05-27-2018, 11:30 PM
|
#1081
|
Crash and Bang Winger
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by I_H8_Crawford
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)
|
I don't really buy the garbage coaching argument as the main reason for Bennett's development. Monahan, Gaudreau, Tkachuk, Backlund, Frolik, Ferland all got better and put up career numbers under GG. If he was such a horrible coach, why did those guys produce so well? Good players produce irregardless of who their coach is.
As for the Crosby argument, he was on pace for 100pts+ every single year he was coached by Bylsma. I wouldn't call that "done" by any stretch of the imagination. Furthermore, during his 5.5yr tenure with the Pens, they finished no worse than 2nd in their division with no less than 47wins (minus lockout) and 100pts+ every year... hardly garbage coaching. Bylsma was fired because he couldn't formulate a strategy to get his team over the hump in the playoffs, not because of how he got his players to produce.
Last edited by yourbestfriend; 05-28-2018 at 12:49 AM.
|
|
|
The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to yourbestfriend For This Useful Post:
|
|
05-28-2018, 08:28 AM
|
#1082
|
Franchise Player
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Calgary
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by yourbestfriend
I don't really buy the garbage coaching argument as the main reason for Bennett's development. Monahan, Gaudreau, Tkachuk, Backlund, Frolik, Ferland all got better and put up career numbers under GG. If he was such a horrible coach, why did those guys produce so well? Good players produce irregardless of who their coach is.
As for the Crosby argument, he was on pace for 100pts+ every single year he was coached by Bylsma. I wouldn't call that "done" by any stretch of the imagination. Furthermore, during his 5.5yr tenure with the Pens, they finished no worse than 2nd in their division with no less than 47wins (minus lockout) and 100pts+ every year... hardly garbage coaching. Bylsma was fired because he couldn't formulate a strategy to get his team over the hump in the playoffs, not because of how he got his players to produce.
|
I was actually referring to Mike Johnston, not Bylsma for Crosby:
https://ca.sports.yahoo.com/blogs/nh...214158198.html
http://www.thehockeynews.com/news/ar...portland-coach
https://www.nhl.com/news/sidney-cros...rs/c-279570784
And out of the players you listed, I would argue that only Monahan, Tkachuck, and Gaudreau had good years last year (I think Ferland is more a product of Gaudreau/Monahan... i.e. put Bennett there for as much time and he scores as much too).
Frolik was terrible last season, Backlund was terrible. Hamilton I argue hasn't grown much under GG. Gio - points decline. Brodie - 'nuff said. Bennett went from promising fist liner under Hartley to a "bust". Brouwer - went from solid player to 4th line garbage.
GG was awful and IMO did more harm than good to this team overall. I want to see what another coach can do before curtain calling Bennett... it just seems too convenient that he went from promising pick, looking like future 1st liner under Hartley to 3rd line bust under GG.
GG was terrible, and I am glad he is with the Oilers now so he can ruin them even more than they currently are.
|
|
|
05-28-2018, 09:00 AM
|
#1083
|
Owner
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Calgary
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by I_H8_Crawford
Frolik was terrible last season, Backlund was terrible. Hamilton I argue hasn't grown much under GG. Gio - points decline. Brodie - 'nuff said. Bennett went from promising fist liner under Hartley to a "bust". Brouwer - went from solid player to 4th line garbage.
|
Counting stats Frolik hit a wall for sure.
Backlund put up 8 less points than the previous year (his career best), but similar stats to his second best season two years earlier under Hartley.
Both continued with their possession stats but had near NHL worst (for players that play) on ice shooting percentages which are unlikely to repeat.
Frolik could be decline and if that's the case it really isn't coaching as well.
|
|
|
05-28-2018, 09:02 AM
|
#1084
|
Franchise Player
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Springbank
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by I_H8_Crawford
I was actually referring to Mike Johnston, not Bylsma for Crosby:
https://ca.sports.yahoo.com/blogs/nh...214158198.html
http://www.thehockeynews.com/news/ar...portland-coach
https://www.nhl.com/news/sidney-cros...rs/c-279570784
And out of the players you listed, I would argue that only Monahan, Tkachuck, and Gaudreau had good years last year (I think Ferland is more a product of Gaudreau/Monahan... i.e. put Bennett there for as much time and he scores as much too).
Frolik was terrible last season, Backlund was terrible. Hamilton I argue hasn't grown much under GG. Gio - points decline. Brodie - 'nuff said. Bennett went from promising fist liner under Hartley to a "bust". Brouwer - went from solid player to 4th line garbage.
GG was awful and IMO did more harm than good to this team overall. I want to see what another coach can do before curtain calling Bennett... it just seems too convenient that he went from promising pick, looking like future 1st liner under Hartley to 3rd line bust under GG.
