As we all wait for the new season's ice cream to melt a little, I figure I might as well continue to propose wild, hypothetical scenarios that will draw derisive snorts and evoke needless arguments.
So here goes:
Trade Daymond Langkow.
Think about it. The Flames have an absolute logjam up the middle. After Langkow there is:
Lombardi
Conroy
Boyd
Primeau
Backlund
Ryder
Carpentier
Wahl
Sure, Conroy goes away after this year...but that's it. Everyone else sticks around beyond that (unless they find some sucker to take that awful Primeau contract. Doubtful).
1.) The first problem is, there's lots of the same kind of player battling it out for limited spots: Lombardi, Backlund, Boyd and potentially Ryder (at some future point) are all agile, offensive centerman who would best be deployed with offensive wingers. Even if you assume Lombardi's ceiling is a 3rd line/40 point guy, that still leaves Boyd, Backlund and Langkow cluttering the top 3 in the near future. And Im not even counting Cammalleri, who is also a natural center.
I suppose there's the option of converting one or two of these guys to wing. That doesn't seem like a sound strategy to me however: Langkow is an established centerman and wont be changing any time soon. Lombardi has gone through two ego-bruising seasons of becoming a capable two-way pivot. Moving him to the boards just as the light goes on wouldn't make much sense. Boyd tried to play wing last year during the kid-line fiasco and it was a disaster. And, by all accounts, Backlund is already a good two-way player. Not to mention being the prototypical playmaking center coaches are always looking for up the middle.
No - what the Flames have here is centers. Too many of them.
2.) What they dont have, however, is depth on the wings. Especially the right side where the step down after Jarome is a steep one:
Iginla
Bertuzzi?
Moss
Roy
Van Der Gulik
Nesmisz?
The left side isn't much better:
Cammalleri
Bourque
Glencross
Nystrom
Greentree?
Prust?
Chucko?
Delete Cammalleri, who might bolt for free agency after this season, and things get significantly uglier.
What Im getting at is the Flames are in a position to deal from strength to shore up a weakness. Langkow has a decent value contract considering his recent numbers and could probably garner some interest. Particularly around the trade deadline when some emergent contender will be looking to add "another significant piece".
3.) Langkow turns 32 in 9 days. His new deal, averaging 4.5M/year, stretches until 11/12 when he'll be 35 at the onset of the season.
To be fair, Langkow has been the picture of consistency over the course of his career and there hasn't been any sign of slowing down recently, but...I still think there's a good chance that he will be overpaid relative to his contributions by the time he's that age. A sizable portion of NHLers start to hit the downward slope mid-way through the 30's. If that happens to Daymond, the team will be stuck paying a 35 year-old 3rd liner (Conroy anyone?) 4.5M that season. And as we've experienced this summer, ditching bad value deals in the capped NHL is by no means easy or assured. Move him now while the dollars seem sensible and he has value.
4.) Trading Langkow means aggressively developing the kids. Which, given the fact that I assume the Flames aren't challenging for the cup this year, is a good thing.
Cammalleri - Backlund - Iginla
New Winger - Lombardi - Bertuzzi
Bourque - Boyd - Moss
Glencross - Conroy - Nystrom
Primeau
Roy
Backlund centering the first line as a rookie is probably silly. It's also something that's happened with some elite younger talents recently (Backstrom, Toews, Mueller, Kopitar) with relative success. By that I mean success for the prospect in question and potentially the organization in the long-term. Would I do this if the Flames were contenders for the Cup this year? Hell no. Are they? Probably not. The loss of Langkow would likely mean some growing pains for Backlund and a loss of a few points off the record. Instead of placing 6th-8th, the club might place 7th-10th. Instead of losing in the first round, they might not make the play-offs at all. That said, I think the club would be better positioned less Langkow's 4.5M going forward into 09/10, especially if he can be moved for a decent return.
5.) Moving Langkow could also potentially free up salary to re-sign Cammalleri, who is both younger and has a higher ceiling. So even if none of the half dozen potential offensive centers waiting in the wings are able to replace Langkow in the short or long term, the Flames have another potential replacement playing on the wing right now anyways.
6.) Langkow is a good player. Maybe very good. But he isn't irreplacable. He's only once managed more than 70 points, for instance.
Last season, Langkow saw easier competition than Tanguay, Conroy, Nolan and Iginla. He beat the hell out the bad guys (3.25 GF/60 vs 2.29 GA/60), but he also had the best teammates the team had to offer (+0.44). Earlier this summer, I showed that Langkow's results on the PP were probably more due to playing with difference makers than him driving the results.
Keep in mind, Langkow has already peaked: he will inevitably get worse as the contract matures.
Assumptions:
1.) Backlund is who I - and a lot of other pundits - think he is. This is by no means a sure thing and could result in a bit of a disaster. However, even if Backlund Flames out spectacularly (punny!), Calgary could move Lombardi up or Cammalleri over. Because, as I've said...we have A LOT OF CENTERS.
2.) The New Winger* coming back in the deal can potentially step into the top 6. This, of course, is the crux of the proposal and is also the fuzziest. IF it could be done, however, then I think it SHOULD BE.
*(I might also take a young, established, top 4 defenseman.).
I know, I know. It's stupid.
Flame away.
