[PGT] Flames lose 2-1

[GranteedEV]

Originally Posted by CalgaryFan1988

Every player you mentioned are playing with 2 pretty good players.

Problem with Calgary is

Gaudreau - Monahan - X
Bennett - X - X

Bennett needs a good player to play with and even he has only been playing good the last few games.

IMO, elite teams will have in their top 9,

Two 1st Line Centers (#1 + #1B)
One 2nd Line Center (or a comparable converted center playing wing)
Two 1st Line Wingers (at least one power winger)
Two 2nd Line Wingers
One Burrows-Typer Middle 6 grind-winger who can play up the lineup

For the Flames, IMO we have:

Two 1st Line Wingers (Bennett/Gaudreau. If Bennett moves to center then that's down to 1)
Zero 1st Line Centers (Bennett and Monahanb could be that, but aren't now)
Two 2nd Line Centers (Monahan/Backlund)
Two 2nd Line Wingers (Hudler/Frolik, and Hudler might be gone)
1 Burrows-Typer (Ferland)
A really good 3rd liner (Bouma)

So to fill our top 9 we're missing essentially 3.5 players. A 1st line winger and/or two 1st line centers and a 2nd line winger. I'm gonna put my money that Sam Bennett will become #1 center. And assumption that Monahan is trending towards a #1B at least of the level of Jeff Carter. And let's assume we keep Hudler around and he gets back to Jiri Hudler of 2012-2014 (2015 Hudler is too good and 2016 Hudler is too horrible)

Gaudreau-Bennett-Ferland
X-Monahan-Hudler
Bouma-Backlund-Frolik

Based on that, "X" is the hole - a 1st Line Winger. Now if we lose Hudler, that will mean two holes. If Monahan and Bennett fail to develop as #1 centers, that's three holes (Bennett would fill the Hudler-left hole) and one extra 2nd line center.

Are we missing 3 top 6 forwards? That's a bit simplistic. Ferland in a Burrows role playing like he's played before his injury is a legitimate top 6 forward even if he's not a top 6 forward in a true individual ability sense.

We've got a lot of role-definitions filled out, but the ones we're missing are not 2nd liners, they're 1st liners. In a world where Monahan and Bennett perfectly develop and Hudler sticks around, we're only short one top line (power) winger.

Now if Hudler leaves, filling his role (2nd Line Winger) is something I want to see a Granlund, Poirier, Klimchuk, or Mangiapane do. But no guaruntees. It could be we're someday the "buyer" in a deadline trade to pick up that piece.

But that genuine top line winger is the most elusive piece, along with our centers developing properly. The idea that having a Ferland or Frolik in our top 6 is a problem, I don't agree with. They're role players who fill their niche.

However the pessimist GM should brace for none of our centers turning into anything special ::and:: Hudler leaving. That means being very careful on Monahan's contract, and not buying anyone out this offseason because you need the extra cap space the year after to make some aggressive signing(s). Patience for another year unfortunately is what the Engelland/Raymond contracts force us into.

[Flash Walken]

This will be an unpopular opinion but I think calling Backlund a 3rd line centre at this point is generous.

His offensive output is largely a result of being force-fed minutes, so while the argument is made that sure you'd love a 3rd line centre that scores 10 goals/30 points, Backlund is only producing that getting 16-19 minutes a night. Compare that to a guy like Cody Eakin who is getting say 12-16 minutes per night and putting up comparable offensive number, it doesn't look so stellar.

With his weak physical play and inconsistent faceoff prowess, I think calling Backlund a 3rd line centre on a contending team to be an optimistic analysis. Is he better than a guy like Jori Lehtera? I don't know about that.

I think we can all admit that a lot of Backlund's offence this year has been Bennett powered. When you look at his game by game stats there are wild swings in icetime. In my belief, a good 3rd line centre will rarely see his icetime cut unless one of 2 things is happening, 1) the #3 guy is playing poorly 2) the #1 and #2 guys are playing exceptionally well.

Considering Backlund is Calgary's #2 guy, that doesn't say a lot if he's getting outcompeted by Matt Stajan or Josh Jooris.

Backlund is a guy who should never be in your top 6. He's not a guy who can move up the lineup and play top 6 minutes, he's strictly a bottom minute guy on a contender, which in my mind disqualifies him from the conversation.

When I see the kinds of plays I see from Backlund on a register basis I don't think to myself "there's our 'settle it down' defender". Watching the game as a fan I'm much more confident with Monahan on the ice than with Backlund.

