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

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by jayswin

Regardless of when he's on or off he doesn't have that "puck on a string" look that stars and budding stars have when they stickhandle. The puck is knocked off him so easily.

Playing against NHL defencemen is a quantum leap up from playing against kids in junior. To succeed as a scorer in the NHL, you have to adapt and improve your game to that next level. Bennett hasn't been able to do that. After 240 games he still seems surprised and frustrated that what he's trying doesn't work against NHL players. When he does score, it's from crashing the net and swiping in rebounds. He just doesn't look like a player who's on the verge of breaking out.

[Geeoff]

Hmmm I think Bennett is the 2nd best stickhandler on the team. I think that's his best attribute TBH. The only complaint I have in regards to his stickhandling is when he tries to dangle through the entire opposing team.

[Enoch Root]

It's almost like he could use a mentor. Or a good coach.

[Bingo]

I wrote an article comparing Bennett, Draisaitl and Reinhart a year ago or so. Looking to update it.

First some help ...

Who are the top forwards on the Sabres, Flames and Oilers in those three years that don't include the subject players?

Flames
Monahan
Gaudreau
Backlund
Tkachuk

Oilers
McDavid
Hall
Maroon
Nugent Hopkins

Sabres
Eichel
O'Reilly
Kane
Okposo

Won't wait to long before I post the summaries, just want a quick take from a few people

[transplant99]

Originally Posted by Bingo

I wrote an article comparing Bennett, Draisaitl and Reinhart a year ago or so. Looking to update it.

First some help ...

Who are the top forwards on the Sabres, Flames and Oilers in those three years that don't include the subject players?

Flames
Monahan
Gaudreau
Backlund
Tkachuk

Oilers
McDavid
Hall
Maroon
Nugent Hopkins

Sabres
Eichel
O'Reilly
Kane
Okposo

Won't wait to long before I post the summaries, just want a quick take from a few people

I think it would have to be Eberle over Hall in that Hall was only with the Oilers that one season of the 3...no?

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by transplant99

I think it would have to be Eberle over Hall in that Hall was only with the Oilers that one season of the 3...no?

Hall is still Draisaitl's 2nd, 5th and 7th most frequent trio combinations

[transplant99]

I am clearly confused what it is you are asking then.

Hall and Draisaitl only played one season together.

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by transplant99

I am clearly confused what it is you are asking then.

Hall and Draisaitl only played one season together.

If you sort all three players by most common linemates in their three plus draft years you see combinations at the top in total minutes.

So Hall played one year, but played a tonne with Draisaitl.

[transplant99]

Originally Posted by Bingo

If you sort all three players by most common linemates in their three plus draft years you see combinations at the top in total minutes.

So Hall played one year, but played a tonne with Draisaitl.

Ahhh....gotcha.

[Bingo]

With my assumptions ...

Three year window

Ice time:

Draisaitl 3345
Reinhart 3200
Bennett 2921

Splits:

Draisaitl
Top 4 80%
Junk 20%

Draisaitl
Top 4 72%
Junk 28%

Bennett
Top 4 38%
Junk 62%

Now it's clear you have to earn your ice time and Matthew Tkachuk is a good example of exactly that, but at the same time Bennett hasn't been given a lot of ice time with quality linemates in his three years.

Bennett's top eight group doesn't show Monahan/Gaudreau until spot 7

1. Backlund/Frolik
2. Jankowski/Hathaway
3. Versteeg/Brouwer
4. Chiasson/Gaudreau
5. Chisasson/Versteeg
6. Jagr/Jankowski
7. Gaudreau/Monahan
8. Stajan/Chiasson

[GioforPM]

No one stood between Reinhart or Daisaitl and playing on a top 6 line. In Calgary, Tkachuk and Ferland did.

[Flash Walken]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

No one stood between Reinhart or Daisaitl and playing on a top 6 line. In Calgary, Tkachuk and Ferland did.

Competing organizational philosophies of trying to both compete now as well as develop Bennett as a centre is the the reason he wasn't getting any linemates.

The organization didn't make the Bennett to Wing switch until after what, 1/5th of the season had gone by without him scoring a goal?

