The Legend of Sam Bennett

[Classic_Sniper]

Originally Posted by Flamesfan05

For the most part you are right, however no core in the world can help Brouwer and Neal. That’s was a big Treliving’s screw up.

Don’t forget Neal failed with Mcdavid.

Did he fail with McDavid? I don’t watch the Oilers. I know he had a pretty good first season, with a goal pace close to 30. Not sure what happened in his second season though and also, not sure if his bloated cap hit was bought out for cap reasons either. Regardless, it was certainly better than what the Flames got out of him.

I know Brouwer and Neal were trash for us. But they had to have had some success in the past that got them the contracts they got. So whatever cores they had played on previously had to have been pretty decent to make those 2 look good.

[jayswin]

Originally Posted by GranteedEV

Sure.

But then that logic applies to a lot of really good second fiddles. The real Brayden Point without Kucherov. The real Leon Draisaitl without McDavid being in on over half his points. The real Backstrom/Kuznetsov without Ovechkin. The real Lindholm without Gaudreau. The real Bergeron without Marchand. The real (prime) Toews without Kane/Hossa.

It's impossible to isolate individual points from linemates.

What we know is that Bennett, as with a lot of those names, does a lot on the ice that isn't always evident in raw point totals. His value is diverse.

Not directed at Jiri as he's gone in depth with his analysis and opinion on Bennett's success, but I do find that it's typically bias that drives fans to isolate or devalue points due to line mates, which is happening a lot with Bennett on CP.

Looking at that idea 360 though, you really would have to go through the whole league and see who plays with who if you want to play that game. And if the exercise is carried out a lot these posters wold eventually have to say "right, most of the top 6 point getters in the league are playing with at least one star to superstar line mate".

Meaning a lot of Flames fans just don't want this to happen and instinctively try to explain it away. Just reverse the roles a bit and imagine we were the team that acquired Bennett and this happened, would you explain the success away in the same manner?

[Cecil Terwilliger]

Originally Posted by jayswin

Not directed at Jiri as he's gone in depth with his analysis and opinion on Bennett's success, but I do find that it's typically bias that drives fans to isolate or devalue points due to line mates, which is happening a lot with Bennett on CP.

Looking at that idea 360 though, you really would have to go through the whole league and see who plays with who if you want to play that game. And if the exercise is carried out a lot these posters wold eventually have to say "right, most of the top 6 point getters in the league are playing with at least one star to superstar line mate".

Meaning a lot of Flames fans just don't want this to happen and instinctively try to explain it away. Just reverse the roles a bit and imagine we were the team that acquired Bennett and this happened, would you explain the success away in the same manner?

We’ve had plenty of players come here and find success. More success than they had elsewhere.

There are multiple factors, linemates, fresh start, new surroundings, different coach, player maturity etc.

Hudler and Huselius, yeah I think we all recognized it was linemates. Guys like Glencross and Bourque, I think it was multiple reasons.


One thing I never once did was attribute the player’s success to the supposed incompetence of the GM of the team that traded the player to us (or didn’t re-sign them in the case of free agents)

[Lanny_McDonald]

Originally Posted by GranteedEV

It's impossible to isolate individual points from linemates.

Is it? You mean you can't look at Duclair's production when he's with Huberdeau, and then his production away from Huberdeau and draw a pretty good conclusion? you can't look at Tippett's production when he's with Huberdeau, and then his production away from Huberdeau and draw a pretty good conclusion? You can definitely look at Huberdeau's production with or without any of the players in question and come to a conclusion that he scores a lot without anyone's help, and his linemate combinations are pretty well irrelevant to his efficacy. Look at points scored away from each player and you see a pretty consistent pattern. If you're playing with Huberdeau, you're going to see a dramatic point increase, and when you're away from him, you're not scoring much.

[Saqe]

^



worse linemates and less icetime = less points

[DeluxeMoustache]

This is all kind of silly

People here were watching Bennett for years, saying they believed he could do better playing his natural position, with quality linemates, and consistent linemates.

Now he is playing his natural position with quality linemates, and consistent linemates, and is doing better

And people here are saying in a dismissive way that he is doing well because he has quality linemates.

Uh… Yeah. He is.

He is the 2C on the best team in the league. He has proven he can play with top line talent and be effective. Which was always the argument, was it not?

