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

[DeluxeMoustache]

Originally Posted by BigRed

Rico Fata was a tremendous skater. Man, could he move.

Carry on.

Sorry, it appears I said something confusing.

I was using the term skater to describe the players on the ice who are not the goalie.

What’s next, you are going to tell me the goalie wore skates too?

[DeluxeMoustache]

Originally Posted by BigRed

It means Sam's a straight ahead player. Doesn't see the ice well, doesn't anticipate, can't envision the play developing. As a result, he's not very good at using his linemates, or being useful to them.

In junior, he could take the puck and charge the net -- do it all himself -- because he was physically superior to the opposition.

In the NHL, he's not. That means old tunnel-vision Sammy's main shtick doesn't translate. And he's no good at finding a new one.

Many players play simple north south games, and work when a coach puts them with the right mix of players.

Lucic was productive with Krejci. How is his “Hockey IQ”?

[blender]

"It means Sam's a straight ahead player. Doesn't see the ice well, doesn't anticipate, can't envision the play developing. As a result, he's not very good at using his linemates, or being useful to them."

Fair enough, good answer.
I don't feel there is anything absolute about the qualities you describe. Coaching, preparation, visualization, practice, make people better at things.

The title of the thread references Bennett's value. If he is at bust-level value then it's no time to get rid of him given Flames lack of depth anyhow.

[BigRed]

Originally Posted by DeluxeMoustache

Sorry, it appears I said something confusing.

I was using the term skater to describe the players on the ice who are not the goalie.

What’s next, you are going to tell me the goalie wore skates too?

No, I think I'll stop trying to say anything to you, to spare us all the snotty replies!

[DeluxeMoustache]

Originally Posted by BigRed

No, I think I'll stop trying to say anything to you, to spare us all the snotty replies!

Are you trying for sanctimony so soon after your Fata comment?

[BigRed]

Originally Posted by blender

I don't feel there is anything absolute about the qualities you describe. Coaching, preparation, visualization, practice, make people better at things.

Yes and no. Some players, in all sports, just see the game better. They used to say the game slowed down for Gretzky. When you watched him, it felt like he saw things before they happened.

Some players have remarkable awareness, and can track multiple paths of motion at once. Some don't. That's hockey IQ. Doesn't have anything to do with footspeed. Gaudreau has it. Tkachuk has it. Monahan to a lesser degree.

Bennett simply does not. That's why he has to do things by himself, but he's no McDavid in terms of speed or hands and typically fails.

[Jiri Hrdina]

Originally Posted by DeluxeMoustache

Cute conversation, nodding heads together about Bennett’s hockey IQ, and that he has no hope of being coached to improvement.

The people who saw him as the best skater in the playoffs still aren’t wrong.

Carry on

What makes good players good players is their ability to do it consistently

[really?]

The game he played in junior doesn't translate to the NHL and it's up to Sam Bennett to decide if he is willing and/or able to adapt his spatial awareness and processing to a top six level. As Big Red suggests some folks don't excel in broad task environments, and that doesn't make them unintelligent, or substandard, it simply means they tend to do better in situations that reward linear thinking.

Maybe this is just how Sam Bennett is wired. If he doesn't expand his awareness his skills could still allow him to excel in a third line role. Think Andrew Cogliano with fists. It wouldn't be what was hoped for when he was drafted, but in such a role it would be unfair to consider his career a bust. However he develops he brings an element the Flames need, and that by itself adds value to the roster. It is best to give him some time as he is a work in process.

[GranteedEV]

Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina

What makes good players good players is their ability to do it consistently

Being able to "do it consistently" is very much a function of getting consistent minutes in an appropriate role. Do you think Dylan Strome just "became good" in Chicago? Did Ryan Strome go from "not good" in Edmonton to "good" in New York?

I think that regardless of peoples' visual analysis of Bennett's game, his limited icetime in an elevated role most certainly impacts perception of his so-called hockey IQ. Gaudreau makes a bad play at the blue line, that is perceived as a high IQ player trying to make something happen, but if Bennett makes the same bad play it's low IQ. No, Bennett and Gaudreau are not comparable offensively. But certainly on a team where a guy like Mikael Backlund plays a key role without such "elite IQ" there is room to think a guy with Bennett's vision and skill might have more to show in a different role.

[DeluxeMoustache]

Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina

What makes good players good players is their ability to do it consistently

Agreed. But good players are typically given good opportunities.

Many posts have correlated Bennett’s performance with opportunity

Look at Michael Frolik. This guy is like clockwork. 0.5 points per game over a decade except for:
- 2 years in Chicago where they played him in a 4th line and PK specialist role
- this year where Blender Billy is scratching and burying him

Opportunity matters

[SportsJunky]

So it’s the coach’s fault? Gulutzan? Peters? Both?

Third coach will be the charm maybe.

[BigRed]

Originally Posted by really?

The game he played in junior doesn't translate to the NHL and it's up to Sam Bennett to decide if he is willing and/or able to adapt his spatial awareness and processing to a top six level. As Big Red suggests some folks don't excel in broad task environments, and that doesn't make them unintelligent, or substandard, it simply means they tend to do better in situations that reward linear thinking.



Maybe this is just how Sam Bennett is wired. If he doesn't expand his awareness his skills could still allow him to excel in a third line role. Think Andrew Cogliano with fists. It wouldn't be what was hoped for when he was drafted, but in such a role it would be unfair to consider his career a bust. However he develops he brings an element the Flames need, and that by itself adds value to the roster. It is best to give him some time as he is a work in process.

