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

[locsofblu]

Originally Posted by Sylvanfan

At this point I don't see Bennett with the Flames after this contract is done. That pick not working out is really hurting the team right now. Never would have thought his offensive game would be this bad after his rookie season.

Safe to say they rushed the rebuild thinking that Bennett was going to be an offensive threat. Imagine this team if Bennett became that first li e center he was supposed to. Our highest pick ever in franchise history and it's a bust although not a complete bust last years past.

[Flash Walken]

Originally Posted by Bingo

I've given up on Bennett improving. I think there are parts of his game that are good, parts that are weak, and then parts that are head scratching (penalties he takes, both deserved and not, as well his inability to finish).

But he isn't the problem, so I don't get the topic being forefront.

This year he's ...

8th amongst forwards for Points/60 ahead of Frolik and Backlund
5th in shots/60
4th in individual xG/60
4th in scoring chances/60
7th in high danger chances/60

Defensively he's struggled, as he's only behind Quine and Ryan for shot attempts against per 60, but he is 7th in xGF%.

So yeah Bennett is a disappointment but he's far from the focus for me right now.

If you look at Calgary's 12 most played forwards the only guys under 50% in xGF% are Monahan (46%), Frolik (47%), Gaudreau (47%) and Lindholm (47%).

Bennett is playing like the last few seasons. Good on chance generation, and bad from finishing. He's a third liner, not worse.

I mean, it's not complicated here Bingo.

If he's not improving and he's not good enough, trade him for something that improves the team.

If even you are at the point of saying he's not improving then why keep him on the roster if there is a potential to improve the team?

You're making it out like this is a thread to run him down when that is obviously and repeatedly not the case. The argument has always been converting an asset to make the team better.

The point is, if Bennett is going to be a 4th line player for the flames moving forward, why not explore moving him to a team that might think he's more valuable than that, if that means improving the team.

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

I mean, it's not complicated here Bingo.

If he's not improving and he's not good enough, trade him for something that improves the team.

If even you are at the point of saying he's not improving then why keep him on the roster if there is a potential to improve the team?

You're making it out like this is a thread to run him down when that is obviously and repeatedly not the case. The argument has always been converting an asset to make the team better.

The point is, if Bennett is going to be a 4th line player for the flames moving forward, why not explore moving him to a team that might think he's more valuable than that, if that means improving the team.

So Bennett is the only guy not improving, or producing at the level you want him to? The only guy not good enough?

That's my point.

How many guys are actually playing well and/or improving, or being good enough?

Lindholm and Tkachuk? That's it up front isn't it?

So by your measure there are a lot of players that need to be moved for improvements right? Like most of the team?

Bennett isn't the problem at all. And no I wouldn't say he's going to be a fourth line player, his production and metrics suggest he's one of the team's better third line players and he has been year in and year out.

You're right, it isn't complicated at all.

[Kovaz]

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

I mean, it's not complicated here Bingo.

If he's not improving and he's not good enough, trade him for something that improves the team.

If even you are at the point of saying he's not improving then why keep him on the roster if there is a potential to improve the team?

You're making it out like this is a thread to run him down when that is obviously and repeatedly not the case. The argument has always been converting an asset to make the team better.

The point is, if Bennett is going to be a 4th line player for the flames moving forward, why not explore moving him to a team that might think he's more valuable than that, if that means improving the team.

What makes him not good enough? Bingo's been trying to argue that he's been plenty good enough as a 3rd liner.

He's got positive possession numbers, we're outscoring the opposition 8-4 with him on the ice, and even if you assume every penalty he's taken is directly his fault - 10 minor penalties is worth 2 goals against so he's still at a +2. So even if he's not improving, he's a perfectly adequate third liner.

Obviously if some other team wants to give up more than he's worth he should be available. But that's true of every guy on the roster. Why focus on Bennett specifically?

[Flash Walken]

Originally Posted by Bingo

So Bennett is the only guy not improving, or producing at the level you want him to? The only guy not good enough?

That's my point.

He is the guy who had the most value that was the most tradeable. He was your best bet to return a piece to improve the team.

How many guys are actually playing well and/or improving, or being good enough?

Lindholm and Tkachuk? That's it up front isn't it?

So by your measure there are a lot of players that need to be moved for improvements right? Like most of the team?

there are several, yes, but moving Bennett has a lot lesser impact than moving backlund because Bennett isn't contributing a lot of anything compared to what other guys are bringing.

Bennett isn't the problem at all.