[GranteedEV]

Originally Posted by Lanny_McDonald

Is it? You mean you can't look at Duclair's production when he's with Huberdeau, and then his production away from Huberdeau and draw a pretty good conclusion?

Unless you've actually analyzed each individual scoring play, no, probably not a "pretty good conclusion"

Fact: Huberdeau shares a point on 13 out of Duclair's 30 points. Barkov adds another point on 8 of those 30 points.

If your assertion is that Duclair is a product of Huberdeau, it's built on a shakey foundation.

While it's true that Huberdeau (53 points) has a point on 13 out of Bennett's 26 points, it's equally true that that McDavid (53 points) has a point on 27 of Leon Draisaitl's 54 points, and those two don't even play on the same line.
Heck, Johnny Gaudreau shares a point on 16 of Elias Lindholm's 29 points, you don't even need to look north.

How do you isolate the production exactly? Just based on your subjective assessment of skill level? Sounds like the definition of confirmation bias.

Good players should play with good players, but production can be more random than that. It's not just Huberdeau doing spinoramas to give Bennett tap-ins the way you assert.

[DazzlinDino]

Originally Posted by DeluxeMoustache

This is all kind of silly

People here were watching Bennett for years, saying they believed he could do better playing his natural position, with quality linemates, and consistent linemates.

Now he is playing his natural position with quality linemates, and consistent linemates, and is doing better

And people here are saying in a dismissive way that he is doing well because he has quality linemates.

Uh… Yeah. He is.

He is the 2C on the best team in the league. He has proven he can play with top line talent and be effective. Which was always the argument, was it not?

Was thinking the same thing. Some here keep moving the goalposts. Bennett is playing better with better linemates. Even Monahan scored lots of goals with Johnny on his line but would probably have struggled with the same linemates Bennett got saddled with in Calgary. Either way great to see Bennett continue to play well. I am looking forward to the Panthers matchup but they are going to come in firing. Calgary has to be ready, it may prove to be a tough matchup!

[blankall]

Originally Posted by DeluxeMoustache

This is all kind of silly

People here were watching Bennett for years, saying they believed he could do better playing his natural position, with quality linemates, and consistent linemates.

Now he is playing his natural position with quality linemates, and consistent linemates, and is doing better

And people here are saying in a dismissive way that he is doing well because he has quality linemates.

Uh… Yeah. He is.

He is the 2C on the best team in the league. He has proven he can play with top line talent and be effective. Which was always the argument, was it not?

I don't think anyone is arguing against what you are saying.

However, to state that Bennett is some ppg star who would have solved Calgary's center depth problems is also ridiculous.

Currently Bennett is getting over 3 minutes of pp time per game, playing with the player with the most assists, and getting 76.7% offensive zone starts. How would that have possibly fit into the Calgary lineup? The only way to give him that kind of time would have been on the #1 line, but he's not a very good #1 center. Calgary's second line is expected to play a heavy shut down role.

Clearly if you give a player more ice time they are going to produce more, but there's a massive opportunity cost to giving a center the kind of ice time that Bennett is getting in Florida. It just so happens that they have a Selke calibre #1 centre, who is also a ppg, and possibly the best offensive generating winger in the game, so they can afford to give out lots of opportunities.

[ComixZone]

Originally Posted by blankall

I don't think anyone is arguing against what you are saying.

However, to state that Bennett is some ppg star who would have solved Calgary's center depth problems is also ridiculous.

Currently Bennett is getting over 3 minutes of pp time per game, playing with the player with the most assists, and getting 76.7% offensive zone starts. How would that have possibly fit into the Calgary lineup? The only way to give him that kind of time would have been on the #1 line, but he's not a very good #1 center. Calgary's second line is expected to play a heavy shut down role.

Clearly if you give a player more ice time they are going to produce more, but there's a massive opportunity cost to giving a center the kind of ice time that Bennett is getting in Florida. It just so happens that they have a Selke calibre #1 centre, who is also a ppg, and possibly the best offensive generating winger in the game, so they can afford to give out lots of opportunities.

Take Monahan off PP1, put Bennett on PP1 -> Calgary is better off.