GG was terrible, and I am glad he is with the Oilers now so he can ruin them even more than they currently are.
|
Frolik had a bad year under GG last year. He also, in GG's first season, had a much better year than under Hartley. So why was his second year GG's fault but his previous one was not to GG's credit? Backlund also had a career year under GG in 16-17, and last year was his third highest production-wise. Hamilton's two best years have been under GG. Giordano declining? At 34? Shocking. Brouwer's failure has been shocking, but that's the player. What exactly do you think GG should have done with him to improve his production? And Brodie - it's hard to determine which years are the outliers. He's had more years under 40 points than over.
|
|
|
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to GioforPM For This Useful Post:
|
|
05-28-2018, 11:33 AM
|
#1086
|
Franchise Player
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Springbank
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by DeluxeMoustache
We all know that Hamilton’s 43-50 points in 82 games in Calgary are better than his 42 points in 72 in Boston, he has really flourished.
So is the argument that Gulutzan was a good coach and got the most out of the team individually and collectively?
|
No, the argument is that GG didn't cause certain players to go down in production just like he didn't cause certain players to go up. I mean, what in GG's coaching caused Frolik do have a bad year? What caused Gio to have lesser production? What caused Gaudreau to go up?
|
|
|
The Following User Says Thank You to GioforPM For This Useful Post:
|
|
05-28-2018, 11:48 AM
|
#1087
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by GioforPM
No, the argument is that GG didn't cause certain players to go down in production just like he didn't cause certain players to go up. I mean, what in GG's coaching caused Frolik do have a bad year? What caused Gio to have lesser production? What caused Gaudreau to go up?
|
Stupid, slow hockey, achieved by implementing the game plan prescribed by the coaches, creates a major challenge for the players that are not elite, that do not have the skill to elevate them above that.
Gaudreau and Monahan are in the years where they are entering their prime, they have predictable and quality linemates in each other, are given top line minutes, and were going to score regardless. And drag the guy on the wing along with them, lucky man that he is.
Gio produced less because he and Hamilton each went to the damn corner waiting for Mike Smith to decide who he was going to pass it to, while the opponents set up their D structure. A representative example of stupid hockey.
I will say that Gulutzan had a team that had a slow transition and did not leverage the abilities of the players on the back end. Care to argue that?
|
|
|
The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to DeluxeMoustache For This Useful Post:
|
|
05-28-2018, 12:46 PM
|
#1088
|
Franchise Player
Join Date: May 2016
Location: ATCO Field, Section 201
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bingo
Counting stats Frolik hit a wall for sure.
Backlund put up 8 less points than the previous year (his career best), but similar stats to his second best season two years earlier under Hartley.
Both continued with their possession stats but had near NHL worst (for players that play) on ice shooting percentages which are unlikely to repeat.
Frolik could be decline and if that's the case it really isn't coaching as well.
|
Frolik's greatest value is as a shut down player. I have no problem with his contributions because he kills penalties well, and is responsible in his own zone (with the exception of the flub against Vegas). I would like to see Frolik and Backlund lean into that shut down role. A part of that is moving Tkachuk into a different line. The other part would be adding a player who can check well. If I had pick a darkhorse for that role I would say that player is Dube.
|
|
|
The Following User Says Thank You to TheIronMaiden For This Useful Post:
|
|
05-28-2018, 02:45 PM
|
#1089
|
Franchise Player
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Springbank
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by DeluxeMoustache
Stupid, slow hockey, achieved by implementing the game plan prescribed by the coaches, creates a major challenge for the players that are not elite, that do not have the skill to elevate them above that.
Gaudreau and Monahan are in the years where they are entering their prime, they have predictable and quality linemates in each other, are given top line minutes, and were going to score regardless. And drag the guy on the wing along with them, lucky man that he is.
Gio produced less because he and Hamilton each went to the damn corner waiting for Mike Smith to decide who he was going to pass it to, while the opponents set up their D structure. A representative example of stupid hockey.
I will say that Gulutzan had a team that had a slow transition and did not leverage the abilities of the players on the back end. Care to argue that?
|
So players that did better did so despite GG because they are elite. Elite players that didn't were because of GG. Got it. So why did Frolik have a great year under GG in 2016-17? And Backlund? Why didn't Versteeg sewer under GG? They aren't elite, but they did well.
Could it be that that production doesn't necessarily reflect coaching? I mean, GG was actually blamed for Brouwer's decline, which goes against all the "he gifts Brouwer too much opportunity" arguments.
|
|
|
05-28-2018, 03:01 PM
|
#1090
|
Acerbic Cyberbully
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: back in Chilliwack
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bingo
Counting stats Frolik hit a wall for sure...
