Quote:
Originally Posted by ComixZone
Which one is the fringe NHL player:
53GP - 3G, 12A, 15PTS
53GP - 7G, 11A, 18PTS
73GP - 10G, 15A, 25PTS
“very low probability” is such an odd comment, unless you’re weighing the general hockey playing population vs. likelihood of becoming a high performing NHL’er?
Making judgements on players, so scathing, when they’re contributing NHL players at an incredibly young age makes little sense. I wonder just how many of you who are proclaiming Bennett a bust/a bad pick said the same about Backlund? Jankowski? Or how much are you failing to disconnect Bennett’s draft spot from his performance? Which is silly. Look at the draft year, the top end of the draft wasn’t strong, especially for forwards. Remove your own expectations that were driven by the draft spot, look at him as a 21 year old and give the kid some time. Jankowski is 2 years older than Bennett. Look at him and ask yourself “who else?” could we put into the lineup with the same potential, who has accomplished what he has accomplished at his age.
Everyone wanted a rebuild when we started to do it. Many claimed to be okay with taking on the pain that a fan does of a rebuilding team. Look how it has gone. We’ve had to invest almost no time in player development. Gaudreau, Monahan, Tkachuk, Hamilton...we’ve been incredibly lucky to have our picks and prospects go the way they have. So to look at Bennett, the only one who appears to be a bit of a later bloomer, and proclaim failure? Eeesh...patience really is a virtue, and with how spoiled we’ve been I guess that means we never had to develop it. |
1) Sorry but why are we removing the expectations based on draft position? Isn't that implicit with the topic of this thread? The fact that this was the highest ever drafted Flame should come with a certain level of expectations, and being outplayed by Brouwer on a terrible line 3 or 4 is not quite what most fans were hoping for. I guarantee you that back at the day of that draft, if most fans knew what was to become of Bennett (even at age 21), every single fan would pass on him. So what does that mean then? It means he hasn't been what was expected of him, and it means that the asset the Flames gave up for him was much more than the asset he is today, even at 21, and yes even if he turns into a Backlund. People taken at 4th overall are expected (and should be expected) to be top line players. This is a guy who somebody with top tier NHL scouting and managerial experience legitimately thought was the 4th best 18 year old on Earth, and the best possible fit for the Flames near-term. Not at age 25. Because, and this relates to my second point...
2) The NHL has transitioned into a young mans game, which yes includes 21 year olds. That's why you see more great young talent breaking into the NHL at ages 18, 19 , 20 and 21. Now that doesn't mean that he still can't develop into something special, and I understand that, but based on the eyeball test of his skill level which seems to be lacking, his work ethic which is inconsistent, and his ability to elevate line mates, which he doesn't, that's why I am saying there's a low probability that he is going to develop into something that should equal the asset value we could have returned if we sold "high" last year or earlier. If you look at the top 5 draftees over the last several years, more often than not they are impact players nearly immediately, not at age 24 or 25.
So, you can't just ignore where he was drafted. He was drafted at that spot for a reason. He showed tremendous potential in a fairly decent draft. It's not wrong for people to have expectations based on where he was drafted at all.
As for the guy laughing about me blaming Gulutzan, I understand what you're getting at, a lot of people have a propensity to blame everything on Glen Gulutzan. But are you honestly going to tell me you don't wonder what Bennett would be like if he was on different lines surrounded by different players? I agree players should not be entitled to top line minutes and be accountable for their play, and that's on Bennett to prove that he belongs on the top line. But, on the other hand, he was drafted as a top end skilled forward projected to be a top line impact player. A Doug Gilmour comparable. Are you honestly going to sit there and tell me that Gulutzan squirreling him away on line 4 is the best for his development? To have linemates that when he dishes the puck to them, they can't turn a play or convert? As Enoch states, his confidence is a huge, huge piece of the puzzle here and by shoving him down on line 4 with guys that can't convert, you're killing the guys' confidence.
So I would place the blame at why he hasn't developed the way we all had hoped at ~70% Bennett, ~30% Gulutzan.