The Legend of Sam Bennett

[Scroopy Noopers]

Originally Posted by TheoFleury

Why? He's been on a bad team, managed by a bad GM, coached by bad HC's and surrounded with bad players for 7 years. Shouldn't be that difficult to wrap your head around this. Now he has Q and some decent running mates and the team he is on is young and good. The degree of success may be surprising but to me it was obvious he would turn it around to at least 35-45 point powerforward status

You’re making the same point Sage is.

[rhino]

So the lesson here is the next time you pick a guy that early in a draft let him come in and play his game to gain confidence then fine tune the other aspects. Drafting a guy because he has offensive ability then plunking him on the 3rd and 4th lines so he has sheltered minutes is ridiculous. If the Flames didn’t want to let him grow into a complete player they should have had him spend a year in the minors to build confidence

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by rhino

So the lesson here is the next time you pick a guy that early in a draft let him come in and play his game to gain confidence then fine tune the other aspects. Drafting a guy because he has offensive ability then plunking him on the 3rd and 4th lines so he has sheltered minutes is ridiculous. If the Flames didn’t want to let him grow into a complete player they should have had him spend a year in the minors to build confidence

Here’s the dilemma. Half of the posters say he needed to play his natural centre. But that would have meant displacing Monahan or Backlund if you want him in the top 6. And you have to remember Monahan as he was, not as he now is. People can say it all they want now, but you’d be hard pressed to find anyone advocating moving him off the top line.

The other half say he should have been the winger on the top 6. Except Lindholm worked so great it was hard to do that, and Tkachuk was a fixture on the second line. Bennett has never looked great on RW. But even then he had Mangiapane blossoming and filling that spot.

[blankall]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

Here’s the dilemma. Half of the posters say he needed to play his natural centre. But that would have meant displacing Monahan or Backlund if you want him in the top 6. And you have to remember Monahan as he was, not as he now is. People can say it all they want now, but you’d be hard pressed to find anyone advocating moving him off the top line.

The other half say he should have been the winger on the top 6. Except Lindholm worked so great it was hard to do that, and Tkachuk was a fixture on the second line. Bennett has never looked great on RW. But even then he had Mangiapane blossoming and filling that spot.

They could have worked things out part time. Give Bennett time between Lindholm and Tkachuk and then shuffle the other top three lines for a few games.

If the Flames truly have given away year elusive #1 center, this is a major disaster for the franchise. It shows their whole system needs an overhaul. I think this is potentially worse than anything that's gone on with the franchise in the last 10 years. That being said.. it's still very early. Lots of strange things going on this season. Let's see if Florida's success continues into next year. Everyone on Florida is killing it this year.

[DeluxeMoustache]

There are multiple lessons. ex. Don’t build a team with half a dozen middle 6 centers and no right wingers

[Gaskal]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

Here’s the dilemma. Half of the posters say he needed to play his natural centre. But that would have meant displacing Monahan or Backlund if you want him in the top 6.

And that's exactly what should have happened!

If we had Florida Panthers Sam Bennett, AKA don't staple him to 4th line plugs with no skill for most of his tenure here, we don't have to worry about shoehorning Backlund into a top 6 role. He's a perfect 3rd line checking centre with likewise wingers on a Cup calibre team.

We wouldn't have to force so much pressure on Monahan to carry all the offensive load either, and maybe we keep Lindholm as the scoring RW we're STILL goddamn looking for.

[Macho0978]

This is the advantage of having 2 superstars vs 4 to 5 very good forwards. Only so many spots on the first 2 lines and first pp.

Backlund is a great 3rd line center but he’s also most likely to match up against other teams top lines. He’s going to get tons of ice time

Hard to take monahan Lindholm Johnny or Tkachuk off the first pp without creating a different problem with a different player

Mangiapane also out played Sam and deserved extra ice

Fla has 2 superstars and the rest are quality players but the team goes as barkov and huberdeau go.

Flames need to find a way to get a superstar even if it costs us 2 or 3 of our quality players. Probably needs to happen through the draft.