Gaudreau - Lindholm - Tkachuk
Mangiapane - Bennett - Coleman

That's a better top-6 than anything we can put out on the ice today. Bennett wouldn't produce at a PPG pace like he has during his time in Florida, but the Flames as a team would be better off. Sam Bennett is notably better than Sean Monahan and Mikael Backlund, so him being here pushing both Backlund and Monahan down the depth chart (if they were both still here), would be better for the Flames than what is going on today.

[powderjunkie]

Originally Posted by Lanny_McDonald

Is it? You mean you can't look at Duclair's production when he's with Huberdeau, and then his production away from Huberdeau and draw a pretty good conclusion? you can't look at Tippett's production when he's with Huberdeau, and then his production away from Huberdeau and draw a pretty good conclusion? You can definitely look at Huberdeau's production with or without any of the players in question and come to a conclusion that he scores a lot without anyone's help, and his linemate combinations are pretty well irrelevant to his efficacy. Look at points scored away from each player and you see a pretty consistent pattern. If you're playing with Huberdeau, you're going to see a dramatic point increase, and when you're away from him, you're not scoring much.

In his 44 games before Bennett came, Huberdeau had a pathetic 44pts (1.0)

In the 55 games (incl. playoffs) since Bennett came, JH has 80 pts in 55gp (1.46)

(Of course SB wasn't on his line or even in the lineup for all of those 55...)

[SuperMatt18]

Even if Bennett could have found his game in Calgary with a full season under Sutter this year it`s kind of irrelevant.

-He asked for a trade
-He was a pending RFA
-There was the expansion draft

Bennett had asked for a trade and could have just refused to sign that offseason, or they could have lost him for free in the expansion draft.

It`s unfortunate and it`s frustrated that the 6 prior years of mismanagement of Bennett on this roster, and to be quite honest Bennett just wasn`t very good here at times either. Trading him at that time was the right move with what we knew at the time, and based on the player Bennett had been in Calgary.

Plus it`s possible he could have turned his game around in Calgary, or maybe he just continued to underperform on this roster. The change of scenery, linemates, and system that Florida play (Jack Han did a breakdown on why it suited Bennett) just happened to work out for him, that doesn`t mean it would have worked out for him here.

[blankall]

Originally Posted by ComixZone

Take Monahan off PP1, put Bennett on PP1 -> Calgary is better off.

Gaudreau - Lindholm - Tkachuk
Mangiapane - Bennett - Coleman

That's a better top-6 than anything we can put out on the ice today. Bennett wouldn't produce at a PPG pace like he has during his time in Florida, but the Flames as a team would be better off. Sam Bennett is notably better than Sean Monahan and Mikael Backlund, so him being here pushing both Backlund and Monahan down the depth chart (if they were both still here), would be better for the Flames than what is going on today.

Backlund only really fell off this year. Until recently he was a top defensive centre who put up 45-50 points while making players around him better. So last year the solution to the Flames problems was to give Backlund, who was on pace for 50 points, with a tire for of a team around him way less ice time?

And then what do you do with the expansion draft? We probably expose Dube instead, who looked like a sure fire soon to be second liner last year.

Can Bennett carry a line of Coleman and Mangiapane? That's about as big of a top 6 downgrade as you can get from being stapled to Huberdeau.

A lot of hindsight going on here.

[powderjunkie]

Originally Posted by ComixZone

Take Monahan off PP1, put Bennett on PP1 -> Calgary is better off.

Gaudreau - Lindholm - Tkachuk
Mangiapane - Bennett - Coleman

That's a better top-6 than anything we can put out on the ice today. Bennett wouldn't produce at a PPG pace like he has during his time in Florida, but the Flames as a team would be better off. Sam Bennett is notably better than Sean Monahan and Mikael Backlund, so him being here pushing both Backlund and Monahan down the depth chart (if they were both still here), would be better for the Flames than what is going on today.

Even better IMO if we wanted to replicate FLA's structure (sheltering JG+Sam with O-zone starts), and have a 1st line that can be very good both ways:

Mangiapane - Lindholm - Tkachuk
Gaudreau - Bennett - Coleman

Of course I think it would be hard to assume the same trajectory for Sam's confidence without rewinding several years in his deployment here.

[powderjunkie]

Originally Posted by blankall

Backlund only really fell off this year. Until recently he was a top defensive centre who put up 45-50 points while making players around him better. So last year the solution to the Flames problems was to give Backlund, who was on pace for 50 points, with a tire for of a team around him way less ice time?

