What do the Flames need most?

Status
Not open for further replies.

Rangediddy

The puck was in
Oct 28, 2011
3,710
809
It is time Bennett be expected to earn his ice time. There are so many parts of his game that need work. Bottom 6 for sure unless injuries have him slotted higher.

Enough gifts.
I'm actually getting a little tired of this mindset. Some players play well with others and some don't. Some need to play a lot of minutes to be productive, some don't. If playing Sam Bennett on the top line turns him into a 20+ goal scorer and the team wins with him there, then go with it. You try different guys in different positions and go with what works best.

I understand the message behind "Always earned, never given", but it was a mantra to get the players to work harder. The coaches don't rank the players who try the hardest and make their lines from that. If Bennett playing with Johnny & Mony shuffles the rest of the lineup into a way that keeps us scoring as a team, then I don't care that he hasn't done **** over the last 2 years to earn a top line spot. If he works on the top line, then it's on him to bust his ass to stay there, but not trying him there because he hasn't "earned" it yet is stupid. If he doesn't work on the top line, try someone else until they do.

You think Guenztel or Sheary "earned" the opportunity to play on the top line with Sidney Crosby?
 

super6646

Registered User
Apr 16, 2018
17,765
15,509
Calgary
I'm actually getting a little tired of this mindset. Some players play well with others and some don't. Some need to play a lot of minutes to be productive, some don't. If playing Sam Bennett on the top line turns him into a 20+ goal scorer and the team wins with him there, then go with it. You try different guys in different positions and go with what works best.

I understand the message behind "Always earned, never given", but it was a mantra to get the players to work harder. The coaches don't rank the players who try the hardest and make their lines from that. If Bennett playing with Johnny & Mony shuffles the rest of the lineup into a way that keeps us scoring as a team, then I don't care that he hasn't done **** over the last 2 years to earn a top line spot. If he works on the top line, then it's on him to bust his ass to stay there, but not trying him there because he hasn't "earned" it yet is stupid. If he doesn't work on the top line, try someone else until they do.

You think Guenztel or Sheary "earned" the opportunity to play on the top line with Sidney Crosby?

No thanks, don't need him dragging down our top 6. We don't have the same amount of depth as Pittsburgh, and I don't want Neal or Lindholm on our 3rd line just for Bennett's sake.
 

Rangediddy

The puck was in
Oct 28, 2011
3,710
809
No thanks, don't need him dragging down our top 6. We don't have the same amount of depth as Pittsburgh, and I don't want Neal or Lindholm on our 3rd line just for Bennett's sake.
I'm not advocating that Bennett should play in the top 6. I'm saying everyone should be tried in different spots to see what works best, and not trying players in different roles because they haven't earned it makes no sense.

So Czarnik shouldn't be tried on a line with Johnny and Mony because he hasn't earned it? Give me a break.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Johnny Hoxville

Anglesmith

Setting up the play?
Sep 17, 2012
46,441
14,715
Victoria
No thanks, don't need him dragging down our top 6. We don't have the same amount of depth as Pittsburgh, and I don't want Neal or Lindholm on our 3rd line just for Bennett's sake.
We have just as much depth as Pittsburgh. We just don't have the same talent at centre (no one does). But he's absolutely right. He's saying you do what needs to be done to win, and who cares if each individual's character arc reads like a story?

You're saying you don't want Neal or Lindholm one the third line if that lineup makes us win?
 

super6646

Registered User
Apr 16, 2018
17,765
15,509
Calgary
I'm not advocating that Bennett should play in the top 6. I'm saying everyone should be tried in different spots to see what works best, and not trying players in different roles because they haven't earned it makes no sense.

So Czarnik shouldn't be tried on a line with Johnny and Mony because he hasn't earned it? Give me a break.

During the preseason? Sure, why not. But unless things are absolutely not working, whats the point in putting Bennett up in the top 6 and potentially screwing things up?
 

super6646

Registered User
Apr 16, 2018
17,765
15,509
Calgary
We have just as much depth as Pittsburgh. We just don't have the same talent at centre (no one does). But he's absolutely right. He's saying you do what needs to be done to win, and who cares if each individual's character arc reads like a story?