It sucks that Sam is tearing it up now and maybe we should have dumped monahan first but I’m ok to dump both and move on. Johnny too. Sam is still not barkov or huberdeau so he wasn’t the answer either

[CalgaryFan1988]

I remember years ago Treliving saying that he wanted the exact opposite of that. He didn't want to build a team around one or two players, he wanted to build an evenly spread, deep team.

[ComixZone]

Originally Posted by CalgaryFan1988

I remember years ago Treliving saying that he wanted the exact opposite of that. He didn't want to build a team around one or two players, he wanted to build an evenly spread, deep team.

Brett Ritchie, top-six right winger.

You did it Brad! You did it!

[Macho0978]

Originally Posted by CalgaryFan1988

I remember years ago Treliving saying that he wanted the exact opposite of that. He didn't want to build a team around one or two players, he wanted to build an evenly spread, deep team.

The hard part about that is it sets you up for Sam Bennett scenarios. If the flames resign dube mangiapane Johnny Tkachuk and keep monahan what is the value of zary or Pelletier? Where are they going to play? 4th line? Sounds like a Sam Bennett scenario

The difference between monahan and Bennett might be that monahan was here first and established himself first. Monahan has declined and IMO he used to be a very good player but if Sam got his spot first we might have seen monahan sitting on the 4th line like Sam did

Flames seem to be very healthy over the years and that could have hurt us but when I watch this team right now I’m ok with our 3rd and 4th line if we had guys like barkov and huberdeau tearing up the league right now

[DazzlinDino]

Originally Posted by Macho0978

This is the advantage of having 2 superstars vs 4 to 5 very good forwards. Only so many spots on the first 2 lines and first pp.

Backlund is a great 3rd line center but he’s also most likely to match up against other teams top lines. He’s going to get tons of ice time

Hard to take monahan Lindholm Johnny or Tkachuk off the first pp without creating a different problem with a different player

Mangiapane also out played Sam and deserved extra ice

Fla has 2 superstars and the rest are quality players but the team goes as barkov and huberdeau go.

Flames need to find a way to get a superstar even if it costs us 2 or 3 of our quality players. Probably needs to happen through the draft.

It sucks that Sam is tearing it up now and maybe we should have dumped monahan first but I’m ok to dump both and move on. Johnny too. Sam is still not barkov or huberdeau so he wasn’t the answer either

Agree 100% we probably need to trade maybe 2/3 good pieces to try and acquire a high-end center, build around that.

Flames should have developed Bennett for what he was drafted for. Florida has no problem playing Bennett and taking someone's spot, he is getting tons of ice time. They are not sheltering him.

How many 4th round draft picks have the Flames had? We don't have the luxury of missing on developing a player like Sam. What is worse is, Sam fits a need on our team.

We are going to have to move on and hopefully the Flames take a hard look at what went wrong.

[tvp2003]

Originally Posted by DeluxeMoustache

There are multiple lessons. ex. Don’t build a team with half a dozen middle 6 centers and no right wingers

And don’t sign any UFA RW either, because they will instantly because useless anchors (unless it’s Tyler Toffoli).

[tkflames]

Originally Posted by CalgaryFan1988

I remember years ago Treliving saying that he wanted the exact opposite of that. He didn't want to build a team around one or two players, he wanted to build an evenly spread, deep team.

You have to build the team with the cards you're dealt. Its not like the flames can just will themselves to a superstar. Superstars, especially cost reasonable ones only come from drafting. Feaster for all his faults had the right idea...all 3 first rounders for McKinnon instead of Monahan. If you don't have Crosby/Malkin Penguins or Kane/Toews model...then you have to build the St Louis template.

There is a lot of science in building a culture, building an organization and making the right decisions along the way. However, early 1st round drafting introduces an element of luck/variance that can put you on an unwinnable trajectory and you still have to field the best possible team.

