Sam Bennett contract negotiations.

[Hey Connor, It's Mess]

Originally Posted by Geeoff

I feel like this might be a difficult negotiation. I'm prepared for Bennett to be moved

I don't think it will be that difficult. Sam recognizes his shortcomings and hasn't been satisfied with his play in the past. On the flip side, I think the Flames recognize his skillset and edge are an integral part of the team even if he isn't playing top 6. He was the Flames best forward in the playoffs and it wasn't particularly close.

He's more valuable to the Flames than anything they'd get for him in return.

[boogerz]

It's hard to believe that Bennett is only 22/23 years old. Feels like he's been around for much longer



Derek Ryan money for two years seems like a good bridge deal for him to "make it or break it", and he'll still have a year or two before UFA status.

[wired]

1 or 2 year deal, just under 3 mil.
I'm betting Sam does way better this upcoming season.

[TOfan]

Don't think so.

Bennett is just coming off a bridge/'show me' deal. I don't see why he would follow up with the same. At this point he & the Flames have a pretty firm grasp on what he is. He's likely going to be looking for a four year deal that gets him into his UFA years. Not only that, there's a strong argument to be made for locking into a deal that gives him some security.

4 years $3.25 per.

[Strange Brew]

The walk away from Bennett narrative does not seem to be prevalent, and no more so than the keep the guy at all costs narrative.

In the spectrum of expendable to indispensable, he falls in the middle IMO. Good to have around while on a good contract, less so if he starts looking for bigger dollars or term.

[timbit]

Originally Posted by Bingo

Nope.

He's an above average third line NHL hockey player.

No point in bringing fourth line into the discussion because it's hyperbole that's equal to calling him a second liner.

Forward #93 had 52 points this year ... Bennett isn't a first line player.

Forward #186 had 33 points this year, Bennett in an 82 game season was on pace for 31 this year. He's not a second liner, but he's close to the worst one in hockey.

Forward #279 had 21 points this year, the cut off for the best fourth liner. Bennett is well ahead.

Is it fair or accurate to use 31 teams’ individual stats as your gauge when you’re talking about 3rd line players after you finish second in the NHL over 82 games( large sample size)?

Wouldn’t you want to compare the Flames 3rd line players stats with comparable teams (let’s say say top 6-8 teams in the NHL)?

Yes, I know Flames were disappointing in the playoffs and Bennett was above average in 5 games and Gaudreau finished with one assist. That small sample size doesn’t change the fact that Gaudreau is a far more valuable player than Bennett.

[TOfan]

Originally Posted by Strange Brew

The walk away from Bennett narrative does not seem to be prevalent, and no more so than the keep the guy at all costs narrative.

In the spectrum of expendable to indispensable, he falls in the middle IMO. Good to have around while on a good contract, less so if he starts looking for bigger dollars or term.

What would you consider big dollars for Bennett?

I don't think Bennett is going to be looking for too much term. He's going to want as many UFA years left as he can get. My guess is he's looking for a 3-4 year deal.

[Strange Brew]

Originally Posted by TOfan

What would you consider big dollars for Bennett?

I don't think Bennett is going to be looking for too much term. He's going to want as many UFA years left as he can get. My guess is he's looking for a 3-4 year deal.

Bennett is very hard to price on a 3 or 4 year deal. If I'm the Flames, I'm not doing that unless he is asking for something low like $2 million. And there is no reason for Bennett to do that.

And the player we have seen thus far is not worth $3 million IMO. Especially without any UFA rights.

[Aarongavey]

Originally Posted by timbit

Is it fair or accurate to use 31 teams’ individual stats as your gauge when you’re talking about 3rd line players after you finish second in the NHL over 82 games( large sample size)?

Wouldn’t you want to compare the Flames 3rd line players stats with comparable teams (let’s say say top 6-8 teams in the NHL)?

Yes, I know Flames were disappointing in the playoffs and Bennett was above average in 5 games and Gaudreau finished with one assist. That small sample size doesn’t change the fact that Gaudreau is a far more valuable player than Bennett.

He would have been 7th on the Bruins, 8th on the Preds, 9th on the caps, 9th on the isles, 8th on the pens, 10th on the sharks, 10th on the lightning. Basically a third liner offensively on most of the top 8 teams (that is total points with their respective teams, did not do points per game or figure out what the trade deadline acquisitions did to the rankings)

[TOfan]

Originally Posted by Strange Brew

Bennett is very hard to price on a 3 or 4 year deal. If I'm the Flames, I'm not doing that unless he is asking for something low like $2 million. And there is no reason for Bennett to do that.

And the player we have seen thus far is not worth $3 million IMO. Especially without any UFA rights.