Say it with me here, you're moving Bennett to make the team better, not because he's a problem.

If you can't move a 27 point player then who can you move?

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

He is the guy who had the most value that was the most tradeable. He was your best bet to return a piece to improve the team.

there are several, yes, but moving Bennett has a lot lesser impact than moving backlund because Bennett isn't contributing a lot of anything compared to what other guys are bringing.



Say it with me here, you're moving Bennett to make the team better, not because he's a problem.

If you can't move a 27 point player then who can you move?

Nice condescending line ... you'll never learn I guess. How many times are you going to be called out for being an ass before you let it sink in?

Kovaz put it great ... I'd move anyone in the bottom half of the roster if another team overvalues them compared to where Treliving sees his worth. No problem with that.

But focusing on moving Bennett is misplaced in my opinion. I never said you can't move Bennett, I just find your obsession with the player a little odd.

[Flash Walken]

Originally Posted by Kovaz

What makes him not good enough? Bingo's been trying to argue that he's been plenty good enough as a 3rd liner.

Ya, I'm not at all convinced by bingos argument last year that he's a top end 3rd liner, or this year's argument that he's an adequate 3rd liner.

He's got positive possession numbers, we're outscoring the opposition 8-4 with him on the ice, and even if you assume every penalty he's taken is directly his fault - 10 minor penalties is worth 2 goals against so he's still at a +2. So even if he's not improving, he's a perfectly adequate third liner.

unfortunately the flames don't have a shortage of bottom 6 players, but they do have a shortage of top 6 players. So how do you get a top 6 player? I'm suggesting you move one of more of your most valuable bottom 6 players which is where I categorize Bennett.

When I first started this thread, I was questioning whether you could've gotten a top line player for Bennett at one point, and did the flames miss the boat on that. Now almost 2 years later than argument is basically over, and the answer to that is yes, the flames did hold on too long and can no longer get a top player for Bennett in the way that other teams got top players for their marginal former high draft picks.

Obviously if some other team wants to give up more than he's worth he should be available. But that's true of every guy on the roster. Why focus on Bennett specifically?

I'm glad you agree because I feel this way about basically every player.

The focus on Bennett of course is because this is the Bennett thread to discuss his trade value, as bingo himself has bumped from time to time for Bennett related stats and opinions, and because he is having yet another lacklustre start compared other contributors.

There's also a janko thread on the first page discussing his lacklustre start, there are threads for hanifin, tkachuk and lucic on page 2 etc etc.

Why shouldn't I focus on Bennett in the Bennett thread? He's one of my favourite players.

[Psytic]

Originally Posted by Vinny01

18-23 Connolly is much worse

Fair enough. If he could find a way to play his game while taking less penalties I have no issues with him. Much bigger problems on the team. I'm less concerned about him panning out then I am that Tre hasnt been able to find another means to find a second line C or RW. First round picks don't pan out all the time teams generally should have multiple irons in the fire. I guess I still cant fault Tre though hes tried with Jagr, Brouwer, Neal, Stewart, Kadri, Zucker, Stone. Seems to be a swing and a miss every time on that 2nd line though so far. I'm hoping for some more Lindholm type luck here soon.

[Kovaz]

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

I'm glad you agree because I feel this way about basically every player.

The focus on Bennett of course is because this is the Bennett thread to discuss his trade value, as bingo himself has bumped from time to time for Bennett related stats and opinions, and because he is having yet another lacklustre start compared other contributors.

There's also a janko thread on the first page discussing his lacklustre start, there are threads for hanifin, tkachuk and lucic on page 2 etc etc.

Why shouldn't I focus on Bennett in the Bennett thread? He's one of my favourite players.

Let me ask a different question then: "Why is trading Bennett a better option than any other player on the roster?"

A lot of posts portray Bennett in such a negative light ("lacklustre start", "he's not good enough", etc) that it comes across as addition by subtraction to get rid of him. I disagree - a 3rd line with favorable possession stats and positive goal differential is all you can reasonable ask for. If it's just a matter of "you have to give to get", fair enough. But I'm not convinced Bennett's value in a trade is much higher than what he currently brings by keeping him.

[TOfan]

Easy enough to say 'trade Bennett to improve the team' but what are other GM's prepared to pay for Bennett? The Flames aren't exactly going to be able to pull the wool over anyone's eyes here. Bennett is a pretty good to very good 3rd line winger. If the argument is trade Bennett for help in the top six, I'm skeptical Treliving is going to find a trade partner out there.