I'm sure there are advanced stats that both refute and prove what I'm saying, but I'd appreciate hearing the arguments.

[GranteedEV]

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

I'm sure there are advanced stats that both refute and prove what I'm saying, but I'd appreciate hearing the arguments.

I'm not sure there are advanced stats that prove what you're saying, because you're wrong and evidence rarely proves things that are wrong. But here are some advanced stats that refute what you're saying:

His offensive output is largely a result of being force-fed minutes

Last 2 Seasons, On-Ice 5v5 Scoring
1.61 Points per 60 Minutes

Comparables with less points per 60 minutes @ 5v5:
ARTEM ANISIMOV (1.59)
PAUL STASTNY
MIKKO KOIVU
NICK BJUGSTAD
SEAN COUTURIER
MIKAEL GRANLUND
ERIC STAAL(1.54)
NAZEM KADRI
CARL SODERBERG
RILEY SHEAHAN (1.28)
RYAN KESLER (1.15)


Comparables with Barely more points per 60 Minutes @ 5v5 Probably Playing With Better Wingers Than Lance Bouma

LOGAN COUTURE (1.76)
RYAN NUGENT-HOPKINS 1.75
TOMAS PLEKANEC
BROCK NELSON
SEAN MONAHAN 1.68
RYAN O_REILLY 1.66

When I see the kinds of plays I see from Backlund on a register basis I don't think to myself "there's our 'settle it down' defender". Watching the game as a fan I'm much more confident with Monahan on the ice than with Backlund.

What you're describing, is the effect of simplicity bias. Backlund makes plays that can have dire consequences.

Broken down to a more extreme level, it's like comparing Giordano vs Engelland. Sure, Engelland can chip the puck out of the defensive zone. Giordano will get burned every few games with crazy passes. Who was the better partner for Brodie? Well, if you don't mind spending the whole game defending, it's Engelland because he won't do anything stupid. If you look at who's actually preventing the pairing from being scored on, it's not Engelland.

I think we can all admit that a lot of Backlund's offence this year has been Bennett powered.

You mean like how a lot of Anisimov's offense this year has been Kane and Panarin powered? Or how a lot of Carter's offense this year has been Toffoli powered? Are you seriously knocking the guy's offense because he has a good linemate? The guy who's spent his career dragging Lance Bouma around like they're conjoined twins? The same Lance Bouma that most think is functionally just a 4th liner yet threw up a 15/15 season on Backs' wing?

[Wiggum_PI]

0/5 again on the Power Play, and 2/19 for the 5 game road trip. It's confusing why there's been such a massive decline in the special teams play from last year, since there really hasn't been any major roster changes.

I think the Flames would be in a playoff spot right now if they had a middle of the pack PP, but it continues to be terrible almost every single game.

[Displaced Flames fan]

Originally Posted by GranteedEV

IMO, elite teams will have in their top 9,

Two 1st Line Centers (#1 + #1B)
One 2nd Line Center (or a comparable converted center playing wing)
Two 1st Line Wingers (at least one power winger)
Two 2nd Line Wingers
One Burrows-Typer Middle 6 grind-winger who can play up the lineup

For the Flames, IMO we have:

Two 1st Line Wingers (Bennett/Gaudreau. If Bennett moves to center then that's down to 1)
Zero 1st Line Centers (Bennett and Monahanb could be that, but aren't now)
Two 2nd Line Centers (Monahan/Backlund)
Two 2nd Line Wingers (Hudler/Frolik, and Hudler might be gone)
1 Burrows-Typer (Ferland)
A really good 3rd liner (Bouma)

So to fill our top 9 we're missing essentially 3.5 players. A 1st line winger and/or two 1st line centers and a 2nd line winger. I'm gonna put my money that Sam Bennett will become #1 center. And assumption that Monahan is trending towards a #1B at least of the level of Jeff Carter. And let's assume we keep Hudler around and he gets back to Jiri Hudler of 2012-2014 (2015 Hudler is too good and 2016 Hudler is too horrible)

Gaudreau-Bennett-Ferland
X-Monahan-Hudler
Bouma-Backlund-Frolik

Based on that, "X" is the hole - a 1st Line Winger. Now if we lose Hudler, that will mean two holes. If Monahan and Bennett fail to develop as #1 centers, that's three holes (Bennett would fill the Hudler-left hole) and one extra 2nd line center.