I'll preface this with saying a year ago I was pretty critical of Bennett. I thought he looked lost, especially at center, the majority of the time. I would have not argued too much had they moved him. Also, iirc teams were asking about him based on comments Friedman was making at the time. I sure his name was brought up with the Canes.

Regardless, Bennett looks to have found a role and accepted it. He's a top 9 winger who can basically be an 'agent of chaos' as Kent Wilson put it. He can be an effective third line winger who can step up into the top 6 when needed. Something the Flames don't really havean abundance of. with the league tilting towards speed and skill, players who can do what Bennett does will have value. I also think the organization, Treliving & Peters, believes in Sam. I think they see him as a part of the picture moving forward.

My view towards Bennett has shifted. I still think he's capable of putting up 15-20 goals & 30-40 points per season while bringing an edge to a team that doesn't have too much of it. He has a role and that's what's most important. I think he's worth what Derek Ryan is getting and I don't think that amount would be a hinderance at all on the cap.

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by timbit

Is it fair or accurate to use 31 teams’ individual stats as your gauge when you’re talking about 3rd line players after you finish second in the NHL over 82 games( large sample size)?

Wouldn’t you want to compare the Flames 3rd line players stats with comparable teams (let’s say say top 6-8 teams in the NHL)?

Yes, I know Flames were disappointing in the playoffs and Bennett was above average in 5 games and Gaudreau finished with one assist. That small sample size doesn’t change the fact that Gaudreau is a far more valuable player than Bennett.

Some called him a fourth liner ... was pretty easy to bring up the averages to suggest he's not.

Is he a fourth liner in Calgary?

He could be, but to be he would need to be passed by three players from the current roster given his production rates, chance rates and intangibles from last year.

Down the road for sure though. I think Mangiapane and Dube have a chance to supplant him. I think Derek Ryan is a better overall player now but playing on the fourth line with special teams.

Without a lot of change though they may be building a third line around Bennett and Ryan.

[The Cobra]

Originally Posted by Aarongavey

He would have been 7th on the Bruins, 8th on the Preds, 9th on the caps, 9th on the isles, 8th on the pens, 10th on the sharks, 10th on the lightning. Basically a third liner offensively on most of the top 8 teams (that is total points with their respective teams, did not do points per game or figure out what the trade deadline acquisitions did to the rankings)

FWIW, a player getting third line minutes with little PP time cannot likely produce points above those getting top 6 minutes.

Producing points in the NHL is all about opportunity.

As long as Bennett’s usage remains the same, so will his production.

Just look at Sean Couturier. He was labeled a shut down third line centre, played that role spectacularly and produced points according. Moved into a situation where he had less defensive responsibilities and more PP time, he is now considered an excellent 1st line centre.

But the change in production did not occur, nor could it, without the usage change.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[EldrickOnIce]

You pay him like the solid 3rd line, RFA player he is.
Which is what - 2.5 ish?

[transplant99]

Originally Posted by The Cobra

FWIW, a player getting third line minutes with little PP time cannot likely produce points above those getting top 6 minutes.

Producing points in the NHL is all about opportunity.

As long as Bennett’s usage remains the same, so will his production.

Just look at Sean Couturier. He was labeled a shut down third line centre, played that role spectacularly and produced points according. Moved into a situation where he had less defensive responsibilities and more PP time, he is now considered an excellent 1st line centre.

But the change in production did not occur, nor could it, without the usage change.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

I keep coming back to Frolik in this instance.

43 pt pace with zero PP time. Mostly as a 2nd line W, but also played all over the place including 4th line time at points.

Sam was on a 31 pt pace with 1:30 pp time per game. And rarely was he ever less than 3rd line and certainly took turns playing up the line up.

That's huge difference when considering all circumstances. Bennett did get top 6 time...and did squat with it. He forced Peters to play him down where he spent the majority of his time.

There is truly nothing to indicate he is anything but a 3rd line RW. That's OK as every team needs one of them.

But to suggest he should get more ice time....because...is pure folly. There are clearly 6 guys who are markedly better offensively than him and have proven it repeatedly. I would suggest there are 2 more that could easily surpass him soon as well.

So....what do you pay him?

[DeluxeMoustache]

^ well, if you are comparing him to Frolik, I expect we run him out of town

[transplant99]

Originally Posted by DeluxeMoustache

^ well, if you are comparing him to Frolik, I expect we run him out of town

Why?

Unless he is used as an upgrade in his own position, the Flames still need a 3rd line RW.

This entire thread is about what to pay him and for how long, or at least thats the intent.

Comparables, particularly on the same team, seems to be about as an objective way as possible to determine worth....no?

[Harry Lime]

I hate to say it, but the Flames are mostly pushovers.

