paying Backes keeps us from affording players that have more impact on whether we win or lose games, then this was a poor signing. I think this was a panic move because we were afraid to lose him.

You can't judge his worth until this team plays better overall and makes the playoffs a few times. I don't give a flying fukk what he does in the regular season... if he's a physical machine in the playoffs and pots a few goals, he's worth every penny. Every team need a big guy like Backes who will hit and fight. Got any bright ideas about who would fill his role if he left?

That's his value alone. There are not many players that can contribute offensively and also have no hesitation to drop the gloves when they need to. Backes does both. I like this signing.

[JWatt (formerly PMS)]

Backes' role isn't to lead the team in scoring. I'm not sure why you think that.

Because he's a forward and we paid him $4.5MM/yr for 5 years. I would expect him to put up scoring numbers with that contract.

If he wants a big payday and won't re-sign for less, then you trade the guy. If teams are lining up to hand this guy $5MM/yr in the offseason, then I'm sure we could fleece those same GMs for a young forward/prospect that can actually score which is what this team needs. Who cares if that player isn't the mystical "power forward." David Backes is a good player that is good to have to round out the 2nd/3rd line for secondary scoring, but he's not a difference maker, and you need to save the big bucks for the difference makers. I'm sorry, the fact that he's big and hits people doesn't make up for his lack of offensive production. It does if he's making $3.5MM/yr, but not above $4MM/yr.

[northwest dave]

Backes' role isn't to lead the team in scoring. I'm not sure why you think that.

Because he's a forward and we paid him $4.5MM/yr for 5 years. I would expect him to put up scoring numbers with that contract.

If he wants a big payday and won't re-sign for less, then you trade the guy. If teams are lining up to hand this guy $5MM/yr in the offseason, then I'm sure we could fleece those same GMs for a young forward/prospect that can actually score which is what this team needs. Who cares if that player isn't the mystical "power forward." David Backes is a good player that is good to have to round out the 2nd/3rd line for secondary scoring, but he's not a difference maker, and you need to save the big bucks for the difference makers. I'm sorry, the fact that he's big and hits people doesn't make up for his lack of offensive production. It does if he's making $3.5MM/yr, but not above $4MM/yr.

Backes pretty much got the going rate for his type of player: Lucic ($4.0M), Bergeron ($5.75M), Morrow ($4.1M), etc.

Players with size cost more.

[Kogie]

At some point we are going to have to buy production instead of "intangibles." We can't win a cup with just 25 "locker room assets." However, Backes imo is our captain of the future and he received a pretty standard rate for his role. He has also averaged slightly better than a PPG (1G5A) since his deal was announced.

[joosforjihad]

Backes pretty much got the going rate for his type of player: Lucic ($4.0M), Bergeron ($5.75M), Morrow ($4.1M), etc.

Players with size cost more.

Bergeron's like 6 foot 180 lbs. And I think he recently signed an extension for 3 yrs 15 mil.

And I would take Morrow or Lucic over Backes any day and put the 500k towards someone else.

[northwest dave]

Backes pretty much got the going rate for his type of player: Lucic ($4.0M), Bergeron ($5.75M), Morrow ($4.1M), etc.

Players with size cost more.

Bergeron's like 6 foot 180 lbs. And I think he recently signed an extension for 3 yrs 15 mil.

And I would take Morrow or Lucic over Backes any day and put the 500k towards someone else.

I was basically looking at production comparisons in a quick search.

And sure go get Lucic...do you think you'll have to give up something in a trade or will you have to bid on him with other teams when he's a free agent.

[joosforjihad]

Backes pretty much got the going rate for his type of player: Lucic ($4.0M), Bergeron ($5.75M), Morrow ($4.1M), etc.

Players with size cost more.

Bergeron's like 6 foot 180 lbs. And I think he recently signed an extension for 3 yrs 15 mil.

And I would take Morrow or Lucic over Backes any day and put the 500k towards someone else.

I was basically looking at production comparisons in a quick search.

And sure go get Lucic...do you think you'll have to give up something in a trade or will you have to bid on him with other teams when he's a free agent.

Just saw that you replied. I see your point that if we were to get one of those guys we wouldn't just be giving up money to get them. I was just talking about a hypothetical dollar for dollar comparison. As I said earlier, I'm glad we got Backes locked up, I just think it's at too high a price. With all the cap space we have now, its not an immediate concern, but hopefully we are good enough in the near future where we do have cap problems.

[xbleed83bluex]

Semin makes 6 mil and year and Backes 4.5? That's way too much for him. The caps are considering letting Semin go, Let's see if the Caps will give us him in exchange for Backes - if we can pay Backs 4.5, there shouldn't be a problem paying Semin 6.5

If there's anyone I would sign to a long term deal, it would be Perron.