Calgarypuck Forums - The Unofficial Calgary Flames Fan Community
Old 05-12-2019, 03:28 PM   #121
Johnny Makarov
First Line Centre
 
Johnny Makarov's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2017
Exp:
Default

Bennett is such a low hockey IQ derp it is hard to see him get anything more than $2 mil per. I guess it's karma for making fun of Taylor Hall all those Oiler years. Now we have one. One that can't put up points.

At best he can be a Matt Martin and hits everything that moves. Which is what this team needs.
__________________
AKA Sergei Gaudreau ‘Jeez, he really does loves Skittles.’ ”
Johnny Makarov is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Johnny Makarov For This Useful Post:
Old 05-12-2019, 04:12 PM   #122
DazzlinDino
First Line Centre
 
DazzlinDino's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Grew up in Calgary now living in USA
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Johnny Makarov View Post
Bennett is such a low hockey IQ derp it is hard to see him get anything more than $2 mil per. I guess it's karma for making fun of Taylor Hall all those Oiler years. Now we have one. One that can't put up points.

At best he can be a Matt Martin and hits everything that moves. Which is what this team needs.

Mind explaining what your definition of low IQ especially since some posters were saying the same thing about Taylor Hall? How and in what way does IQ affect Bennett's contributions on the Flames? Your statement he has such a low IQ is based on what criteria? Just curious.
DazzlinDino is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-12-2019, 04:58 PM   #123
Johnny Makarov
First Line Centre
 
Johnny Makarov's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2017
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by DazzlinDino View Post
Mind explaining what your definition of low IQ especially since some posters were saying the same thing about Taylor Hall? How and in what way does IQ affect Bennett's contributions on the Flames? Your statement he has such a low IQ is based on what criteria? Just curious.
Have you not watched him play the past 4 years? He prob leads the league in offensive zone penalties and has negligible offensive finish. Only a flaming homer can't see past that. I guess he hits hard and has an awesome moustache... great..
__________________
AKA Sergei Gaudreau ‘Jeez, he really does loves Skittles.’ ”
Johnny Makarov is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-12-2019, 05:00 PM   #124
DomeFoam
Crash and Bang Winger
 
DomeFoam's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: Kelowna
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Johnny Makarov View Post
Have you not watched him play the past 4 years? He prob leads the league in offensive zone penalties and has negligible offensive finish. Only a flaming homer can't see past that. I guess he hits hard and has an awesome moustache... great..
Why are you chirping the only guy that gave a #### this post season?
DomeFoam is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to DomeFoam For This Useful Post:
Old 05-12-2019, 05:09 PM   #125
dammage79
Franchise Player
 
dammage79's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Calgary
Exp:
Default

I'm thinking Bennett signs a 3 year deal. 2.5 per season.
The upper end of his ceiling may never be met but anyone who thinks he doesnt have a positive impact on this roster is not seeing thing properly.

Since the playoffs ended for Calgary everyone's crying about the team give a frack meter and yet here we are in this particular thread thinking removing Bennett makes the give a crap meter better!

I get it, the series loss was disheartening but I didnt think it would take this long to tone down the lynching of core players.
dammage79 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 05-12-2019, 05:32 PM   #126
transplant99
Fearmongerer
 
transplant99's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Wondering when # became hashtag and not a number sign.
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by dammage79 View Post
I'm thinking Bennett signs a 3 year deal. 2.5 per season.
The upper end of his ceiling may never be met but anyone who thinks he doesnt have a positive impact on this roster is not seeing thing properly.

Since the playoffs ended for Calgary everyone's crying about the team give a frack meter and yet here we are in this particular thread thinking removing Bennett makes the give a crap meter better!

I get it, the series loss was disheartening but I didnt think it would take this long to tone down the lynching of core players.


I've seen this a few times now.

Sam Bennett ....a guy who is a career average 30 pt,3rd line, right winger who hits a bit and will defend team mates while being defensively average or below.....is a "core player"?