You're saying you don't want Neal or Lindholm one the third line if that lineup makes us win?

Lol. I'd love to be as optimistic as you, but this forward group is maybe slightly above average as of now. I'd love if they proved me wrong, but there is no chance in hell I can honestly say that today. And how does putting Bennett on the top 6 (who so far couldn't handle the task unless he was sheltered by Backlund and Frolik) help us win?
 

Rangediddy

The puck was in
Oct 28, 2011
3,710
809
During the preseason? Sure, why not. But unless things are absolutely not working, whats the point in putting Bennett up in the top 6 and potentially screwing things up?
That is my point, if things are working there is no need to switch anything. When it's not working is when you make changes.

I know Bennett specifically hasn't shown much success playing with Johnny and Mony in the past, but he has played his best along side Backlund. We haven't had this much forward depth in a long time and having Lindholm and Neal gives us a chance to create 3 high end lines, but we just don't know what combinations those lines will be. It could be Bennett in the top 6, it might not, but we have to try different things to figure it out, but excluding Bennett from a top 6 role because he hasn't played well under GG is silly.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Johnny Hoxville

super6646

Registered User
Apr 16, 2018
17,765
15,509
Calgary
That is my point, if things are working there is no need to switch anything. When it's not working is when you make changes.

I know Bennett specifically hasn't shown much success playing with Johnny and Mony in the past, but he has played his best along side Backlund. We haven't had this much forward depth in a long time and having Lindholm and Neal gives us a chance to create 3 high end lines, but we just don't know what combinations those lines will be. It could be Bennett in the top 6, it might not, but we have to try different things to figure it out, but excluding Bennett from a top 6 role because he hasn't played well under GG is silly.

Sure yeah, if one of Lindholm or Neal (or perhaps someone else) is having trouble, sure make some changes. What I'm saying is that he shouldn't be given a spot over other players because reasons.
 

Rangediddy

The puck was in
Oct 28, 2011
3,710
809
It is so rare that a player is GIVEN a roster spot. They've been tried at a certain spot at one time and did well enough to keep it. Bennett gets older and more mature (hopefully) every year so there's no reason why we can't give him opportunities in the top 6 after each off-season to see if he's worked on things to be better. If he can't play well enough to stay in the top 6, then off he goes.
 

Anglesmith

Setting up the play?
Sep 17, 2012
46,441
14,715
Victoria
Lol. I'd love to be as optimistic as you, but this forward group is maybe slightly above average as of now. I'd love if they proved me wrong, but there is no chance in hell I can honestly say that today. And how does putting Bennett on the top 6 (who so far couldn't handle the task unless he was sheltered by Backlund and Frolik) help us win?

It doesn't matter how. The point was if it works, you use it. That was the point. It wasn't a prediction that it would work, or that it should work. It was just that we shouldn't prioritize making sure players earn things over winning games. That's it.

And honestly, look at Pittsburgh's roster. They don't have a ton of depth. They are two centres deep and they have three legit top 6 wingers in Kessel, Hornqvist and Guentzel (but typically he's only legit in the post-season). Not sure why you're putting them on a pedestal when it comes to depth.
 

super6646

Registered User
Apr 16, 2018
17,765
15,509
Calgary
It doesn't matter how. The point was if it works, you use it. That was the point. It wasn't a prediction that it would work, or that it should work. It was just that we shouldn't prioritize making sure players earn things over winning games. That's it.

And honestly, look at Pittsburgh's roster. They don't have a ton of depth. They are two centres deep and they have three legit top 6 wingers in Kessel, Hornqvist and Guentzel (but typically he's only legit in the post-season). Not sure why you're putting them on a pedestal when it comes to depth.

So does simply giving a guy a spot equal wins? If changes need to me made, I understand. But if things are working, why should Bennett be in the top 6 over other guys? I have no issue trying him in the preseason and going from there, but he should be able to produce in a top 6 role before he is given a spot.
 

Rangediddy

The puck was in
Oct 28, 2011
3,710
809
Don't give him a spot unless he produces when given a spot
I'm not sure this makes much sense.

That's like saying don't hire anyone without any experience. He can't produce in a spot without being in that spot to begin with.

