Sam Bennett Value: Have the Flames held on TOO long? OR is he awesome?

[SeanCharles]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

I watched the games, both with him at centre and at wing. His play at centre was better, but not so much that I thought it merited demoting Ryan, who’s been a mainstay all season. In other words, it wasn’t better than what Ryan had done previously until he got sick.

Maybe he should be at C but until Jankowski is dealt or cut loose that won’t likely happen. And if he does get put at C between Reider and Rinaldo or Jankowski, people will still complain about his lack of quality line mates (though Jankowski should be one - he had 25 points in 72 games his rookie year).

I think Bennett would be marginally better with different line mates. But the whole debate always strikes me as one where the coach should be sacrificing team goals to boost Bennett’s play. Can anyone honestly say that Lucic-Bennett-Dube would for sure be better than Lucic-Ryan-Dube (especially considering 2 way play)?

I think Dube and Bennett have some on-ice chemistry so I do actually think it would make for a more balanced lineup.

I wouldn’t mind trying those two with Ryan and Lucic and see what works best.

[Oling_Roachinen]

Originally Posted by Harry Lime

Not the argument that I was making. If you look at a stat line without context, that is not telling the story. The easiest way to build that context is to watch a player through an entire shift, with the puck and without. That's not elitist. Eight year olds can do this, and if they were curious about a particular player, I'm sure that they do.

Not elitist but goes on to tell us that even an eight year old could do it...

Get over yourself, people have differing opinions. They aren't just from looking up his stats.

[BigRed]

Originally Posted by Matata

He still plays a style that relies on him being more physically gifted than other players, he needs to create space to make shots or plays by being either stronger or quicker than the opposition, which worked great in juniors but he never developed any of those gifts beyond average at the NHL level. Now he's already at the age where agility and reflexes start to fade and while many other NHLers are able to handle that transition by becoming stronger and smarter players,

I think this is really true. Sam was a bull in junior because he was physically superior to most of those players and could do everything himself. He's average physically in the NHL, so he has no ability to do that (really, only McDavid can) and he either lacks the hockey sense to adapt and use his teammates, or is so programmed from his years of being a one-man show in junior that he can't turn the corner.

Originally Posted by Matata

Sam hasn't really shown much capacity to make those improvements. He's one of the dumbest players in the entire NHL and he might be only a few seasons away from being out of the league entirely.

Now, just hold a second there! That's just ... exactly right.

[Harry Lime]

Originally Posted by Oling_Roachinen

Not elitist but goes on to tell us that even an eight year old could do it...

Get over yourself, people have differing opinions. They aren't just from looking up his stats.

Read the thread. That's what happening, even in the last two pages.

[soulchoice]

Originally Posted by Johnny Makarov

How can one fix a player with the hockey IQ of a kiwi fruit?

Its not easy, however offensive smarts/instincts is hard to teach at any level(people either have it or they dont). However, in my experience with the game, one would have a much easier time teaching a player strong fundamentals with the defensive part of the game in order to be come responsible in that realm.

Especially since the dzone is more about positioning and effort over the traits needed to be an offensive player which relies highly on vision and hands/edge work.

[Gaskal]

Originally Posted by Oling_Roachinen

Not elitist but goes on to tell us that even an eight year old could do it...

It's no small coincidence that many of those Bennett witch-hunt cursory reviews tend to falter under even the smallest bit of statistical scrutiny. Do you have an explanation to offer as to why?

Even though there are certain posters willing to pick apart every point he had in a playoff run as dumb unskilled luck, that was the point HL was getting at. Not calling everyone elitist 8 year olds.

[DeluxeMoustache]

I don’t see Bennett as the apparent idiot that some people here do. I have seen some of the one on x attempts that have not been successful, and I have seen some pretty good plays to ineffective line mates that have died on their sticks too.

But I will say this. If he, for argument’s sake, truly has such low hockey IQ as some of the armchair hockey geniuses here claim, then they need to look straight at the GM, who is not as astute as them and hasn’t figured out that you move on from that type of player while you can maximize the return

[Itse]

Originally Posted by DeluxeMoustache

I don’t see Bennett as the apparent idiot that some people here do. I have seen some of the one on x attempts that have not been successful, and I have seen some pretty good plays to ineffective line mates that have died on their sticks too.

But I will say this. If he, for argument’s sake, truly has such low hockey IQ as some of the armchair hockey geniuses here claim, then they need to look straight at the GM, who is not as astute as them and hasn’t figured out that you move on from that type of player while you can maximize the return

There's a good chance there wasn't much interest.

Bennett is a useful bottom six player, trading him just to trade him makes no sense.

[DeluxeMoustache]

Originally Posted by Itse

There's a good chance there wasn't much interest.

Bennett is a useful bottom six player, trading him just to trade him makes no sense.