Frolik could be decline and if that's the case it really isn't coaching as well.
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by GioforPM
Frolik had a bad year under GG last year. He also, in GG's first season, had a much better year than under Hartley. So why was his second year GG's fault but his previous one was not to GG's credit?...
|
Frolik scored 7 goals and 15 points in his first 36-games, and then suffered a broken jaw in a game with the SJ Sharks on 28 Dec. After he returned on 30 Jan he finished the season with 3 goals and 10 points in his final 34 games. I am not sure if he has started a decline, but I suspect his injury recovery factored into his offensively disappointing season.
|
|
|
The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Textcritic For This Useful Post:
|
|
05-28-2018, 03:06 PM
|
#1091
|
Franchise Player
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Springbank
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Textcritic
Frolik scored 7 goals and 15 points in his first 36-games, and then suffered a broken jaw in a game with the SJ Sharks on 28 Dec. After he returned on 30 Jan he finished the season with 3 goals and 10 points in his final 34 games. I am not sure if he has started a decline, but I suspect his injury recovery factored into his offensively disappointing season.
|
Plus the fact that the whole team went into a tailspin after losing those must-win games right after he returned. Plus the psychology of being the goat against Vegas.
I think Frolik had a tough second half and could well rebound to some degree.
|
|
|
The Following User Says Thank You to GioforPM For This Useful Post:
|
|
05-28-2018, 03:14 PM
|
#1092
|
Franchise Player
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Textcritic
Frolik scored 7 goals and 15 points in his first 36-games, and then suffered a broken jaw in a game with the SJ Sharks on 28 Dec. After he returned on 30 Jan he finished the season with 3 goals and 10 points in his final 34 games. I am not sure if he has started a decline, but I suspect his injury recovery factored into his offensively disappointing season.
|
The drop in shooting % happened for a lot of players last year, and I attribute a lot of that to the system deployed.
Look at these changes in shooting % from 16/17 to 17/18:
Backlund: -4.7%
Bennett: -3.7%
Brodie: -3.3%
Brouwer: -7.5%
Ferland: +0.4%
Frolik: -2.4%
Gaudreau: +0.7%
Giordano: -1.8%
Hamilton: +0.4%
Hamonic: -3.2%
Monahan: +1.7%
Stajan: -4.0%
Tkachuk: +3.2%
The vast majority of players saw their shooting % drop a notable chunk last season. Tkachuk and Monahan are the only ones who saw any level of real improvement, and it's also worth noting that Gaudreau's shooting % was 13.4% and 14.8% in the two years prior to Gulutzan - and 10.6% and 9.9% with Gulutzan as the head coach.
I have a hard time blaming individual players for drops in production last season because it was rampant throughout the lineup - and that points to a systematic issue more-so than an issue at the individual level in my eyes. It's about where they're taking their shots from, or how slow the play develops allowing defensive players to get into shooting lanes.
|
|
|
The Following 8 Users Say Thank You to ComixZone For This Useful Post:
|
|
05-28-2018, 03:55 PM
|
#1093
|
First Line Centre
|
I left CP for about a month. Come back and realize we are still debating the same thing
after taking a month and thinking very little about this stuff, I tend to think that GG's system just isn't NHL calibre, and all - in - all (of course anyone can find an exception to any blanket statement) Flames non-elite players performed worse than they did under Hartley.
There has to be something for Bennett to go from the forum's darling to the whipping boy and im pretty sure it wasn't that he became a bad hockey player all of a sudden between hartley and GG.
Bennett will be just fine. Let the kid come in hungry and hopefully a more hands-on coach in BP will have a positive impact on his confidence
|
|
|
The Following User Says Thank You to The Boy Wonder For This Useful Post:
|
|
06-28-2018, 11:03 AM
|
#1094
|
Franchise Player
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Calgary, AB
|
Assuming Bennett isn't traded and starts the season with the Flames, what do the Flames do if Bennett continues to struggle in the last year of his 'show me' deal?
Is it worthwhile giving him another $2.0M type deal next summer and just live with the fact he's a 3rd line winger and not who they drafted? Are Mangiapane, Dube, Foo etc. better and cheaper 3rd line wing options then? Do you trade or package Bennett then?
I just don't see him improving much. He can get better but don't see much upside.
|
|
|
06-28-2018, 11:23 AM
|
#1095
|
Franchise Player
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Barthelona
|
If Bennett doesn't show any progress, we still have to hold onto him, because we're not going to get any meaningful assets from trading him. Right now, he's a good option for a bottom 6 role, and we're thin on the bottom 6 as is.