Clearly if you're looking to add to your top six with a trade involving Bennett, you're going to have to add. Would the Flames want to revisit Zucker? Bennett and a second? Could you get Palmeri for that?

Personally, I lean against making that type of move because once you trade Bennett, you're almost immediately looking to replace him. I don't see any internal options that can provide what Bennett does. For a team that often looks to lack edge, I would have to think the Flames aren't eager to move him.

[Flash Walken]

Originally Posted by Kovaz

Let me ask a different question then: "Why is trading Bennett a better option than any other player on the roster?"

A lot of posts portray Bennett in such a negative light ("lacklustre start", "he's not good enough", etc) that it comes across as addition by subtraction to get rid of him. I disagree - a 3rd line with favorable possession stats and positive goal differential is all you can reasonable ask for. If it's just a matter of "you have to give to get", fair enough. But I'm not convinced Bennett's value in a trade is much higher than what he currently brings by keeping him.

For me that's an easy answer: he's the most valuable of the expendable players on the roster.

With Lucic, it's even more pronounced.

He's a great sweetener in my opinion, that good second piece in a trade. If you compare his value to anyone else in the bottom 6 forward group I think his value is second to only Ryan and I could probably be convinced that it's higher.

For me, the urgency to move Bennett is that his value is likely to continue to depreciate. There's also a risk of him having a career year in a contract year, or even worse, in a UFA year. Obviously if Bennett is going to have a 2003-2004 Donovan year I want him doing it with the Flames, but I'd rather not have him explode in an offensive year and then have to pay him for it under the belief he's not that player long term.

We've heard teams have expressed interest in Bennett previously, maybe there's a good fit with an asset rich team looking for what he brings to a lineup. Maybe packaged with something else, there's a good young asset to add that fits immediately in the top 6.

A guy like Mangiapane is showing that his value may rise in the near future, and he looks like he could be a stop-gap fit on that 2nd line. Moving him doesn't move the needle for the cap either, so there really isn't much incentive to move him.

Janko's value has never been lower, Lucic and potentially Frolik have negative value and Czar/Quine have no value.

But if you could attach something to Bennett, you could probably get a player, or at the least, tip the scales of a deal towards consummation.

If you put together a lineup without Bennett but with a good secondary player, the lineup looks pretty good imo.

Gaudreau - Monahan - Lindholm
Tkachuk - Backlund - Rackell
Lucic - Ryan - Mangiapane
Reider - Janko - Czar

[カナダ人です]

Sam Bennett for Jake Virtanen? Fresh start for both.

[Kovaz]

Fair enough, if you can add to Bennett to get Rakell I'd drive him to the airport myself.

But if Bennett has to be the secondary piece, then the real important discussion is about the primary piece. Is it our first rounder? Is it Valimaki or Kylington? That's where I hesitate. But at that point, this isn't a "Bennett" trade, it's a "Valimaki+ for Forward X" trade, and to me Bennett is no more or less expendable than any other bottom 6er, and his inclusion would be totally dependant on how big that + needs to be.

As a side-note, I'm really hesitant about any win-now type trade. No matter what trades are out there, the most important thing for this team is that Gaudreau and Monahan need to be highly effective top-line threats. We aren't going to meaningfully upgrade on Lindholm as 1RW, and we aren't going to meaningfully upgrade on Tkachuk-Lindholm-Giordano as linemates on the 1st PP unit. Upgrading any other spot on the roster is a moot point unless those two are stars again. And if we need to re-tool, I'd rather have all of those pieces either on the roster or as trade chips.

[Flash Walken]

Originally Posted by カナダ人です

Sam Bennett for Jake Virtanen? Fresh start for both.

ew

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

Ya, I'm not at all convinced by bingos argument last year that he's a top end 3rd liner, or this year's argument that he's an adequate 3rd liner.

The focus on Bennett of course is because this is the Bennett thread to discuss his trade value, as bingo himself has bumped from time to time for Bennett related stats and opinions, and because he is having yet another lacklustre start compared other contributors.

There's also a janko thread on the first page discussing his lacklustre start, there are threads for hanifin, tkachuk and lucic on page 2 etc etc.

Why shouldn't I focus on Bennett in the Bennett thread? He's one of my favourite players.

"Bingo's argument" is simple stats. Nothing magical or interpretive there. His production rates across a full season in each of the last two years is a third line guy.

You don't have to believe simple stats, but there' hardly an "argument" there ... just an ability to look things up and report them.