I must be completely out to lunch.

More to the point though...this is not about "removing" him, but it is about what to pay him.

Seems like 2.5 per for 3 or 4 years is kind of the consensus?
__________________
Quote:
Tkachuk is more like Marchand than the other guys though. He's really ****ing good. He's just a total butthole.
Unknown Kings fan
transplant99 is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to transplant99 For This Useful Post:
Old 05-12-2019, 05:41 PM   #127
dammage79
Franchise Player
 
dammage79's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Calgary
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by transplant99 View Post
I've seen this a few times now.

Sam Bennett ....a guy who is a career average 30 pt,3rd line, right winger who hits a bit and will defend team mates while being defensively average or below.....is a "core player"?

I must be completely out to lunch.

More to the point though...this is not about "removing" him, but it is about what to pay him.

Seems like 2.5 per for 3 or 4 years is kind of the consensus?
Like it or not, I think the organization does in fact hold Sam Bennett in the core player ranks. So as we fans come to our own conclusions we dont run the team. And there has never been any sign pointing otherwise that Sam Bennett is not held in high esteem with the team. Do they want more production from him? Obviously.

But they have also been on record coveting the rest of his game.
dammage79 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 05-12-2019, 05:41 PM   #128
DazzlinDino
First Line Centre
 
DazzlinDino's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Grew up in Calgary now living in USA
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Johnny Makarov View Post
Have you not watched him play the past 4 years? He prob leads the league in offensive zone penalties and has negligible offensive finish. Only a flaming homer can't see past that. I guess he hits hard and has an awesome moustache... great..

You didn't answer the question. Are you saying taking offensive penalties, and and has negligible offensive finish is a product of low IQ? How do you define low IQ is it a product of your opinion or is is a measurable stat based on actual criteria?
DazzlinDino is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to DazzlinDino For This Useful Post:
Old 05-12-2019, 06:04 PM   #129
transplant99
Fearmongerer
 
transplant99's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Wondering when # became hashtag and not a number sign.
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by dammage79 View Post
Like it or not, I think the organization does in fact hold Sam Bennett in the core player ranks. So as we fans come to our own conclusions we dont run the team. And there has never been any sign pointing otherwise that Sam Bennett is not held in high esteem with the team. Do they want more production from him? Obviously.

But they have also been on record coveting the rest of his game.
Yeah i get that the management seem to like the guy...they like all their guys.

When i think of a "core" player though, i think of a guy that would be hard to upgrade on and even harder to deal away.

He is no where close to that...at least at this point.
__________________
Quote:
Tkachuk is more like Marchand than the other guys though. He's really ****ing good. He's just a total butthole.
Unknown Kings fan
transplant99 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-12-2019, 11:45 PM   #130
Lil Pedro
First Line Centre
 
Lil Pedro's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Calgary
Exp:
Default

Bennett doesn't deserve a dime over $2 million...too many posters give this guy too much credit for playing good for 5 playoff games but forget that for most nights in the regular season he was a non-factor. If Bennett wants more, let him get that on another team.
Lil Pedro is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Lil Pedro For This Useful Post:
Old 05-13-2019, 12:23 AM   #131
TheScorpion
First round-bust
 
TheScorpion's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: Canada
Exp:
Default

Bennett might not have deserved a penny over $2 million 10 years ago, when the cap was $45 million. But it's almost twice that, now. In a league where the cap is soon to be $83 million, $2 million is a pitiful salary. It's hardly 2% of the cap. On a 23-man roster, the theoretical "average" player under an $83 million cap would receive $3.6 million. I don't think that salary is out of the question for Bennett, depending on the term.