Forwards who play a physical game would be... Bennett and Hathaway.

His value is heightened because of this, for this particular team.

[PlayfulGenius]

Originally Posted by Tyler

#1 rated North American forward in the 2014 draft.

Averaging 26 points over the last 3 years.

Y'all are suffering from the sunk cost fallacy about him being this great grinder.

By mentioning his draft status, you are the only one using the sunk cost to determine your outlook.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[GranteedEV]

Originally Posted by transplant99

I keep coming back to Frolik in this instance.

43 pt pace with zero PP time. Mostly as a 2nd line W, but also played all over the place including 4th line time at points.

Sam was on a 31 pt pace with 1:30 pp time per game. And rarely was he ever less than 3rd line and certainly took turns playing up the line up.

That's huge difference when considering all circumstances.

8 of Frolik's 34 points came in the final 3 minutes of regulation wins. I'd wager that maybe all but one of those eight was with the opponent's goalie pulled. How much do you value empty net points?

When Bennett played RW (which is not his natural position by any means) in the top six (which he didn't spend nearly as much time on as your post implies) he aproached empty net situations differently, opting to take shorter shifts and change earlier, and did not have any empty net points last year. However I can recall situations where an empty net goal was scored thanks to a Lindholm or Ryan in immediate relief of Bennett. But sure, Bennett didn't get the point and that's all you're concerned with.

How much are empty net points worth? Surely you don't think they are worth just as much as points that are actually scored on goaltenders, do you?

And you're grossly understating the difference in linemate quality. 24 of Frolik's 34 points came with our top 6 forwards. Another three came with our #1 defense pair getting the rest of the points.

Contrast that with Bennett, who had 27 points (again, none with a net empty). Of these only seven were with the top pair or top six forwards. Of those seven one was a pp goal where Backlund had an assist, even though Backlund was by far the worst player on our PP last season. In fact our regulars on PP2 were guys like Neal, Czarnik, Hanifin, Ryan none of whom were top six or top pair guys. Backlund's time on PP2 was consistently fruitless even though he is supposed to be a top six guy.

The vast majority of Bennett's points were scored in a bottom six capacity, the vast majority of Frolik's were scored in top six or empty net capacity.

If you are trying to equate Derek Ryan, James Neal, Mark Jankowski, Austin Czarnik, Noah Hanifin, Mikael Backlund (PP) to a consistent diet of Matthew Tkachuk, Mikael Backlund (ES), and Mark Giordano, that speaks volumes aboug you.

Maybe Frolik does have elements that fit better with Tkachuk and Backlund, since line construction isvery much about offsetting skillsets, but pretending Frolik's limited and unproductive time in the bottom six equates to Bennett is just plain wrong. Though I am not shocked given your other terrible takes on Bennett.

[transplant99]

Originally Posted by granteedev

8 of frolik's 34 points came in the final 3 minutes of regulation wins. I'd wager that maybe all but one of those eight was with the opponent's goalie pulled. How much do you value empty net points?

When bennett played rw (which is not his natural position by any means) in the top six (which he didn't spend nearly as much time on as your post implies) he aproached empty net situations differently, opting to take shorter shifts and change earlier, and did not have any empty net points last year. However i can recall situations where an empty net goal was scored thanks to a lindholm or ryan in immediate relief of bennett. But sure, bennett didn't get the point and that's all you're concerned with.

How much are empty net points worth? Surely you don't think they are worth just as much as points that are actually scored on goaltenders, do you?

And you're grossly understating the difference in linemate quality. 24 of frolik's 34 points came with our top 6 forwards. Another three came with our #1 defense pair getting the rest of the points.

Contrast that with bennett, who had 27 points (again, none with a net empty). Of these only seven were with the top pair or top six forwards. Of those seven one was a pp goal where backlund had an assist, even though backlund was by far the worst player on our pp last season. In fact our regulars on pp2 were guys like neal, czarnik, hanifin, ryan none of whom were top six or top pair guys. Backlund's time on pp2 was consistently fruitless even though he is supposed to be a top six guy.

The vast majority of bennett's points were scored in a bottom six capacity, the vast majority of frolik's were scored in top six or empty net capacity.

If you are trying to equate derek ryan, james neal, mark jankowski, austin czarnik, noah hanifin, mikael backlund (pp) to a consistent diet of matthew tkachuk, mikael backlund (es), and mark giordano, that speaks volumes aboug you.

Maybe frolik does have elements that fit better with tkachuk and backlund, since line construction isvery much about offsetting skillsets, but pretending frolik's limited and unproductive time in the bottom six equates to bennett is just plain wrong. Though i am not shocked given your other terrible takes on bennett.

LOL!