Jump to content
The Official Site of the Calgary Flames
Going4TheCup

Sam Bennett

Recommended Posts

16 minutes ago, MAC331 said:

So how does he do that with 6 or 8 minutes from the 4th line and no PP time ?

 

On a different team. A few days ago I said, “Trade the bum!” But that was my thinking he’s rotting in Calgary and probably needs a change of scenery to get to his potential and reacting to those who think he’s been given every opportunity and failed to seize it.

 

Bennett is my favourite player. I think he has what it takes. Maybe their thinking is to finally to stick to something for him. I guess that is with Janks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, stubblejumper1 said:

 

I think the answer is somewhere in the middle.  

 

Management in any field needs to put players/employees in situations where they can succeed.  Everyone needs mentoring. 

 

Players/employees need to be able to work outside of their comfort zone in order to grow.  Everyone has to do what is best for the team.

 

Bennett is a fast skater, a hard worker and he is fearless but he lacks high end skill.  He was drafted as a centre and the team gave him an opportunity at centre.  He didn't show much playmaking ability, so they gave him a chance on the wing.  He hasn't shown much finishing ability, and he has taken a lot of undisciplined penalties, so they are deploying him as a role player.

 

I am not sure where they could give him an opportunity in more offensive situations. 

- Bennett isn't going to bump Gaudreau or Monahan off the first line.

- Brouwer played a bit on the first line and his contract was bought out.  Ferland played a bit on the first line and he was traded.  Is Bennett significantly better than either of those guys?

- Bennett isn't going to bump Tkachuk or Backlund off the second line.

- Is Bennett any better than Frolik? 

 

Maybe Bennett deserves a chance on the third line, but are any of those players skilled enough to turn him into a goal scorer?

 

Let's take what you have here and follow it where Bennett has ended up. He started out with Backlund and Frolik which was a good way for him to break in ad learn from a C like Backlund. In comes Tkachuk so Bennett gets the chance to C his own line, given a bunch of also rans as wingers, epic fail all around not just Bennett. Begs the question is he a C or a LW with his style of play ? I really think with the better players brought in we have an opportunity to set up a good string of moves for our future starting now. First let me say I am a big fan of both Bennett and Dube but I believe in a sense of order for one laying over the other before an answer has been tried for the one here first. We drafted Bennett to be a C and given real solid wingers like Tkachuk and Lindholm could we get him back to the level of play we have expected all along ? Could Dube by playing LW with Backlund learn from him as did Bennett and Tkachuk ? I see Dube as someone who along with Bennett could eventually replace Backlund and Ryan. Neal IMO belongs with Gaudreau and Monahan.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, robrob74 said:

 

On a different team. A few days ago I said, “Trade the bum!” But that was my thinking he’s rotting in Calgary and probably needs a change of scenery to get to his potential and reacting to those who think he’s been given every opportunity and failed to seize it.

 

Bennett is my favourite player. I think he has what it takes. Maybe their thinking is to finally to stick to something for him. I guess that is with Janks.

This IMO is simplistic thinking from something that showed a spark last season. Talented players will or should provide this spark as Bennett and Jankowski did. I don't think they lose anything by using Dube with Jankowski and as a 1st year player he to will be working hard to show he belongs. Maybe this all sorts itself out as time passes and BP has more time to assess what he has in his players.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, kehatch said:

 

Where did I say the Flames should toss a prospect in the deep end and see if they can swim? I am saying the opposite. You don't move a player up the line up unless their play shows you they can "swim". That isn't the right approach to development and it isn't the right approach to winning hockey games. 

 

If your only justification to playing Bennett top 4 / top 6 is that we like his potential then that's a mistake. I personally think his play has shown he can / should be moved up the line up. 

I think the very use of the words "could" and "should" display the need to find out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, cross16 said:

 

I think skill set should be a bigger factor in the decision so I still disagree. Skill set and potential should equal more opportunities and more prime opportunities, ie PP, better linemates etc. Put players in positions to succeed. 

 

Gaudreau, Monahan, Tkachuk, Valimaki, Dube, Jankowski, Czarnik, Rittich, Gilles, Kulak, etc. All prospects that got or are getting an opportunity on the team. Many in an impact role. This isn't a team that refuses to give the young guys a shot.

 

Bennett is where he is because of Bennett. If he keeps playing well he will get more ice time. At that point he will need to continue to play well to keep it.