Best analysis of Bennett ever. Thank you for addressing the idea that “hockey IQ” does not equal general intelligence. A hockey game has got to be one of the broadest task environments (such a great term) out there. Not all minds are wired to think on multiple levels at once.

The problem with Bennett is that hockey hasn’t been a linear thinking sport for some time, and he’s no longer in a league where he can bend the game to his will, as he did in junior.

You seem to have some training in cognition. Can someone like Bennett really “expand his awareness?” Or does our wiring really just mean we are what we are?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[DeluxeMoustache]

Originally Posted by SportsJunky

So it’s the coach’s fault? Gulutzan? Peters? Both?

Third coach will be the charm maybe.

Not at all

Unlike many on the internet I don’t see things in binary / black and white

Clearly with Bennett he was good in his rookie year. With Backlund and Frolik. Very similar to Tkachuk the next year. But Bennett was rewarded by Gulutzan with bottom 6 blender time.

I agree with the points made that his junior game doesn’t fully translate, but it really does for few players.

Maybe he is the kind of guy that needs a few games to get chemistry with linemates

You can’t deny that he has not been given a solid opportunity with top linemates.

I think the Flames can get more out of the guy.

[Harry Lime]

Maybe it's a Wild Thing scenario, where he just needs to start wearing glasses in order to hit the strike zone.

[really?]

Originally Posted by BigRed

Best analysis of Bennett ever. Thank you for addressing the idea that “hockey IQ” does not equal general intelligence. A hockey game has got to be one of the broadest task environments (such a great term) out there. Not all minds are wired to think on multiple levels at once.

The problem with Bennett is that hockey hasn’t been a linear thinking sport for some time, and he’s no longer in a league where he can bend the game to his will, as he did in junior.

You seem to have some training in cognition. Can someone like Bennett really “expand his awareness?” Or does our wiring really just mean we are what we are?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Appreciate your generous acknowledgment, but my experience in cognitive matters ended when I left the field of social work two decades ago. People can alter how they process, but as with any trait those who naturally possess a certain aptitude are likely to have a higher ceiling in respect to that ability. Unfortunately we are creatures of habit and the more we do something, the more ingrained it becomes in the fabric of who we are. This is why I suggest Sam Bennett is a work in progress. It appears as you suggest that he has been able to bend the game to his will, it is now a journey from a decade plus habit of playing the game in that world, to the more anticipatory environment encountered in the NHL. They used to say similar things about Taylor Hall, and that seemed to work out alright. Well at least for a season.....

[Flash Walken]

There's a lot of indictment of the player going on here that I don't get or really enjoy frankly.

The issue is how do you improve the team. Clearly the wait and see approach with Bennett is costing the team in term of getting off the pot, and while they simultaneously need a 2nd line improvement, they have a player in Bennett who obviously can't fill it.

Do you wait for another sub 30 point season for further erode that value while eroding the winning window, or do you actively try to capitalize on that 4th overall pedigree and try to get something the team needs while you still can?

Do you let cam Barker fester on your bottom pairing waiting for him to get it together, or do you trade him for Nick leddy and go win a cup?

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

We are focusing on Bennett in this thread because it's about Bennett.

If you want a Reider thread or a thread on the PK, go start one.

Yeah sure but you bumped it, didn't you?

Which goes back to his question about why you (others) are focusing on him.

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by transplant99

Slow start?

This is what he has done for going on 5 years now. He has improved...none. It now looks like he may actually be regressing a bit, which is hard to do when you start so low. What was it? 280th in offense in the league last year?

Just to repeat a comparison done before

Nail Yakupov 1st overall, 350 GP, 136 pts, .39 PPG, 142 PIM

Sam Bennett 4th overall, 331 GP, 121 pts, .37 PPG, 284 PIM

At what point is Bennett actually going to be held responsible for his position in the game?

Yakupov ends up in Siberia for good reason, meanwhile we have a poster on this board thinking Bennett should be a 1st line center.

Mind boggling stuff to me.

I think picking one guy's opinion of Bennett isn't really summarizing the overall site view of him.

There are those that haven't given up and prop him up for sure, but they are certainly balanced by the crowd that thinks he's on his way out of the NHL etc.

Most of us see him for what he is ... a third line guy that can play up the roster in a pinch and provide a physical element.

Nothing wrong with that unless you pine on draft position (up to each individual).

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

There's a lot of indictment of the player going on here that I don't get or really enjoy frankly.

The issue is how do you improve the team. Clearly the wait and see approach with Bennett is costing the team in term of getting off the pot, and while they simultaneously need a 2nd line improvement, they have a player in Bennett who obviously can't fill it.

Do you wait for another sub 30 point season for further erode that value while eroding the winning window, or do you actively try to capitalize on that 4th overall pedigree and try to get something the team needs while you still can?

Do you let cam Barker fester on your bottom pairing waiting for him to get it together, or do you trade him for Nick leddy and go win a cup?

I think Sam Bennett is what he is ... probably an average to maybe above average third liner.

The value has already eroded, but you have to give them a nod for patience given the asset value they started with.

Any one in the bottom six is replaceable, and you can certainly move on when you wish, but this isn't the issue with the Flames nor the most pressing asset decision they have to make.

Don't get the lightning rod to be honest.

[Vinny01]

Originally Posted by SportsJunky

So it’s the coach’s fault? Gulutzan? Peters? Both?

Third coach will be the charm maybe.

He seemed to play his best or at least score the most points under Hartley. It would be his 4th coach if they made a change by either replacing Peters or trading him.