The cap has risen. A Flames player will soon make over $10 million a year -- rightfully so. If Iginla was in his prime today, he'd probably get $13 million. And $2 million is just too low for a player in Bennett's position. It's not realistic anymore.
__________________
Milan Lucic = underrated
TheScorpion is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-13-2019, 12:53 AM   #132
Strange Brew
Franchise Player
 
Strange Brew's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TheScorpion View Post
Bennett might not have deserved a penny over $2 million 10 years ago, when the cap was $45 million. But it's almost twice that, now. In a league where the cap is soon to be $83 million, $2 million is a pitiful salary. It's hardly 2% of the cap. On a 23-man roster, the theoretical "average" player under an $83 million cap would receive $3.6 million. I don't think that salary is out of the question for Bennett, depending on the term.

The cap has risen. A Flames player will soon make over $10 million a year -- rightfully so. If Iginla was in his prime today, he'd probably get $13 million. And $2 million is just too low for a player in Bennett's position. It's not realistic anymore.
The fact that the Flames need another big time, big money player is exactly why you don’t pay Sam Bennett $3.6 million IMO. Your top guys are going to make way more than the average so your third line guys have to come in under. There is no other way to do it.

The Flames have had overpaid bottom of the roster players for quite some time now. I’m really hoping that trend reverses.
Strange Brew is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-13-2019, 01:13 AM   #133
TheScorpion
First round-bust
 
TheScorpion's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: Canada
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Strange Brew View Post
The fact that the Flames need another big time, big money player is exactly why you don’t pay Sam Bennett $3.6 million IMO. Your top guys are going to make way more than the average so your third line guys have to come in under. There is no other way to do it.

The Flames have had overpaid bottom of the roster players for quite some time now. I’m really hoping that trend reverses.
Yeah, I wasn't pointing to $3.6 as being the ideal contract. I think it very much could happen, but only if the term is super long and the Flames feel that they can get good value on the back half of a long-term deal if they project Bennett as improving substantially. Look at Barkov's last contract, for instance (although he is much much better) -- they locked in a guy with only one 40+ point season to his name to a bigger deal than maybe some people expected, but him getting $5.9 million now as a 96-point-scoring two-way machine is one of the best contracts around. Bennett will 99.99% likely never reach those heights, but if the Flames look at him maybe being a 55- or 60-point winger with energy in three or four years, maybe it'd be prudent to lock him up at significant term now. It's all gonna be an exercise in measuring the floor against the ceiling. Is paying Bennett over $3 million to score around 30 points and throw hits ideal? Probably not. But will it overwhelmingly break the bank a la James Neal? Certainly not even close to that same extent. And the upside provided by Bennett progressing is very attractive. If he becomes a top-six forward (which I think is entirely possible), then a deal around or above $3 million could quickly look like a bargain.

Either way, I think a short-term contract is a great deal more likely, but it still likely clocks in above $2.5 million, perhaps closer to $3.
__________________
Milan Lucic = underrated

Last edited by TheScorpion; 05-13-2019 at 01:24 AM.
TheScorpion is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to TheScorpion For This Useful Post:
Old 05-13-2019, 10:00 AM   #134
transplant99
Fearmongerer
 
transplant99's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Wondering when # became hashtag and not a number sign.
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TheScorpion View Post
Bennett might not have deserved a penny over $2 million 10 years ago, when the cap was $45 million. But it's almost twice that, now. In a league where the cap is soon to be $83 million, $2 million is a pitiful salary. It's hardly 2% of the cap. On a 23-man roster, the theoretical "average" player under an $83 million cap would receive $3.6 million. I don't think that salary is out of the question for Bennett, depending on the term.

The cap has risen. A Flames player will soon make over $10 million a year -- rightfully so. If Iginla was in his prime today, he'd probably get $13 million. And $2 million is just too low for a player in Bennett's position. It's not realistic anymore.
Sure...if he was an average player.

Is he? Even on this team, never mind league wide?

Depending what kind of metrics you use he could be anywhere from 10-15 on this 20 man roster. Then add in that the better players are going to make more while the others make less...and what does that leave?