 

I am actually encouraged. He isn't playing like a guy in need of a change of scenery and if he keeps that up he will make an impact. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, MAC331 said:

Clearly we have a Coach still finding his way.

Which is fair. Turn over every stone to get it right. Bennett-Neal could be a good grind with a sweet set-up man in the middle.

 

Apologies the practice lines were posted in the lines thread earlier.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, conundrumed said:

As per Kristen Anderson twitter:

Bennett-Dube-Neal is a thing at today's practice.

Valimaki-Andersson

 

Janx-Prout the odd men out.

 

And those are fair decisions.  Though Janko was okay, but his faceoff record wasn't.

Bennett has outplayed Ryan in at least one game.

This could work.  Let's see how long they give it a try.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, conundrumed said:

Which is fair. Turn over every stone to get it right. Bennett-Neal could be a good grind with a sweet set-up man in the middle.

 

Apologies the practice lines were posted in the lines thread earlier.

agreed

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, conundrumed said:

 

 

I like most of it.  I like Bennett on a line with Neal.  I like Andersson in over Prout.  Those are the big items, the rest is nit picking. 

 

As for the nit picking: I am not sure I like Dube as the third line centre over Ryan/Jankowski, but I don't hate it either.  I don't like Peluso/Hathaway as the fourth line LW.  I also don't like Jankowski sitting as I think he has been pretty good. I would prefer to see Frolik-Jankowski-Ryan as the fourth line. But the coach is going to try new things and clearly they want a bit of size on the fourth line.  

 

Overall I like the lines. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, kehatch said:

 

I like most of it.  I like Bennett on a line with Neal.  I like Andersson in over Prout.  Those are the big items, the rest is nit picking. 

 

As for the nit picking: I am not sure I like Dube as the third line centre over Ryan/Jankowski, but I don't hate it either.  I don't like Peluso/Hathaway as the fourth line LW.  I also don't like Jankowski sitting as I think he has been pretty good. I would prefer to see Frolik-Jankowski-Ryan as the fourth line. But the coach is going to try new things and clearly they want a bit of size on the fourth line.  

 

Overall I like the lines. 

 

Steinberg does it that way for some reason.  Wills said it was Frolik-Ryan-Hathaway, which makes more sense.

I see no need to dress Peluso unless we are playing Anaheim or some other dirty team.

Even then, I would only play him 5 minutes.

In other words, it makes little sense.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, kehatch said:

 

I like most of it.  I like Bennett on a line with Neal.  I like Andersson in over Prout.  Those are the big items, the rest is nit picking. 

 

As for the nit picking: I am not sure I like Dube as the third line centre over Ryan/Jankowski, but I don't hate it either.  I don't like Peluso/Hathaway as the fourth line LW.  I also don't like Jankowski sitting as I think he has been pretty good. I would prefer to see Frolik-Jankowski-Ryan as the fourth line. But the coach is going to try new things and clearly they want a bit of size on the fourth line.  

 

Overall I like the lines. 

Pretty much agree. Maybe it'll be good for Jankowski to watch from above. Hard to say there's fault in Janx, as his minutes have been low.

Bennett-Dube can bounce back and forth at C so I'm good with that.

I expected pretty much what is happening right now, it takes time.

The amazing part is, we still have a good roster while we go through the trials of how to lineup.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, conundrumed said:

Pretty much agree. Maybe it'll be good for Jankowski to watch from above. Hard to say there's fault in Janx, as his minutes have been low.

Bennett-Dube can bounce back and forth at C so I'm good with that.

I expected pretty much what is happening right now, it takes time.

The amazing part is, we still have a good roster while we go through the trials of how to lineup.

 

In two game we have score 9 goals.  Sure it was against Vancouver, but when was the last time we were able to say that?    

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, kehatch said:

 

 

Bennett is where he is because of Bennett. If he keeps playing well he will get more ice time. At that point he will need to continue to play well to keep it.

 

I am actually encouraged. He isn't playing like a guy in need of a change of scenery and if he keeps that up he will make an impact. 

 

Fundamentally I just don't agree. I will always be ofnthe opinion that the flames did a horrible job with Bennett. 

 

But it's the past and can't change it so I'm trying to hide my frustration over it. It's just hard when o thought Peters would approach with a clean slate and he doesn't appear to.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, conundrumed said:

Yup, just don't forget to put me on the ignore list in GDTs when things aren't going our way lol

 

Maybe you can just set your TV to ignore the ignoramous Randorf.