Are we missing 3 top 6 forwards? That's a bit simplistic. Ferland in a Burrows role playing like he's played before his injury is a legitimate top 6 forward even if he's not a top 6 forward in a true individual ability sense.

We've got a lot of role-definitions filled out, but the ones we're missing are not 2nd liners, they're 1st liners. In a world where Monahan and Bennett perfectly develop and Hudler sticks around, we're only short one top line (power) winger.

Now if Hudler leaves, filling his role (2nd Line Winger) is something I want to see a Granlund, Poirier, Klimchuk, or Mangiapane do. But no guaruntees. It could be we're someday the "buyer" in a deadline trade to pick up that piece.

But that genuine top line winger is the most elusive piece, along with our centers developing properly. The idea that having a Ferland or Frolik in our top 6 is a problem, I don't agree with. They're role players who fill their niche.

However the pessimist GM should brace for none of our centers turning into anything special ::and:: Hudler leaving. That means being very careful on Monahan's contract, and not buying anyone out this offseason because you need the extra cap space the year after to make some aggressive signing(s). Patience for another year unfortunately is what the Engelland/Raymond contracts force us into.

You lost me at "Burrows-typer". Nobody needs that and I'm not kidding. You couldn't find a better player to model that slot after than Alexandre freaking Burrows?

[Displaced Flames fan]

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

This will be an unpopular opinion but I think calling Backlund a 3rd line centre at this point is generous.

His offensive output is largely a result of being force-fed minutes, so while the argument is made that sure you'd love a 3rd line centre that scores 10 goals/30 points, Backlund is only producing that getting 16-19 minutes a night. Compare that to a guy like Cody Eakin who is getting say 12-16 minutes per night and putting up comparable offensive number, it doesn't look so stellar.

With his weak physical play and inconsistent faceoff prowess, I think calling Backlund a 3rd line centre on a contending team to be an optimistic analysis. Is he better than a guy like Jori Lehtera? I don't know about that.

I think we can all admit that a lot of Backlund's offence this year has been Bennett powered. When you look at his game by game stats there are wild swings in icetime. In my belief, a good 3rd line centre will rarely see his icetime cut unless one of 2 things is happening, 1) the #3 guy is playing poorly 2) the #1 and #2 guys are playing exceptionally well.

Considering Backlund is Calgary's #2 guy, that doesn't say a lot if he's getting outcompeted by Matt Stajan or Josh Jooris.

Backlund is a guy who should never be in your top 6. He's not a guy who can move up the lineup and play top 6 minutes, he's strictly a bottom minute guy on a contender, which in my mind disqualifies him from the conversation.

When I see the kinds of plays I see from Backlund on a register basis I don't think to myself "there's our 'settle it down' defender". Watching the game as a fan I'm much more confident with Monahan on the ice than with Backlund.

I'm sure there are advanced stats that both refute and prove what I'm saying, but I'd appreciate hearing the arguments.

Cody Eakin is averaging almost a minute more ice time per game than Backlund is this season. So there's that.

Eakin is destroying weak Backlund in Faceoff % though 47.9% to 47.5%.

[PeteMoss]

The non top pair defense should all hang their head in shame.

Brodie and Gio play most of the game against Seguin/Benn and end up with a positive Corsi.

Giordano +5
Brodie +2
----------
Engelland -11
Wideman -14
Russell -14
Hamilton -16

That's pathetic. Somehow David Jones was -17

[saillias]

Faceoffs are really overrated. They do not correlate with winning or losing. It's just the first of a dozen puck battles that happen in a typical shift.

[JohnnyB]

I would be quite happy to see the Flames bring up two, possibly even three, rookie defenders next year. They could also do with moving out Jones, Hudler and Raymond. Okposo would be a great addition for the Flames up front and could be worth the cost if some weight can be shed from the cost of the D and some of the dead weight up front. There is just way too much money tied up in dead weight, especially on the back end.

Another problem the Flames have right now is too many centers. Monahan and Bennett are the clear 1-2 for the future, but it's a log jam after them. Backlund is a very good 3rd C, but Granlund, Jankowski, Stajan, Colborne and Jooris could all be fighting it out for those bottom two C positions while there is a dearth of talent on the wings. Some hard choices to be made there in necessarily moving out some good players to free up money and get some natural wingers in the right positions.

[Coach]

Originally Posted by saillias

Faceoffs are really overrated. They do not correlate with winning or losing. It's just the first of a dozen puck battles that happen in a typical shift.