I think everyone is thinking that if a player is GIVEN a spot, that they are kept in that spot for the season. That's not what I'm saying. Yes, you have to give him the opportunity to play in a top 6 role, but that doesn't mean you're keeping him there until it works.
 

Anglesmith

Setting up the play?
Sep 17, 2012
46,441
14,715
Victoria
So does simply giving a guy a spot equal wins? If changes need to me made, I understand. But if things are working, why should Bennett be in the top 6 over other guys? I have no issue trying him in the preseason and going from there, but he should be able to produce in a top 6 role before he is given a spot.

Honestly, I have no idea how you still haven't understood the point, but let me break down the dichotomy here.

Rangediddy suggested the following principle:

The team winning games should be prioritized over making sure individuals earn spots in the lineup based on merit. If putting our best RW on the third line results in more wins than having him on the top line, then we do that.

By saying he's wrong, you are implying the opposite principle:

Regardless of what configuration wins games, players should be moved up or down the lineup based strictly on merit. If putting our best RW on the third line results in more wins than having him on the top line, then we ignore that and keep plugging him on the first line because he's earned it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Johnny Hoxville

Mobiandi

Registered User
Jan 17, 2015
20,840
17,194
I think Peters is gonna tinker what things heavily. He likes duos on forward lines and Bennett hasn't jived with anyone in the past two seasons like Johnny has with Monahan or Tkachuk with Backlund. So we'll definitely see him move up and down the lineup when things aren't going well.
 

Rubi

Photographer
Sponsor
Jan 9, 2009
15,674
10,233
Honestly, I have no idea how you still haven't understood the point, but let me break down the dichotomy here.

Rangediddy suggested the following principle:

The team winning games should be prioritized over making sure individuals earn spots in the lineup based on merit. If putting our best RW on the third line results in more wins than having him on the top line, then we do that.

By saying he's wrong, you are implying the opposite principle:

Regardless of what configuration wins games, players should be moved up or down the lineup based strictly on merit. If putting our best RW on the third line results in more wins than having him on the top line, then we ignore that and keep plugging him on the first line because he's earned it.
I see what you're saying:

Line ABC = 100 pts
Line DEF = 75 pts
Line GHI = 50 pts

Total = 225 pts

However there is a possibility that

Line ACI = 90 pts
Line DEF = 75 pts
Line GHA = 75 pts

Total = 240 pts

I just don't see it happening. Changing one player in a line of 3 won't suddenly change an ordinary line into an exceptional line. The other two players have too much of an influence.. Talent thrives with other talent.
 

Lunatik

Normal is an illusion.
Oct 12, 2012
56,176
8,336
Padded Room
I think Peters is gonna tinker what things heavily. He likes duos on forward lines and Bennett hasn't jived with anyone in the past two seasons like Johnny has with Monahan or Tkachuk with Backlund. So we'll definitely see him move up and down the lineup when things aren't going well.
To where? He's a C/LW, he's clearly behind Gaudreau, Tkachuk, Monahan and Backlund. I'd even argue he's behind Ryan at C and Frolik (if used there) on LW. If they try him on his off wing, he's behind Lindholm, Neal, Rya and Frolik.

Sure they might juggle things, but right now Bennett is very clearly our 9th or 10th best forward.
 

super6646

Registered User
Apr 16, 2018
17,765
15,509
Calgary
Honestly, I have no idea how you still haven't understood the point, but let me break down the dichotomy here.

Rangediddy suggested the following principle:

The team winning games should be prioritized over making sure individuals earn spots in the lineup based on merit. If putting our best RW on the third line results in more wins than having him on the top line, then we do that.

By saying he's wrong, you are implying the opposite principle:

Regardless of what configuration wins games, players should be moved up or down the lineup based strictly on merit. If putting our best RW on the third line results in more wins than having him on the top line, then we ignore that and keep plugging him on the first line because he's earned it.

I understand what you are saying, but that doesn't mean It makes sense. I seriously doubt putting a top 6er in the bottom 6 and a bottom 6er in the top 6 will allow us to win more and have spread out scoring. Sure, Kessel technically players on the 3rd line, but he still gets a lot of minutes and time on the 1st pp unit. Anyway, the discussion was initially was about Bennett, and for all intents and purposes, he is a 3rd liner baring injuries or Neal or lindholm not working out in the top 6 (and even then, I could see Ryan and frolik ahead of Bennett for the rw).
 

