April 8 Practice - Ortio close? Bollig in for Bouma?

[GioforPM]

I don't think the lineup is determined by contract status - I think it's the coach's call. If Treliving was that concerned about the ELC he wouldn't have called Bennett up.

[Table 5]

Originally Posted by Gaudfather

If the Flames were going a second round in the playoffs - ownership would likely have little concern with eating a year of Bennett's ELC - as they would be raking in significant unplanned revenues!

Concern around the ELC is not about revenue for the ownership. The Flames owners have shown time and again that they will open their wallets when necessary.

It's about making sure they can minimize/delay any cap issues in the long-term. In a few years time, when all these young players will get big raises, delaying Bennett getting a bigger contract by even 1 year might mean that the team doesn't have to trade someone else to get under the cap. Stretching out ELCs might prevent the Flames from running into the same situation that Chicago did.

[Imported_Aussie]

Bollig played well last time against LA. I think it would be smart for him to draw in for this matchup. Play Bennett vs the Jets if the playoff spot is sealed with a win vs LA. Otherwise, keep guys who have been playing within the system. This team's greatest strength IMO is that the team has established a way of playing and everyone has bought in. Bennett can sit in the pressbox with Conroy pointing out what he should do - get that learning in, more practices with the team, then turn him loose when he is 100% ready to roll

[flambers]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

I don't think the lineup is determined by contract status - I think it's the coach's call.

If Treliving was that concerned about the ELC he wouldn't have called Bennett up.

Totally agree, I would think since the Kings are a large team who play very physical a player like Bollig makes sense.

[PeteMoss]

They've never seen Bennett play in an actual NHL game. Until the Flames lose.. you aren't going to see him play.

[calf]

Originally Posted by Bingo

didn't a Hartley quote point to Bennett playing and we have a plan or something like that?

makes me think they wanted the ELC thing sorted out as suggested above.

My read on it is if he plays the rest of the season, and is contributing well enough to play all 7 games of a first round series, then who cares if the second round results in him burning a year off the ELC. Let him keep playing and go on a run.

If he doesn't draw in, or does and we don't make it past the first round, that year isn't burned. No big deal.

[hockey.modern]

lisa dillman ‏@reallisa: Sutter and Hartley just shook hands in the hallway, Nice moment

[GreenLantern2814]

Originally Posted by Table 5

Concern around the ELC is not about revenue for the ownership. The Flames owners have shown time and again that they will open their wallets when necessary.

It's about making sure they can minimize/delay any cap issues in the long-term. In a few years time, when all these young players will get big raises, delaying Bennett getting a bigger contract by even 1 year might mean that the team doesn't have to trade someone else to get under the cap. Stretching out ELCs might prevent the Flames from running into the same situation that Chicago did.

Imagine where Chicago would be right now if Dale Tallon didn't forget to qualify Versteeg, Byfuglien and Ladd.

[CroFlames]

Originally Posted by GreenLantern2814

Yes, you absolutely sit Bennett if you make it past the first round to avoid burning a year on his ELC.

This team can probably beat Vancouver in a 7 game series. We're not winning the cup this year.

Next summer, Johnny, Monahan, Russell and Gio are all up for extensions. Gio and Russell will double their current AAV salaries at minimum, and who knows how Treliving handles Monahan/Gaudreau.

They need 3 full years of Bennett on an ELC.

At this point, who gives a damn about his ELC? It's about winning hockey games. Bob had a great quote at the start of the year when he sat Wides (and I'm paraphrasing) "I coach players, I don't coach contracts".

The reality of the business of coaching is the Bob may not even be around when Bennett comes off his ELC, so why should Bob care now about burning a year? If Treliving cared, he wouldn't have made him available to Bob.

I'm not saying one way or the other I would dress Bennett, I'm just saying Bob needs to ice the best possible roster, period. Contracts be damned right now.

[FBI]

If Bollig draws in, for the love of God don't do anything STUPID this time Bollig..

5 mins of ice time please.

[sureLoss]

lisa dillman @reallisa
Sutter and Hartley just shook hands in the hallway
Nice moment

[GreenLantern2814]

Originally Posted by calf

My read on it is if he plays the rest of the season, and is contributing well enough to play all 7 games of a first round series, then who cares if the second round results in him burning a year off the ELC. Let him keep playing and go on a run.

If he doesn't draw in, or does and we don't make it past the first round, that year isn't burned. No big deal.