If he does pop and starts to look like an useful player offensively, then you deal with that then. Its why IMO this deal has to be a short one. Though even at 3 years there is risk on both sides, it seems the most fair for both.

He reminds me very much now of Patrick Maroon when he was starting to find his game with the Ducks, though Sam still has a bigger upside. That upside is starting to seem further away each year however.
__________________
Quote:
Tkachuk is more like Marchand than the other guys though. He's really ****ing good. He's just a total butthole.
Unknown Kings fan
transplant99 is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to transplant99 For This Useful Post:
Old 05-13-2019, 10:49 AM   #135
The Boy Wonder
First Line Centre
 
The Boy Wonder's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by transplant99 View Post
Sure...if he was an average player.

Is he? Even on this team, never mind league wide?

Depending what kind of metrics you use he could be anywhere from 10-15 on this 20 man roster. Then add in that the better players are going to make more while the others make less...and what does that leave?

If he does pop and starts to look like an useful player offensively, then you deal with that then. Its why IMO this deal has to be a short one. Though even at 3 years there is risk on both sides, it seems the most fair for both.

He reminds me very much now of Patrick Maroon when he was starting to find his game with the Ducks, though Sam still has a bigger upside. That upside is starting to seem further away each year however.
Pretty sure that with some metrics you could rank him anywhere from 1-12 on this team...

Playoff points this season as an example

Seriously though, I hope he gets a two year deal at around $3 Mil, keep him hungry and give him a bridge and hope he breaks out late like backlund did.

Honestly though, he deserves at least stajan money at this point, and anyone who is saying he doesn't really hasn't watched any of the big time games where he shows up.
The Boy Wonder is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-13-2019, 10:52 AM   #136
Bingo
Owner
 
Bingo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Calgary
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by transplant99 View Post
LOL!

Spin?

The guy had a lot more to say than just spin. He dug into the Frolik comparison you brought up with detail as to how the goals were scored. That's not spin, it's actual research.

Frankly I think the Flames need a better top six forward than either Frolik or Bennett next season. If both are back they should be bottom six without injury.

But Frolik bested Bennett by just two primary five on five points last year, so they're pretty much the same offensively in production and chance generation.

I think Bennett falls when you bring shut down roles into the conversation.
Bingo is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Bingo For This Useful Post:
Old 05-13-2019, 11:42 AM   #137
transplant99
Fearmongerer
 
transplant99's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Wondering when # became hashtag and not a number sign.
Exp:
Default

Sorry man.....its spin to the max. Its making excuses to believe that the player is something better than he is.

Its just nonsense to suggest "hey that guy scored into an empty net but Sam didnt so its not a fair comparison...yadda yadda"

You know why Bennett doesn't get empty net points? Cause his coach doesn't trust him enough to put him out in that situation, because he isnt good enough defensively.

Frolik out produced Bennett with the same amount of ice time and way less PP time. Period. He was the better player last year and has been every year.

I realize that its becoming some sort of offense to state that Bennett is what he is around here though...... I THOUGHT this was about what he should be paid but once again has turned into a "how can you disparage the moustache" instead (even when that isn't what was happening).

I hope Sam stays, i hope he gets better and "pops" at some point. The team needs his style of play and preferably from more than just him.

I hope that the team doesn't pay him while expecting more production and instead pays him to be what he has been for 4 years now.
__________________
Quote:
Tkachuk is more like Marchand than the other guys though. He's really ****ing good. He's just a total butthole.
Unknown Kings fan
transplant99 is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to transplant99 For This Useful Post:
Old 05-13-2019, 12:22 PM   #138
Bingo
Owner
 
Bingo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Calgary
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by transplant99 View Post
Sorry man.....its spin to the max. Its making excuses to believe that the player is something better than he is.

