Bennett Playing Costs Flames A Year of His Rookie Deal

[Fleury2005]

Sounds like Bennett is playing tomorrow which will cost the Flames a year on his rookie deal. What does everyone think about this? I'd much rather have an extra year of Bennett the stud once he is a star in his early twenties than an extra few games from him this year.

Say the Flames have a 50/50 shot tomorrow (Vegas thinks it is worse). So half the time we lose and are dead at 0-3 so we cost a full year of Bennett's rookie deal for one game. If we win tomorrow our odds for the series increase but only to about 25%. I'd guess Bennett is a guy in the $5M range by the time his rookie deal is done. We are paying a high price in terms of the cap impact at that point in exchange for a very marginally increased shot at winning now.

Maybe the better question is why start him for the final game of the season? He didn't have to play during the season to be on the playoff roster did he? They knew they had only nine games to play with to keep the extra year on his rookie deal so it seems you would want to use all of those in the playoffs this year.

Don't get me wrong - it's been AWESOME to watch him and I don't think we beat the Canucks without him - I just question the decisions to play him for the final regular season game (which meant nothing) and the decision to play him tomorrow when they are already down 2-0 and have not looked good at all.

This seems like short term thinking. Thoughts?

http://calgaryherald.com/sports/hock...game-threshold

[devo22]

"Hey Sam, we know you've played well and you deserve to be in the lineup, but we don't want to burn a year off your contract so we'll scratch you from now on. But we're still cool, right?" ... yeah, that's not going to happen.

I couldn't care less about his ELC. The kid deserves to play and the experience he's gaining will be much more valuable in the future than saving an ELC year.

[King Theo]

Play him. It will cost us a year on his ELC, but he will still be an RFA for the same amount of time. Not a big deal.

[EVERLAST]

Big time players learn to play in big game situations early and this is what Hartley Treliving and BurKe agree on .

This is a smart move and going forwards will pay us back handsomely

[T@T]

Having to pay Sam a year earlier = meh!

Having Sam experience playoff hockey = priceless!

[Trailer Fire]

Sam is playing well right now. We are in the playoffs right now. This season could very well be a fluke and we may see regression next year. Would you rather save a year on his contract and call it quits this year? Or would you like to see everyone play as hard as they can right now and maybe-maybe-not make it to the next level?

Burning a year off his ELC isn't "short term thinking" like you think it is. Telling him to pack it in and save it for next year could be more harmful than good. Sam would be pissed, and rightly so. If I was playing like him right now, and the team asked me to sit for the rest of the playoffs "in case we don't make it any further" I would be furious.

Did we not burn a year off Gaudreaus ELC by him playing last year (or did we lose a year of RFA status? Honestly don't remember)? Should we have sent Monahan back to Ottawa to save a year?

[Fleury2005]

Originally Posted by King Theo

Play him. It will cost us a year on his ELC, but he will still be an RFA for the same amount of time. Not a big deal.

Ohhhhhh - is that how this works? So he is under team control for the same numbers of years? That's a big difference. I thought he was also a UFA a year sooner.

[ColoradoFlamesFan]

"You can't go to the pharmacy and buy experience"
Bob Hartley

[Robbob]

I think it is rare for an 18 year old to get to play in this situation. Understanding what it takes in the playoffs is huge for his development. Top ten picks picks don't typically get this experience so quickly.

[Vinny01]

The only way a year was being burned is if the team was playing in the second round. Sam has proven to be an important part of the team and deserves to play.

[Poe969]

It's not like he's been a plug and he's being played just for the sake of being played. He's been one of our best forwards since he started playing. Sitting him now would not only look bad to him and possibly leave a bad taste in his mouth come contract time but it also sends a bad message to the fans. They've been doing everything they could to win all year don't stop now.

If they did sit him, it would be kinda funny to see #NeverquitunlessitcostsayearofanELCthenitsoktoquit

[Delthefunky]

Originally Posted by Robbob

I think it is rare for an 18 year old to get to play in this situation. Understanding what it takes in the playoffs is huge for his development. Top ten picks picks don't typically get this experience so quickly.

Yeah, just ask Edmonton

[CgyFlamesftw]

Should see HF main boards. All the oilers laughing and having great off season talk because of this. Rather have Bennett burn elc in playoffs than draisaitl in regular season.

[btimbit]

Experience is huge, also I wouldn't be a big fan of a management decision keeping a player out of the lineup if the coach wanted him in.

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by CgyFlamesftw

Should see HF main boards. All the oilers laughing and having great off season talk because of this. Rather have Bennett burn elc in playoffs than draisaitl in regular season.

Who's laughing?

Draisaitl
37 2 7 9 -17
Bennett
1 0 1 1 -1
8 3 1 4 -2

Bennett has 3 more goals, all in the playoffs, and 4 fewer points in roughly 30 less games

One guy was taking up space and stunting, the other guy contributing to a successful playoff season.

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally Posted by Fleury2005

Ohhhhhh - is that how this works? So he is under team control for the same numbers of years? That's a big difference. I thought he was also a UFA a year sooner.

A player can become UFA after their 7th season in the NHL I believe. I think in this situation, because Bennett will play 10 games, he burns a year off his entry level deal but for it to be considered a full season, he would have to play more than that (which is why the Oilers sent Draisaitl back before he reached that mark).

Something like that. I am sure someone can confirm whether that it correct.

On the poll, Bennett's play has warranted him being in the line-up. "Always earned" means nothing if it is only used to keep players out of the line-up.

[OutOfTheCube]

Way too much crystal ball thinking to not play him.

What if he plays out the next two years and is solid, but not spectacular? Think 20 goals, 20 assists type. Then they sign him to a 3-4 year, lower dollar contract at that point, and in his third year he breaks out to become an 80+ point player. Burning the year here would have saved the Flames money.

Ultimately, he looks great now and has established himself in the top 6. Play him!

[shermanator]

Threads like this are why we can't have nice things...

[OldDutch]

Didn't the Pens sit Fleury back in the day although he was playing well? I seem to remember rumours of how choked he was at that. It all worked out in the end, but it was stupid then and stupid now.

If Sam was in way over his head ala Sven then yes, sit him. Since he is clearly not, play him contracts be damned. Even if the Flames lose, they will need to see exactly what it will take to play the best. Despite losing the series the young players are learning what it will take to win at the highest level go forward.

Oilers kids don't have that. They only know giving up on the road to here. That is the big difference. Our future core has been seasoned properly to take it to the next level, theirs has not. This will pay huge dividends for us.

[albertGQ]

Still 7 more years AFTER this season before he is eligible for UFA status so no big deal.

And as poster above says, burning a year off the ELC can actually save the Flames money as he will have a smaller body of work once the ELC expires.