If you have the choice to lose in five or six games to the Blues in Round 2, or get an extra year of Sam Bennett at 925K, you take the extra year. This year has been amazing, but it isn't 'our year' yet.

[GranteedEV]

Originally Posted by CroFlames

At this point, who gives a damn about his ELC? It's about winning hockey games. Bob had a great quote at the start of the year when he sat Wides (and I'm paraphrasing) "I coach players, I don't coach contracts".

The reality of the business of coaching is the Bob may not even be around when Bennett comes off his ELC, so why should Bob care now about burning a year? If Treliving cared, he wouldn't have made him available to Bob.

That's not necessarily true. Look at the Shore situation this season... Shore had two games left before he could be waiver eligible, he played one, and then Hartley purposely scratched him until he was sent down. These kind of decisions are not one person's to make. The ELC could be very well a factor if/when Bennett hits the 9 game threshold.

[GreenLantern2814]

Originally Posted by CroFlames

At this point, who gives a damn about his ELC? It's about winning hockey games. Bob had a great quote at the start of the year when he sat Wides (and I'm paraphrasing) "I coach players, I don't coach contracts".

The reality of the business of coaching is the Bob may not even be around when Bennett comes off his ELC, so why should Bob care now about burning a year? If Treliving cared, he wouldn't have made him available to Bob.

I'm not saying one way or the other I would dress Bennett, I'm just saying Bob needs to ice the best possible roster, period. Contracts be damned right now.

It's about winning Stanley Cups. It isn't about the two extra wins we MIGHT get in round 2. We can't get by St Louis or Chicago without Gio at this stage.

Winning a Stanley Cup is aided by having three full years of Sam Bennett making the league minimum and significantly overperforming.

[sureLoss]

Darren Haynes @DarrenWHaynes
Gem from coach Bob Hartley today, about the #Flames inexperience compared to LA: "You don't go to the pharmacy to buy a pack of experience."

[CroFlames]

Originally Posted by GreenLantern2814

It's about winning Stanley Cups. It isn't about the two extra wins we MIGHT get in round 2. We can't get by St Louis or Chicago without Gio at this stage.

Winning a Stanley Cup is aided by having three full years of Sam Bennett making the league minimum and significantly overperforming.

I don't know man. If we play Bennett the next 2 games and we dispatch the Canucks in 7, and Bennett plays Monahan-esque, you would sit him in the 2nd round?

The beauty of the playoffs is anything can happen. I would not throw away that chance at glory this year for potentially saving cap space later.

However, it all depends on how Bennett plays, or if he plays. I trust Bob to make the best lineup decisions.

Having said that, I doubt Bennett plays against LA. If we clinch though, I'm almost certain he'd get a crack at the Jets.

[burn_this_city]

We don't have the horses on defense for a deep playoff run.

[MisterJoji]

Originally Posted by GreenLantern2814

Yes, you absolutely sit Bennett if you make it past the first round to avoid burning a year on his ELC.



This team can probably beat Vancouver in a 7 game series. We're not winning the cup this year.



Next summer, Johnny, Monahan, Russell and Gio are all up for extensions. Gio and Russell will double their current AAV salaries at minimum, and who knows how Treliving handles Monahan/Gaudreau.



They need 3 full years of Bennett on an ELC.

No way. If Bennett comes in, doesn't look out of place and helps this team get to the 2nd round, ELC be damned. I'd rather watch this team play in May (and possibly further) than worry about losing one year of ELC. I think our management will be fine when it comes to salary cap, salaries, contracts, etc. Yes, there are some upcoming contract raises coming however we have lots of contracts expiring too. Also we don't have a Campbell or Hossa or Huet boat anchor-like contracts to worry about, like Chicago had. I am confident Treliving and Co. already have a solid long term outlook when it comes to salary cap and finances.

[Table 5]

Originally Posted by CroFlames

The beauty of the playoffs is anything can happen.

Anything can happen...except Cinderella teams actually winning the Cup.

[Lucky23]

The flames have their best shot of making the playoffs in years tomorrow. Who knows if the flames will regress next season like all the "smart" hockey minds say. In regards to the Bennett situation, if he is indeed a positive impact for the team then why not burn a year off his ELC this season if it means we have a greater chance at going deep into the playoffs. Who knows? Anything can happen in the playoffs. But if we were to regress next season we would be burning a year off Bennett's ELC in a pointless season. The Flames are so close and what if Bennett is the missing piece to us being a contender this season? I don't want to put high expectations on a young kid, but he seems very driven.