Its just nonsense to suggest "hey that guy scored into an empty net but Sam didnt so its not a fair comparison...yadda yadda"

You know why Bennett doesn't get empty net points? Cause his coach doesn't trust him enough to put him out in that situation, because he isnt good enough defensively.

Frolik out produced Bennett with the same amount of ice time and way less PP time. Period. He was the better player last year and has been every year.

I realize that its becoming some sort of offense to state that Bennett is what he is around here though...... I THOUGHT this was about what he should be paid but once again has turned into a "how can you disparage the moustache" instead (even when that isn't what was happening).

I hope Sam stays, i hope he gets better and "pops" at some point. The team needs his style of play and preferably from more than just him.

I hope that the team doesn't pay him while expecting more production and instead pays him to be what he has been for 4 years now.
You don't have to apologize for thinking differently than me.

Sam Bennett had 19 primary points five on five with about 800 minutes of ice time.
Michael Frolik had 21 primary points five on five with about 800 minutes of ice time.

That's not spin ... that's a quick summary that is readily available on line.

His "spin" pointed out that Frolik's offence disappeared when he wasn't with the second line, but Bennett's offence came primarily from the bottom six without the big 5 forwards to help him.

How can that be spin in this discussion? I don't think he nor I are suggesting giving him more money because of this, but you brought in the Frolik comparison and looking at how and why both players are producing certainly isn't spin. If you didn't want to get into such a topic why did you start it?

It's prudent research.
Bingo is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Bingo For This Useful Post:
Old 05-13-2019, 12:43 PM   #139
pepper24
Franchise Player
 
pepper24's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Calgary, AB
Exp:
Default

I'd only do short term. 1 or 2 year extension tops at less than $3M. He has settled in as a decent 3rd line player but Flames must remember we have Mangiapane and Dube that can help fill out the middle 6 on forward on cheaper deals if they continue to progress.
pepper24 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-13-2019, 12:54 PM   #140
transplant99
Fearmongerer
 
transplant99's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Wondering when # became hashtag and not a number sign.
Exp:
Default

Old man rant time:

Hockey is played on frozen water....not spread sheets.

Who played against tougher opposition?

Who was better on Tuesdays and who was better on Saturdays?

Who was better when Bill Peters was getting smoked with errant pucks wearing a blue suit?

I mean its ALL spin when you are breaking down to these types of minutiae.

You call it prudent research, i do not.

This is only my opinion of course, but the stuff i see trying to explain or excuse things in a game that is relatively straight forward to see what is occurring is becoming mind numbing to me.

Even the whole "he is an above average 3rd liner" you trotted out...like really? So he is closer to a #7 than a #8? Does that truly matter at all?

Some players are good at X others at Y and others at both. Some at none. Who plays where and with whom will always be part of the equation for sure, but with 4 years of history, that argument doesn't fly either. Bennett has had MULTIPLE turns with the best players on this club and failed repeatedly.

When it comes to the player this subject is about, i see more excuses, (and have for years now), about how he is this and that or will be this and that....and it simply has not manifested itself to anything close. The thing is, it hasnt even had the appearance of happening, yet here we are still seeing the same old song and dance being trotted out for him because he found his game for 10 days in April. He was great for 2 weeks so now we ignore the last 4 seasons?

Frolik is/has been a much better player than Sam Bennett. You can disagree if you like, but in reality there is no way that can be substantiated. Could that change based on their ages? Of course and i really hope it does. Im just not seeing it nor counting on it based on the last 4 seasons however. I hope he is not paid for that expectation either...really is all im saying.

Go ahead and scold me now, but nothing presented here with "research" is going to change what Sam Bennett is thus far in his Flame career.

I've been wrong before though and hopefully will be around to be wrong again.
__________________
Quote:
Tkachuk is more like Marchand than the other guys though. He's really ****ing good. He's just a total butthole.
Unknown Kings fan
transplant99 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 11:41 AM.

Calgary Flames
2017-18




Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright Calgarypuck 2016