I respect that since you don’t live here you don’t likely follow the NA media

There was reportedly several clubs with interest in Bennett but Tre’s asking price was too high

So please stop

Thanks

[Itse]

Originally Posted by DeluxeMoustache

I respect that since you don’t live here you don’t likely follow the NA media

There was reportedly several clubs with interest in Bennett but Tre’s asking price was too high

So please stop

Thanks

So, again:

Nobody was actually interested enough.

[Travis Munroe]

Originally Posted by Itse

So, again:

Nobody was actually interested enough.

If I have a house for sale at an asking price of $500,000 and you offer me $400,000 only for me to decline, did you have interest?

Just because we value the home differently doesn't mean you weren't very interested.

[Lanny_McDonald]

Originally Posted by Travis Munroe

If I have a house for sale at an asking price of $500,000 and you offer me $400,000 only for me to decline, did you have interest?

Just because we value the home differently doesn't mean you weren't very interested.

I hope you see the difference between "having interest" and there "being a serious buyer"?

Treliving is maintaining that his house is worth $500K, but that market is telling him it is worth $400K, or less. Buyers may have "interest" but only in their price range. If you are representing your product with a premium, it better have some serious advantages over competing products on the market, otherwise you are over inflating the value of the property and damaging the potential to make a deal.

The Bennett conundrum is an interesting one. The advanced stats junkies like to point at unreliable data points to support the claim that Bennett is mis-used and abused by the hockey team. The eye testers point to the complete failure to produce and his inability to show anything that could be conflated with having a functioning brain on the ice. The stats that matter (goals, assists, and penalties leading to wins and losses) indicate a poor player and a poor investment. The ice time from the last three coaches paint a picture that tells you what they think of Bennett and his performance. Add in the inability of the Flames to find a suitor for the player seems to give you a clear indication what the league thinks of him as well - that being a lot less than what Treliving is trying to get back in trade, which certainly can only be a second rounder at best at this point. Tough to argue that Bennett is a player with untapped potential just waiting to break out. Bennett is what he is, and that is an overpaid 4th liner who sometimes manages to string together three or four games where he passes as a third liner.

Flames would be best served moving him for a mid-round pick before the draft and use the cap space to improve the team. Bennett is not getting better and the Flames are not getting better as a result. Move forward and let someone else assume the risk with Sam Bennett.

[Flash Walken]

I'm getting pretty tired of people calling Bennett an idiot in this thread.

It's been happening a lot in the last page and I don't think it's warranted or necessary.

[Gaskal]

Originally Posted by New Era

I hope you see the difference between "having interest" and there "being a serious buyer"?

No, I don't.

[Scroopy Noopers]

“Serious buyer” is in the eyes of the seller. Sellers can overvalue their asset.

[Matata]

No one's called him an idiot except the people defending him. All the criticism about his intelligence has been relative to regular NHL intelligence, criticism that can easily be supported with multiple arguments.

[Flash Walken]

Originally Posted by Matata

No one's called him an idiot except the people defending him. All the criticism about his intelligence has been relative to regular NHL intelligence, criticism that can easily be supported with multiple arguments.

I don't know that saying he has the brain of a kiwi fruit or that his brain is non functioning on the ice are are warranted, and are cringe inducing commentaries imo.

These guys are regular people. 'thinking the game' in real time is probably the skill that most separates NHL players from almost NHL players.

I don't know that bennett not being the player we want him to be or having a different set of skills than the ones we want him to have are worth calling him dumb over.

For the purposes of discussion, I think it really detracts from peoples arguments.

[DFO]

Is there really a big market out there for an expensive bottom six forward that isn't any good on special teams?

[Oling_Roachinen]

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

I don't know that saying he has the brain of a kiwi fruit

Well that's not really a fair characterization of what was said. He said he had the hockey IQ of a kiwi fruit. He didn't insult his actual intelligence. Bennett's weakness is his hockey IQ, it's no different than saying someone skates with cement in their skates to say they are slow.

He's not even getting the Phaneuf dumb-as-a-bag-of-rocks treatment yet, people are just pointing out what I think even an eight year old (right Harry Lime?) would agree is his biggest flaw.

[Lanny_McDonald]

Originally Posted by Gaskal

No, I don't.

Not sure if serious.

You may have "interest" in buying a Porsche 918, but when you walk in and make a written offer of $20K to the dealership, you're not a "serious buyer." A serious buyer is someone who has interest, has capacity, AND desire to pay the price to acquire the product.

Teams may have inquired with Treliving about Bennett, and may have even made offers, but if Treliving is asking way more than any club is willing to pay, then no one is a serious buyer. If Treliving is asking a 1st and a roster player, and teams are offering a mid-round pick at best, then there is no serious buyer in the field. Based on the information from the media, there were no serious buyers for Sam Bennett.