Calgarypuck Forums - The Unofficial Calgary Flames Fan Community - View Single Post

DeluxeMoustache · 01-31-2021, 01:38 PM

Before the game last night, Kelly and Cassie were talking about the impact of putting Lindholm at C

Cassie was of the opinion that these lines make sense

Gaudreau - Monahan - Lindholm
Tkachuk - Backlund - Mangiapane
Lucic - Bennett - Dube
Leivo - Ryan - Simon

Her reasoning was that Lindholm makes the top line a better 200 foot line, Backlund and Tkachuk have worked well for years, Bennett is better at C and that line clicked in the playoffs. Lindholm at C pushes Backlund to 3C and he is better than that

Hrudey’s view was that putting Lindholm at C takes pressure off of 13 and 23 and gives them favourable matchups. And he likes the look of Lindholm and Tkachuk together. That was kind of the end of his case, he didn’t discuss the knock on impact on the full group of 12

The counterpoint I would propose to Kelly is that putting them with a minimum wage grinder does little to elevate that line 5 on 5.

I think I’m with Cassie.

The fact is that the Flames have too many Cs and not enough Ws. Slotting Lindholm at C pushes down two guys who are good 200 foot, productive for deployment Cs - Backlund and even arguably Ryan. Backlund to me is a 2 C. Ryan is a good serviceable 3 C, very smart and dependable, but then again he is also on the back 9 of his career.

Slotting Lindholm at C also exposes the dearth of top 6 wingers. Consider the positions these players have played when they were drafted

At C, they have Monahan, Lindholm, Backlund, Ryan, Bennett and Dube (also Nordstrom)

On W they have Gaudreau, Tkachuk and Mangiapane

Then it’s guys like Lucic and Simon.

The challenge is that there are some guys who can play C that are good at W
Lindholm is a top line guy at either position. Dube plays well at W and seems to be on a good trajectory

Then there are guys who play C who do not look as good at W. Backlund and Bennett come to mind

So how is this best managed?

The coach has to roll out the best mix of 12 he can.
The GM should have to evaluate if he has the best assets given positional requirements

Fact is that the Flames 5 on 5 play this season has been nothing to write home about on the whole. Special teams are what has been working.

Tre and Ward seem to think that Cs are more important and valuable assets than Ws. But clearly they have Cs who can’t just be as effective at W.

If they are in fact correct in terms of valuation, the Flames are pretty rich at C.

So my question is what they should do.

Should they manage their asset imbalance with slotting? If so, how do you maximize the group of 12?

Or does Tre need to pick up the phone and see how he can transfer his glut of centres who are playing below their ideal slotting and find some guys who are actual productive wingers?

(I do want to discuss the mix of 12, the strategy of building this roster, and not have this devolve into another thread about Bennett, for the love of god)

01-31-2021, 01:38 PM	#1
DeluxeMoustache Moustache Join Date: Mar 2010 Exp:	What to do with so many Cs, so few Ws? Before the game last night, Kelly and Cassie were talking about the impact of putting Lindholm at C Cassie was of the opinion that these lines make sense Gaudreau - Monahan - Lindholm Tkachuk - Backlund - Mangiapane Lucic - Bennett - Dube Leivo - Ryan - Simon Her reasoning was that Lindholm makes the top line a better 200 foot line, Backlund and Tkachuk have worked well for years, Bennett is better at C and that line clicked in the playoffs. Lindholm at C pushes Backlund to 3C and he is better than that Hrudey’s view was that putting Lindholm at C takes pressure off of 13 and 23 and gives them favourable matchups. And he likes the look of Lindholm and Tkachuk together. That was kind of the end of his case, he didn’t discuss the knock on impact on the full group of 12 The counterpoint I would propose to Kelly is that putting them with a minimum wage grinder does little to elevate that line 5 on 5. I think I’m with Cassie. The fact is that the Flames have too many Cs and not enough Ws. Slotting Lindholm at C pushes down two guys who are good 200 foot, productive for deployment Cs - Backlund and even arguably Ryan. Backlund to me is a 2 C. Ryan is a good serviceable 3 C, very smart and dependable, but then again he is also on the back 9 of his career. Slotting Lindholm at C also exposes the dearth of top 6 wingers. Consider the positions these players have played when they were drafted At C, they have Monahan, Lindholm, Backlund, Ryan, Bennett and Dube (also Nordstrom) On W they have Gaudreau, Tkachuk and Mangiapane Then it’s guys like Lucic and Simon. The challenge is that there are some guys who can play C that are good at W Lindholm is a top line guy at either position. Dube plays well at W and seems to be on a good trajectory Then there are guys who play C who do not look as good at W. Backlund and Bennett come to mind So how is this best managed? The coach has to roll out the best mix of 12 he can. The GM should have to evaluate if he has the best assets given positional requirements Fact is that the Flames 5 on 5 play this season has been nothing to write home about on the whole. Special teams are what has been working. Tre and Ward seem to think that Cs are more important and valuable assets than Ws. But clearly they have Cs who can’t just be as effective at W. If they are in fact correct in terms of valuation, the Flames are pretty rich at C. So my question is what they should do. Should they manage their asset imbalance with slotting? If so, how do you maximize the group of 12? Or does Tre need to pick up the phone and see how he can transfer his glut of centres who are playing below their ideal slotting and find some guys who are actual productive wingers? (I do want to discuss the mix of 12, the strategy of building this roster, and not have this devolve into another thread about Bennett, for the love of god)