We get that this is a Bennett topic and what to do with it. But why did you bump it? Why is Bennett your focus?

[Bingo]

I just can't believe the focus is on Bennett and Backlund when the top line is a complete no show in five on five play.

[chedder]

Originally Posted by Bingo

I just can't believe the focus is on Bennett and Backlund when the top line is a complete no show in five on five play.

I think that's why. Everyone knows the first line is brutal but hope they're skilled and professional enough to figure it out. When the first line isn't working you would hope the 2nd line center could provide something. Agree on Bennett though. He's doing what a third line winger is expected to do, minus the penalties.

[Flash Walken]

Originally Posted by Bingo

"Bingo's argument" is simple stats. Nothing magical or interpretive there. His production rates across a full season in each of the last two years is a third line guy.

You don't have to believe simple stats, but there' hardly an "argument" there ... just an ability to look things up and report them.

yeah, I don't think you represent the stats appropriately.

For example:

Originally Posted by Bingo

On the team Bennett's rankings ... (forwards)

Goals60 - 10th (4th line)
PrimaryA60 - 5th (2nd line)
Shots60 - 8th (3rd line)
ExpGoals60 - 2nd (1st line)
IndCF60 - 7th (3rd line)
IndSCF60 - 2nd (1st line)
IndHDCF60 - 1st (1st line)

Once again ... not going to have much luck making that fourth line case.

He produces goals at a 4th line rate, but played 30% of the season with the hottest player in the lineup at the time.

We've been over this:

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

The Flames were the 2nd highest scoring team in the league this year, so how does Bennett compare to his own teammates?

Frozen tools says Bennett scores the same goals per 60 as jankowski, scores less assists per 60 than Janko, less points per 60 than Janko but more shots per 60.

Does that mean Jankowski is also an above average 3rd liner? Jankowski also kills penalties.

In my opinion, of course Jankowski isn't an above average 3rd liner, and he's not better than Bennett. So what's Bennett?

Take out Quine and Bennett was the 10th best forward in points per 60 on the Flames this year at 1.7. Czarnik was 1.8.

Tied for 9th with Hathaway in goals per 60. 11th in Assists per 60, behind Dube.

These do not scream above average 3rd liner to me. The suggest an excellent 4th liner though. Tied for 9th in goals per 60 with Hathaway again does not scream above average third liner. Suggests perhaps a top tier 4th liner though. We all can acknowledge Hathaway is a 4th line player, right?

If you gave Roslovic 13 minutes a game instead of 10, he'd be right there with Bennett. I don't think Roslovic is an above average 3rd liner.

You could probably convince me that Bennett is a 3rd line player on a contending roster in a good year.

But if you can't trust him defensively, and he can't kill penalties, just how good of a 3rd liner could he possibly be?

This year, without significant icetime in the top 6, he's on pace for:

12 goals and 21 points.

That's 4th line production.

last year after 20 games without significant icetime in the top 6, he was on pace for:

8 goals and 21 points

Czarnik by comparison was on pace for 27 points. Janko on pace for 19. 4th liners. Janko exploded of course, but he's back to being a 4th liner this year.

I believe according to your stats that his time with Tkachuk and Backlund saw his points per 60 jump by 100%. So, even on the hottest offensive team in the west last year, when he didn't get icetime with the Tkachuk and Backlund, he produced at 4th line rate.

If you gave Hathaway the 3 extra minutes per game Bennett played, does Hathaway close the 2 goal gap between them over 70 games? Absolutely.

Is Hathaway out producing Bennett this year even though he's playing marginally fewer minutes? Yes he is.

Is Hathaway a 4th liner? Yes he is.

So what's Bennett then?

[Bingo]

I think you meant I produce stats that don't fit your narrative.

It's a pretty standard way to look at hockey players by listing points/60 as it normalizes ice time. It's literally the best way to sort out who should have a bigger role vs those that shouldn't.

If you produce stats without a spin you're just showing the numbers. If you battle hard to find a way to eliminate or reduce the impact of stats you're trying to find a way to hold a view.

I haven't fought the fight for Bennett to move up the lineup, I'm not in on the it's all coach's fault. I don't even press the bad luck angle.

But Sam Bennett produces at an average 3rd liner rate, those are facts, not spin. He generates more scoring chances than third line players as well, but can't finish them. Also a fact.

You can want him to be worse, but he just isn't.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by カナダ人です

Sam Bennett for Jake Virtanen? Fresh start for both.

Jankowski for Virtanen is a fairer trade.