Again, if he continues to stagnate, he's not going to see much of a raise, if any on his next contract anyway.
I really hope he's given some significant time in the top 6, and finds some success though, because that would be a real difference-maker for the team.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by snipetype
k im just not going to respond to your #### anymore because i have better things to do like #### my model girlfriend rather then try to convince people like you of commonly held hockey knowledge.
|
|
|
|
06-28-2018, 11:25 AM
|
#1096
|
Franchise Player
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Chicago
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Boy Wonder
I left CP for about a month. Come back and realize we are still debating the same thing
after taking a month and thinking very little about this stuff, I tend to think that GG's system just isn't NHL calibre, and all - in - all (of course anyone can find an exception to any blanket statement) Flames non-elite players performed worse than they did under Hartley.
There has to be something for Bennett to go from the forum's darling to the whipping boy and im pretty sure it wasn't that he became a bad hockey player all of a sudden between hartley and GG.
Bennett will be just fine. Let the kid come in hungry and hopefully a more hands-on coach in BP will have a positive impact on his confidence
|
The elite players did fine under Gulutzan.
It was the scrubs who didn't perform.
Which makes sense, I suppose. Talent is more likely to still produce in a crap system.
|
|
|
06-28-2018, 11:42 AM
|
#1097
|
Franchise Player
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Calgary, AB
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by pepper24
Assuming Bennett isn't traded and starts the season with the Flames, what do the Flames do if Bennett continues to struggle in the last year of his 'show me' deal?
Is it worthwhile giving him another $2.0M type deal next summer and just live with the fact he's a 3rd line winger and not who they drafted? Are Mangiapane, Dube, Foo etc. better and cheaper 3rd line wing options then? Do you trade or package Bennett then?
I just don't see him improving much. He can get better but don't see much upside.
|
If Bennett doesn't take that next step, the Flames could still use him on the bottom 6. His trade value would be too low and there would still be a chance he breaks out. $2.0M for bottom 6 player is fine. It's only 2.5% of the cap.
|
|
|
06-28-2018, 11:45 AM
|
#1098
|
First Line Centre
|
If Bennett doesn't break out at least he won't cost much.
I'd be happy to have him on our 3rd line going forward even if he doesn't improve much.
|
|
|
06-28-2018, 11:46 AM
|
#1099
|
Franchise Player
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Springbank
|
Bennett will break out somewhat and we will all be "should we trade him now when he has more value?"
|
|
|
06-28-2018, 11:58 AM
|
#1100
|
Franchise Player
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Calgary
|
Just going to cross-post this here:
Quote:
Originally Posted by GranteedEV
Last three seasons:
Sam Bennett has 69 points in 2978 5v5 minutes
Elias Lindholm has 58 points in 3178 5v5 minutes
The difference in what you are calling "consistently reliable"?
Elias Lindholm is 2nd on the Carolina Hurricanes in PP TOI (probably because he's a RHS) over that period with 574 minutes of PP TOI logged. You can safely assume he was playing with first unit players like Aho, Staal, Skinner, and Teravainen over that period.
Sam Bennett is 5th on the Calgary Flames among forwards in PP TOI over that period with 355 minutes of PP TOI logged. While he did spend time with Backlund, he spent limited PP time with Gaudreau, Monahan, or Tkachuk when he was out there.
Perhaps the fact that Bennett's potential power play roles are saturated by guys like Gaudreau, Monahan, Backlund, and Tkachuk has something to do with why you think Lindholm is a better player.
Because based on production in a situation that isn't based on a coach's whim (5 on 5) favours Sam Bennett - even though he spent long periods of that time dragging around Marcus Granlund, Troy Brouwer, Lance Bouma, Garnet Hathaway, Alex Chiasson, Curtis Lazar, etc AND was a year younger than Lindholm in the same period.
Which center led our team in 5v5 scoring in the 2017 playoffs? Who was our 3C for that entire season en route to the playoffs despite some hodgepodge line construction? What does it mean to you to be "able to prove one can play center if needed" when Bill Peters allegedly jerked him around to the wing for his entire career and intends to start him at wing next season? Is it faceoffs? Because Bennett himself was 54.3% there last year.
Gets pretty annoying to see people disparage Bennett. He's in tough on a team with some really good LHS forwards ahead of him on the power play, and he's gotten dealt a pretty weak hand in terms of linemates whilst playing for a coach who was obviously pretty toxic for his confidence.
|
__________________
"May those who accept their fate find happiness. May those who defy it find glory."
|
|
|
The Following User Says Thank You to GranteedEV For This Useful Post:
|
|
Thread Tools |
Search this Thread |
|
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
All times are GMT -6. The time now is 03:30 PM.
|
|