[powderjunkie]

Originally Posted by FlamesAddiction

It is worth mentioning though that when he went to Tampa, he complained to Tortorella that he wasn't getting quality ice-time to produce. Tortorella gave him some pretty tough love by plastering him to the bench and 4th line. St. Louis went scoreless in something like his first 20 games and then out of the blue, Torts put him on the first line and told him to prove it. He made St. Louis want it so bad that once he had the chance, he wasn't going to let anyone take it away. If he stayed in Calgary, I am not sure he would have developed the same way.

The exact same kind of tactic coaches here used on Bennett and people thought it was unfair. He didn't respond nearly as well as St. Louis did.

1. 4th line/bench Bennett
2. ???
3. Profit

We just forgot to try the bolded step.

Originally Posted by Classic_Sniper

Right, but you also have to realize that Troy Brouwer was the Flames’ prized free agent. The guy had a few 20 goal seasons and a really strong playoff performance the previous season. It’s not like Gulutzan threw league minimum junk with the pair. It was a more then fair attempt.

Obviously a more skilled driver in play would’ve been the ideal choice. But like I said earlier, Treliving wouldn’t know a good right winger if it bit him in the ass. Edge and competitiveness is what Treliving wanted and that’s what he got. Had he went with speed and skill, maybe Bennett that line would’ve has more success, but c’est la vie I guess.

This is actually a really important point. But, as it became increasingly clear that Brouwer was destined for a buyout, perhaps they should have reconsidered past evaluations/conclusions they made based on false assumptions?

Originally Posted by Classic_Sniper

Well, if you’re in Gulutzan’s position and your sole objective is to make the playoffs or you’re fired, you kind of don’t have the option to “try” things out. You go with what works and at the time, Tkachuk-Backlund and Gaudreau-Monahan worked. I don’t blame Gulutzan for sticking with those pairs because it ended up getting them to the dance in the end.

The bolded is a major failure 2 years into a start-stop rebuild. "win-now" mode vs. "win-right" mode. There's a fine balance between sheltering your most important young players and giving them the opportunity to learn from mistakes. The GM needs to earn the coach's trust that development is >= to winning. But that may have been impossible given ownership mandate.

Originally Posted by GioforPM

Here’s the dilemma. Half of the posters say he needed to play his natural centre. But that would have meant displacing Monahan or Backlund if you want him in the top 6. And you have to remember Monahan as he was, not as he now is. People can say it all they want now, but you’d be hard pressed to find anyone advocating moving him off the top line.

The other half say he should have been the winger on the top 6. Except Lindholm worked so great it was hard to do that, and Tkachuk was a fixture on the second line. Bennett has never looked great on RW. But even then he had Mangiapane blossoming and filling that spot.

I think the other thing we can look at is Monahan's development. Riding shotgun with Gaudreau was never a recipe to help him develop into a complete player.

Bergeron was an offensive wunderkind his 2nd and 3rd years (70+ pts). Then he got hurt, and came back slotted behind Savard and Krejci. He adapted to that role and fleshed out his game.


Tkachuk-Backlund-Brouwer
Gaudreau-Bennett-Ferland
Versteeg-Monahan-Frolik

Janko-Stajan-Chiasson

Same problem as always; still 1 quality forward short to really make things work (Brouwer slot).

Eye to the future (ie. following year) from this would be:

Spoiler!

Tkachuk-Monahan-Frolik
Gaudreau-Bennett-Ferland
???-Backlund-Brouwer


I'll even argue it was never too late to try to flesh out Monahan and Bennett's games. After the COL failure, go into 19-20 with:

Gaudreau-Lindholm-Tkachuk
Bennett-Backlund-Mangiapane
Lucic-Monahan-Dubé

[GioforPM]

These hindsight scenarios make me laugh. Can you imagine the site if Monahan gets demoted to third line after leading the team in goals as a sophomore (2nd on the team as a rookie, without playing with Gaudreau)? Monahan with Versteeg and Frolik? Someone here just said those two were AHL plugs when Bennett was on their line.