So hard to listen to that crap.

You would think the only player on the ice was Pettersen.

Okay, he was the only player for VAN, but some on dude,

 

Wonder if we get Ball/DeBrusk or one of the old TSN guys.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, conundrumed said:

Van's McDavid.:lol:

 

Those ex TSN guys can only focus on one player per team.

It's all their little stats brains can handle.

Randorf should go back to Olympics, where his droning voice would fill the void.  Cross Country Skiing commentary.

Or curling.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, cross16 said:

 

Fundamentally I just don't agree. I will always be ofnthe opinion that the flames did a horrible job with Bennett. 

 

But it's the past and can't change it so I'm trying to hide my frustration over it. It's just hard when o thought Peters would approach with a clean slate and he doesn't appear to.

And I can’t agree with you here.  Calgary may have struggled with his development, but Bennett didn’t help himself at all.  I still contend that Bennett’s problem is he plays selfishly.  He tries to do too much by himself and as a result does very little effectively.  Even last game; he may have been “buzzing”, but how many people did he help to create quality shots?  His mindset needs to alter in order for him to become more effective.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, flames for life said:

And I can’t agree with you here.  Calgary may have struggled with his development, but Bennett didn’t help himself at all.  I still contend that Bennett’s problem is he plays selfishly.  He tries to do too much by himself and as a result does very little effectively.  Even last game; he may have been “buzzing”, but how many people did he help to create quality shots?  His mindset needs to alter in order for him to become more effective.

 

Wasn't a problem his rookie year. Having to carry 2 non nhler as a rookie center really didn't help either. 

 

Agree to disagree. I also don't mean to suggest Bennett should shoulder no blame and it's all on the Flames, that's not fair either. But I point heavily to the Flames here. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, flames for life said:

And I can’t agree with you here.  Calgary may have struggled with his development, but Bennett didn’t help himself at all.  I still contend that Bennett’s problem is he plays selfishly.  He tries to do too much by himself and as a result does very little effectively.  Even last game; he may have been “buzzing”, but how many people did he help to create quality shots?  His mindset needs to alter in order for him to become more effective.

I wouldn't disagree with your take on Bennett's approach but the question becomes how do you feed it. I recommend having Tkachuk on his LW who is also aggressive but a good playmaker. Bennett has a nose for the net which has made him successful as a scorer. I don't view this much differently than how Gaudreau and Monahan function, you don't see Monahan setting up his line mates much. Rather than try to change him, try and capture his competitiveness with efforts towards the net. I think he would rise to the challenge.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, MAC331 said:

I wouldn't disagree with your take on Bennett's approach but the question becomes how do you feed it. I recommend having Tkachuk on his LW who is also aggressive but a good playmaker. Bennett has a nose for the net which has made him successful as a scorer. I don't this much differently than how Gaudreau and Monahan function, you don't see Monahan setting up his line mates much. Rather than try to change him, try and capture his competitiveness with efforts towards the net. I think he would rise to the challenge.

This lends to my point exactly.  He scored 18 and 18 in his first year.  Not exactly a playmaker, but the hint of a playmaker.  The big difference between Mony and Bennett lies in the hidden strengths.  Most of Mony’s goals are from in front of the net.  Bennett plants in the corner and tries to charge into the front.  He needs to either place himself better or play with his head more in tune with the pass.  Just a reminder that Mony also played his first while without Gaudreau, and scored goals the same way he does now.

maybe this speaks more so of his hockey smarts and on ice vision, as well as understanding the role you need to accept in order to succeed in this league.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, cross16 said:

 

Wasn't a problem his rookie year. Having to carry 2 non nhler as a rookie center really didn't help either. 

 

Agree to disagree. I also don't mean to suggest Bennett should shoulder no blame and it's all on the Flames, that's not fair either. But I point heavily to the Flames here. 

I remember when Mike Keenan admitted that they had screwed up McElhinney's development. I thought it was pretty honest of him. He argued that in the pursuit of winning in the short-term, he did not provide McElhinney with sufficient time to development properly in the long-term. It has had a lasting impact. As you stated, this is not to argue that the player holds no responsibility. And it is not an either or proposition of playing him with boat anchors or the top line. We can chew bubble gum and walk at the same time. Being our top draft pick, he deserves this consideration. This is not the same thing as arguing that say, Prout be put on the top pairing when he clearly is not elite talent. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...