And then what do you do with the expansion draft? We probably expose Dube instead, who looked like a sure fire soon to be second liner last year.

Can Bennett carry a line of Coleman and Mangiapane? That's about as big of a top 6 downgrade as you can get from being stapled to Huberdeau.

A lot of hindsight going on here.

Mangiapane was in the conversation for Team Canada...

I think we can mostly agree that Backlund slots as an okay 2nd line C (but probably not quite to the level of any 2C that has won the cup in the cap era) or a superb 3rd line C.

rank among F's EV TOI (Total TOI):
4. Coleman 13:43 (6. 15:24)
5. Backlund 13:37 (4. 17:27)
6. Mangiapane 12:53 (5. 15:58)
7. Monahan 11:52 (7. 14:42)

There would be no need to give Backlund a lot less time.


In this hindsight exercise we can also imagine one of Backlund/Monahan being moved, with a middle 6 F as part of the return - of course a lot of butterfly effects from there.

[Strange Brew]

Originally Posted by blankall

Backlund only really fell off this year. Until recently he was a top defensive centre who put up 45-50 points while making players around him better. So last year the solution to the Flames problems was to give Backlund, who was on pace for 50 points, with a tire for of a team around him way less ice time?

And then what do you do with the expansion draft? We probably expose Dube instead, who looked like a sure fire soon to be second liner last year.

Can Bennett carry a line of Coleman and Mangiapane? That's about as big of a top 6 downgrade as you can get from being stapled to Huberdeau.

A lot of hindsight going on here.

The hindsight play was moving on from Monahan while it was possible, creating some flexibility.

Some people have been talking about moving Monahan for whatever picks you could get for years. But it seems that Treliving was focusing on trying to make a "hockey trade". This organization is just so afraid of taking a temporary step back.

[Vinny01]

Hindsight shows the Flames should have worked with Bennett after the Sutter hire and gone from there. He likely would have signed his QO to be a UFA next year but the Flames could have turned things around with Sam by now. No doubt he would have been given a long look at the #2C spot here seeing how disappointing Monahan, Backlund and Dube have been.


The gutsy move would have been exposing Monahan to Seattle which would have made their choice of he or Gio more difficult. Flames would lose a big cap hit either way and still have Bennett

[ComixZone]

Originally Posted by Strange Brew

The hindsight play was moving on from Monahan while it was possible, creating some flexibility.

Some people have been talking about moving Monahan for whatever picks you could get for years. But it seems that Treliving was focusing on trying to make a "hockey trade". This organization is just so afraid of taking a temporary step back.

The odd thing to me is that the Flames had tried to trade Monahan for two off-seasons in a row, with no one wanting him/or having to accept "50 cents on the dollar". I don't think exposing Monahan was a wild idea, especially while Giordano was also being exposed - I don't think there was much risk.

Flames protection list should have been:

Backlund, Bennett, Dube, Gaudreau, Lindholm, Mangiapane, Tkachuk

Andersson, Hanifin, Tanev

You still likely lose Giordano, and even if they did select Monahan...well, the Flames are yet again better off.

[DazzlinDino]

Originally Posted by Vinny01

Hindsight shows the Flames should have worked with Bennett after the Sutter hire and gone from there. He likely would have signed his QO to be a UFA next year but the Flames could have turned things around with Sam by now. No doubt he would have been given a long look at the #2C spot here seeing how disappointing Monahan, Backlund and Dube have been.


The gutsy move would have been exposing Monahan to Seattle which would have made their choice of he or Gio more difficult. Flames would lose a big cap hit either way and still have Bennett

Gio, Backlund, Monahan, all players that we may have kept past their due date. If the Flames were on top of things they could have traded these guys for some young quality assets (Maybe even kept Brodie). Monahan should never have been allowed to play through so many injuries without letting someone else step up. It might have kept him healthy and given him a longer shelf life, but I am just speculating. Having Backlund and Monahan tailing off puts the Flames in a tough spot especially if we expect to face the grind of the playoffs. The Flames do not have a very skilled NHL roster right now, we need to find some upgrades.

[mile]

https://twitter.com/user/status/1483151751121281024

https://twitter.com/user/status/1483153130573369347

https://twitter.com/user/status/1483141672087146496