Until last year everything worked with Johnny and Monahan, including adding Lindholm - they looked like that was the “next level” ingredient.

[Beatle17]

Originally Posted by DeluxeMoustache

There are multiple lessons. ex. Don’t build a team with half a dozen middle 6 centers and no right wingers

So the opposite of what the team did for all of Iginla's years then? How many years were all the fans clamoring for centers to play with Iggy so they draft centers and have no wingers. We were all led to believe that Bennett was the number one center we needed and would push Monahan down the line up but couldn't happen. Hope Bennett the best and hope his 10 game rally continues.

[TOfan]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

These hindsight scenarios make me laugh. Can you imagine the site if Monahan gets demoted to third line after leading the team in goals as a sophomore (2nd on the team as a rookie, without playing with Gaudreau)? Monahan with Versteeg and Frolik? Someone here just said those two were AHL plugs when Bennett was on their line.

Until last year everything worked with Johnny and Monahan, including adding Lindholm - they looked like that was the “next level” ingredient.

I also find it paradoxical when people would argue that Bennett was continually saddled with 4th line/AHL level talent and this was holding him back.

2018/19 Andrew Mangiapane cut his teeth with Mark Jankowski and Garnett Hathaway, and he excelled. Had Bennett been placed with this two the sentiment for many would have been ‘why is Bennett being placed with these two dusters? No wonder he can’t succeed here’.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by TOfan

I also find it paradoxical when people would argue that Bennett was continually saddled with 4th line/AHL level talent and this was holding him back.

2018/19 Andrew Mangiapane cut his teeth with Mark Jankowski and Garnett Hathaway, and he excelled. Had Bennett been placed with this two the sentiment for many would have been ‘why is Bennett being placed with these two dusters? No wonder he can’t succeed here’.

You don’t have to imagine, because Bennett did play with Hathaway and Jankowski quite a bit. I imagine the thought process was “these two first rounders will grow together like Toews and Kane.

[powderjunkie]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

These hindsight scenarios make me laugh. Can you imagine the site if Monahan gets demoted to third line after leading the team in goals as a sophomore (2nd on the team as a rookie, without playing with Gaudreau)? Monahan with Versteeg and Frolik? Someone here just said those two were AHL plugs when Bennett was on their line.

Until last year everything worked with Johnny and Monahan, including adding Lindholm - they looked like that was the “next level” ingredient.

The scenario was Gulutzan year 1. Johnny's 3rd year, Monny's 4th. Sam's 2nd (full); Chucky's 1st.

Coming off a disappointing season.

But if you'd like, we could fast forward 1 more year, after getting swept in the PO's, and 13/23 having less productive regular seasons.

I should've stated in my post that you'd have a pretty evenly balanced/deployed top 9. But if you're worried about what a message board thinks, try something like:

Tkachuk-Monahan-Frolik
Gaudreau-Bennett-Ferland
Janko/Lazar-Backlund-Versteeg

But I suppose breaking up 13 and 23 is blasphemous? Maybe CFP can advise if a similar feeling existed with 11/16 in FLA?

Yes, it's all hindsight, but writing 13-23-RW with very specific attributes in permanent marker has been the root of so many problems, and has never even worked when it really mattered. 2 EVG each in the '14-15 playoffs was decent, though Bennett & Ferland each had 3 EVG, Bollig & D Jones each had 2, too.

[Classic_Sniper]

Originally Posted by CalgaryFan1988

I remember years ago Treliving saying that he wanted the exact opposite of that. He didn't want to build a team around one or two players, he wanted to build an evenly spread, deep team.

In the end, Treliving kind of did do that didn’t he? Except what he ended up getting was 4 evenly spread lines that made absolutely no difference almost every game. It’s almost like trying to evenly spread raspberry jam on toast. It was spread so incredibly thin that you can’t even see the jam or taste the jam anymore. So his chefs (coach) tried to shift the jam back over and overload it to one side, but now one side has all the jam and the other side is completely barren.


So what’s the solution Brad?


It’s easy... get more JAM!