Anglesmith

Setting up the play?
Sep 17, 2012
46,441
14,715
Victoria
I understand what you are saying, but that doesn't mean It makes sense. I seriously doubt putting a top 6er in the bottom 6 and a bottom 6er in the top 6 will allow us to win more and have spread out scoring. Anyway, the discussion was initially was about Bennett, and for all intents and purposes, he is a 3rd liner baring injuries or Neal or lindholm not working out in the top 6 (and even then, I could see Ryan and frolik ahead of Bennett for the rw).
Sure. But we rolled with a third liner on the first line last year, and many teams around the league do it (like Pittsburgh, for instance, who were brought up earlier in the conversation).

And again, you seem to be arguing against a point that no one is making. Go back and read all the posts in this conversation and find somewhere that someone has said "Bennett should start in the top 6" or "the team will win more games with Bennett on the top line." Not one person has said either of those two things. The point is purely hypothetical: if X, then Y. And you are arguing against X, which is besides the point.
 

Mobiandi

Registered User
Jan 17, 2015
20,840
17,194
To where? He's a C/LW, he's clearly behind Gaudreau, Tkachuk, Monahan and Backlund. I'd even argue he's behind Ryan at C and Frolik (if used there) on LW. If they try him on his off wing, he's behind Lindholm, Neal, Rya and Frolik.

Sure they might juggle things, but right now Bennett is very clearly our 9th or 10th best forward.
It's naive to think that Peters won't try out Bennett in a top 6 role during the season to see if he sticks.

The sky won't fall if Lindholm or Neal slide down to the third line for a bit. They are also third wheels like Bennett in Peters' pairings
 

Lunatik

Normal is an illusion.
Oct 12, 2012
56,176
8,336
Padded Room
It's naive to think that Peters won't try out Bennett in a top 6 role during the season to see if he sticks.

The sky won't fall if Lindholm or Neal slide down to the third line for a bit. They are also third wheels like Bennett in Peters' pairings
It's naive to think Peters will not try a clearly inferior player on his off wing....

yeah, okay
 

Mobiandi

Registered User
Jan 17, 2015
20,840
17,194
It's naive to think Peters will not try a clearly inferior player on his off wing....

yeah, okay
Tkachuk has been told to anticipate playing on the RW at some point. I don't think that's changed just because Neal and Lindholm are here now.

Plus, Flames fans have been getting excited at all the permutations that are possible with our lines. Has this been put on hold now? Although most people know what our opening day line-up will look like, there is reason to believe the lines could look much differently by game 10 if this group continues to be as anemic offensively as the Canes were.
 
Last edited:

Johnny Hoxville

The Return of a Legend
Jul 15, 2006
37,549
9,343
Calgary
Bennett should start in the top 6, the team will definitely win more games with Bennett on the top line.

Also I think at some point Bennett and Tkachuk will make magic together. They just seem the 2 will continually pull more and more out of each other. I really hope we see that duo get an extended look this year.
 

Lunatik

Normal is an illusion.
Oct 12, 2012
56,176
8,336
Padded Room
Tkachuk has been told to anticipate playing on the RW at some point. I don't think that's changed just because Neal and Lindholm are here now.

Plus, Flames fans have been getting excited at all the permutations that are possible with our lines. Has this been put on hold now? Although most people know what our opening day line-up will look like, there is reason to believe the lines could look much differently by game 10 if this group continues to be as anemic offensively as the Canes were.
Tiach Tkwas told that before the Neal signing. Since then Peters has stated that Lindholm will start with Gaudreau & Monahan, and Neal with Tkachuk and Backlund


Bennett should start in the top 6, the team will definitely win more games with Bennett on the top line.

Also I think at some point Bennett and Tkachuk will make magic together. They just seem the 2 will continually pull more and more out of each other. I really hope we see that duo get an extended look this year.
did OKG hack your account? I know you love to troll sometimes Hox, but this is just delusional
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->