There are certain times that faceoffs are really important. Penalty kills, power plays, last minute of game, after icings, etc.. are all times where winning the faceoff gives you the opportunity to take advantage of the situation. Having 1 or 2 centreman that you are confident can win a draw when we need it is something every championship team needs IMO.

[heep223]

Originally Posted by PeteMoss

The non top pair defense should all hang their head in shame.

Brodie and Gio play most of the game against Seguin/Benn and end up with a positive Corsi.

Giordano +5
Brodie +2
----------
Engelland -11
Wideman -14
Russell -14
Hamilton -16

That's pathetic. Somehow David Jones was -17

Wow. Just .... wow.

[CroFlames]

I am not excited to watch meaningless hockey. Last season was awesome since every game except game 82 mattered.

[Bend it like Bourgeois]

Originally Posted by PeteMoss

The non top pair defense should all hang their head in shame.

Brodie and Gio play most of the game against Seguin/Benn and end up with a positive Corsi.

Giordano +5
Brodie +2
----------
Engelland -11
Wideman -14
Russell -14
Hamilton -16

That's pathetic. Somehow David Jones was -17

The bottom 4 are mostly bad so no arguments, but I think the forwards deserve some heat for those stats too.

There are so many soft or stupid plays from the forwards that unless Brodie's magic feet save the day sometimes the Flames can't keep it out of their zone.

[Flames Draft Watcher]

Originally Posted by Wiggum_PI

0/5 again on the Power Play, and 2/19 for the 5 game road trip. It's confusing why there's been such a massive decline in the special teams play from last year, since there really hasn't been any major roster changes.

I think the Flames would be in a playoff spot right now if they had a middle of the pack PP, but it continues to be terrible almost every single game.

Well Hudler was twice the player last year so that hurts. Glencross probably saw some time in front of the net screening the goalie. Ferland was having success with that til he got hurt. Wideman was twice the player last year on the power play too. Giordano was better on the power play last year as well I would say.

[GranteedEV]

Originally Posted by Displaced Flames fan

You lost me at "Burrows-typer". Nobody needs that and I'm not kidding. You couldn't find a better player to model that slot after than Alexandre freaking Burrows?

Well if I said Holmstrom then everyone would get up in arms about how Ferland has zero talent compared to him. So I went with a guy who has less talent than Ferland and made a career riding the back seat of real stars.

[CroFlames]

Holmstrom was not overly talented. Was a bulldog in front of the net though.

[Resolute 14]

Holmstrom's greatest skill was goaltender interference. It's not that Ferland couldn't match him skill wise, it is that he doesn't have the league-wide rep with the officials to get away with it.

[Flames Draft Watcher]

Originally Posted by Resolute 14

Holmstrom's greatest skill was goaltender interference. It's not that Ferland couldn't match him skill wise, it is that he doesn't have the league-wide rep with the officials to get away with it.

His greatest skill was screening the goalie. Holmstrom was a power forward who excelled at that. And yes, Ferland is the closest thing we have to a Holmstrom.

A lot of fans underrate how important that role is, how much it helps the offence.

[Rollin22x]

I'm starting to think that coaching is a big part of the problem. The Flames are getting beat to the puck a lot in our end. There are clearly times when the player is in a good position to retrieve or battle for the puck but if they are not it seems like the plan is to back off and react to opposing player instead of losing a race and potentially being caught. Couple that with the fact that we have very few players that can separate the opposition from the puck physically. This is evident when Bennett, as a rookie, is one of our more effective players that can knock someone off the puck and not bounce off them or end up going down.
I also think our forwards are still trying to pass too often or initiate a pretty deflection and our defense is trying to pick corners.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by Rollin22x

I'm starting to think that coaching is a big part of the problem. The Flames are getting beat to the puck a lot in our end. There are clearly times when the player is in a good position to retrieve or battle for the puck but if they are not it seems like the plan is to back off and react to opposing player instead of losing a race and potentially being caught. Couple that with the fact that we have very few players that can separate the opposition from the puck physically. This is evident when Bennett, as a rookie, is one of our more effective players that can knock someone off the puck and not bounce off them or end up going down.
I also think our forwards are still trying to pass too often or initiate a pretty deflection and our defense is trying to pick corners.

I'm confused - you say they are beaten in their own end but the erst of your post is about offensive puck battles.

Anyway, do you think the coaches are actually advocating not winning puck battles or trying to win a race to the puck? If so, it's the opposite of what they and the players talk about when they constantly talk about "getting pucks in deep and forechecking".