Tough to get minutes with good wingers when the team only has one of them and they want to utilize him in a way that maximizes wins over, say, developing a top prospect and letting the chips fall where they may in terms of whether the team makes the playoffs or not.

if Brodie and Andersson are both on the team next year and Brodie gets more PP icetime than Andersson it will be a similar story.

A key component of developing players is putting them in positions to succeed even though they might fail. It's one reason team's looking to win will sacrifice younger players that are tougher to fit into a lineup in favour of guys who have been in the league for awhile.

Giving 25% of gaudreau's shifts to Bennett instead of to Monahan probably helps Bennett's offensive game tremendously, but it probably also negatively impacts the team's ability to win; he's just not as effecient at generating offense as Monahan.

So you play him with Brouwer and Chaisson and try to get some wins.

With hindsight bennett is clearly a player that needed development time and a player like Tkachuk clearly does not.

Bennett could've used a situation last year like Buffalo or the Rangers or Arizona.

[Jay Random]

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

You can't have your cake and eat it too. Either 16 minutes is too small of a sample size to show something or it isn't.

Why does the relative corsi matter in 16 minutes but actual production doesn't?

Sample size. Duh. Shots on goal outnumber actual goals by a factor of more than 10. There is no team in the NHL that scores a goal every 16 minutes on average. None. There is no team that goes an average of 16 minutes without getting a shot on goal. None.

[Flash Walken]

Originally Posted by Jay Random

Sample size. Duh. Shots on goal outnumber actual goals by a factor of more than 10. There is no team in the NHL that scores a goal every 16 minutes on average. None. There is no team that goes an average of 16 minutes without getting a shot on goal. None.

What is the raw data for their corsi attirbution over those 16 minutes? 7 shots for, 6 against?

I honestly have no idea.

[ComixZone]

Originally Posted by Bingo

With my assumptions ...

I think this also greatly exposes just how bad the organizational depth is, and that we should be adding to it through any available means - not subtracting the good pieces from it (and yes, Bennett and Jankowski are good pieces in the bottom 6 in my eyes)

[Flash Walken]

Originally Posted by ComixZone

I think this also greatly exposes just how bad the organizational depth is, and that we should be adding to it through any available means - not subtracting the good pieces from it (and yes, Bennett and Jankowski are good pieces in the bottom 6 in my eyes)

I don't know if the Flames can afford to move a single forward off the roster or the minors.

They literally need the warm bodies to keep the Tanner Glass pickups off the roster.

[edslunch]

Originally Posted by Jay Random

Sample size. Duh. Shots on goal outnumber actual goals by a factor of more than 10. There is no team in the NHL that scores a goal every 16 minutes on average. None. There is no team that goes an average of 16 minutes without getting a shot on goal. None.

Sixteen minutes is like one game. It’s way too small a sample size to declare great chemistry. I do agree that if they looked good maybe they should have been given more time. But I wouldn’t get into a sample size argument over 16 minutes.

(Edited to tone down)

[Strange Brew]

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

I don't know if the Flames can afford to move a single forward off the roster or the minors.

They literally need the warm bodies to keep the Tanner Glass pickups off the roster.

And therein lies one of the problems. The lack of patience in building organizational depth before giving away draft picks like candy.

[I_H8_Crawford]

Originally Posted by jayswin

I really want Bennett to work out as a top 6 forward but I honestly don't see this potential talent that people keep referring to. He looks like a serviceable NHL player that could get a little better.

Regardless of when he's on or off he doesn't have that "puck on a string" look that stars and budding stars have when they stickhandle. The puck is knocked off him so easily.

His flashes of brilliance that people allude to seem more like his constant junior style dangles actually working every once in a while than something that will turn consistent.

Just curious... did you feel this way about him during his seasons under Hartley? IIRC it was almost unamious here that he would be a star for this team.

Enter GG and he looks like crap under a crap coach. I still want to see him under a coach that is actually good.

Lets not forget that people were calling Crosby done before Sullivan took over in PIT. Garbage coaches can hurt the best of them. (No i am not saing Bennett = Crosby, just that even the best player in the world can be neutered by garbage coaching)

[scotty2hotty]

Call me overly optimistic, but I still say that Bennett is the perfect second line winger.

Yes, I know the stats don’t show that yet ...but I’m holding out hope that Peters finds the secret sauce for Sam.