Official Sam Bennett Discussion Thread

[Carty]

2 hours ago, MAC331 said:

LOL first off nobody will be asking your permission to trade Gilles.

 

LOL...   First off, got some news for ya...   You can't trade Gillies either...   

[Flyerfan52]

5 hours ago, MAC331 said:

I now worry about resigning Stone after this injury, that shoulder came out to easily and he is coming back from knee surgery. It would be good to sign someone more healthy and not a risk to injury at any time.

Trouba showed me an edge I would like to see more of from our defensemen. You sure a 1st and Gilles wouldn't do the trick ???

Having Manning around would just be great for playing Edmonton. LOL

Anyways it was just a thought.

Since Trouba & Chevy kissed & made up re: the holdout Trouba went & proved he can be a 1st pairing D. Even when Myers returns there won't be any nonsense about playing Trouba as LD. The Jets won't chance losing him for something so easily solved. If the image presented by Trouba & TN is legit he'll get long term with $s big enough to makeup for the bargain of the last 1.

Gillis (who the Flames need) & a  1st wouldn't cut it as the Jets are extremely high on Comrie & envision a Comrie/Hellebuyck tandem in the very near future. The Jets have a truckload of draft picks so the 1st that would be mid-range @ best & likely late wouldn't interest them unless it was for a super deep draft like 2003 or 1979 & I don't know of any coming soon.

The Jets want added depth @ D like any other team. Flames don't have any that = him unless it's a sideways trade involving Brodie or Hamilton & a sweetener to get Wpg. to make the move worthwhile.

 

I still like the idea of Del Zotto but Chevy might see him as an answer for Enstrom who is getting injured a fair bit & is UFA after next season. Enstrom is 1 of the few remaining Atlanta picks the Jets seem to want to erase ties to. If Flames & Jets both are in on him you know the price will go up.

 

I still see Manning as attainable & a good add.

[MAC331]

2 hours ago, Carty said:

 

LOL...   First off, got some news for ya...   You can't trade Gillies either...   

It was a suggestion, they are made all the time on here. I was just saying something like that is maybe what it takes but thx for your input.

[MAC331]

Just now, Flyerfan52 said:

Since Trouba & Chevy kissed & made up re: the holdout Trouba went & proved he can be a 1st pairing D. Even when Myers returns there won't be any nonsense about playing Trouba as LD. The Jets won't chance losing him for something so easily solved. If the image presented by Trouba & TN is legit he'll get long term with $s big enough to makeup for the bargain of the last 1.

Gillis (who the Flames need) & a  1st wouldn't cut it as the Jets are extremely high on Comrie & envision a Comrie/Hellebuyck tandem in the very near future. The Jets have a truckload of draft picks so the 1st that would be mid-range @ best & likely late wouldn't interest them unless it was for a super deep draft like 2003 or 1979 & I don't know of any coming soon.

The Jets want added depth @ D like any other team. Flames don't have any that = him unless it's a sideways trade involving Brodie or Hamilton & a sweetener to get Wpg. to make the move worthwhile.

 

I still like the idea of Del Zotto but Chevy might see him as an answer for Enstrom who is getting injured a fair bit & is UFA after next season. Enstrom is 1 of the few remaining Atlanta picks the Jets seem to want to erase ties to. If Flames & Jets both are in on him you know the price will go up.

 

I still see Manning as attainable & a good add.

Oh well it was just a spitballing trade idea and I know we have very little to trade with right now. Complimentary defensemen to Giordano, Hamilton and Brodie will be the order of the day this offseason. Personally I would bring back Stone and Engelland if the money works.

[MAC331]

2 hours ago, travel_dude said:

 

You must be one of the few that thinks trading Gillies is a good thing.  Perhaps you think PITTS should have traded Murray having an all star like MAF signed long term.  Who is the tradebait now?  If Gillies has enough value to make a Trouba trade possible, then we would be giving up a potential starter.  We can;t keep trading away NHL potential goalies.  

 

Whatever the injury is to Stone, I doubt that he is injury prone.  Shoulder injuries are very easy to get from impact.  The pads don't stop the force pushing on your bones and tendons, etc.

I don't know if I'm one of the only ones or not. Our situation is nothing like PIT, they are stuck with that contract and chose to keep him around. I premised the trade of Gilles if we sign someone else to a 3 year deal in which situation he is available for trade IMO. We would be giving up a potential starting goalie for a top 4 defenseman now with 3 years playing experience. You can't keep everyone.

Like I said about arguing injuries, nobody wins, I would have concerns given what I know about injuries.

BTW FF killed the whole idea as everyone loves Trouba in WPG.

[MAC331]

14 minutes ago, Flyerfan52 said:

Since Trouba & Chevy kissed & made up re: the holdout Trouba went & proved he can be a 1st pairing D. Even when Myers returns there won't be any nonsense about playing Trouba as LD. The Jets won't chance losing him for something so easily solved. If the image presented by Trouba & TN is legit he'll get long term with $s big enough to makeup for the bargain of the last 1.

Gillis (who the Flames need) & a  1st wouldn't cut it as the Jets are extremely high on Comrie & envision a Comrie/Hellebuyck tandem in the very near future. The Jets have a truckload of draft picks so the 1st that would be mid-range @ best & likely late wouldn't interest them unless it was for a super deep draft like 2003 or 1979 & I don't know of any coming soon.

The Jets want added depth @ D like any other team. Flames don't have any that = him unless it's a sideways trade involving Brodie or Hamilton & a sweetener to get Wpg. to make the move worthwhile.

 

I still like the idea of Del Zotto but Chevy might see him as an answer for Enstrom who is getting injured a fair bit & is UFA after next season. Enstrom is 1 of the few remaining Atlanta picks the Jets seem to want to erase ties to. If Flames & Jets both are in on him you know the price will go up.

 

I still see Manning as attainable & a good add.

I would have Manning and Engelland as a pairing and look forward to games with EDM

[travel_dude]

15 minutes ago, MAC331 said:

We would be giving up a potential starting goalie for a top 4 defenseman now with 3 years playing experience.

 

That is what I was saying.  You don't make that trade of an asset that could be the long term solution in CGY.  Trades for goalies or signing a good one don't happen that often, and would cost us our future elsewhere.  As much as I would love to have Trouba, the deal would kill us.  We would do better to develop internally and try to sign promising College players.  That won't kill out roster.

 

The Pens would ideally keep both.  Murray is quietly replacing MAF, though.  I think we have out own version of MAF in Elliott.  At some point, we may get to see Gillies in the NHL and he could replace our #1.  Giving up on him now would be 10x worse than the Brossoit trade. 

[robrob74]

6 hours ago, MAC331 said:

LOL first off nobody will be asking your permission to trade Gilles. Secondly if they were to either sign or trade for an experienced goalie for 3 years or more Gilles becomes tradebait. Thirdly, getting a talent such as Trouba to go Brodie wouldn't necessarily mean BT has to pass on Stone but it gives him options.

In regards to any discussion with injuries involved would be and is all speculation. I just never like when I see a player get injured so easily. You could get a Bouma like player who won't engage contact any longer.

 

I don't think I understand your logic. Signing a goalie for 3 years does not mean it is a good idea to trade Gillies. It buys him time to develop properly and not rush him. It gives us more options. 

 

Are you you putting all of your cards on Parsons in that case then?

[robrob74]

1 hour ago, MAC331 said:

Oh well it was just a spitballing trade idea and I know we have very little to trade with right now. Complimentary defensemen to Giordano, Hamilton and Brodie will be the order of the day this offseason. Personally I would bring back Stone and Engelland if the money works.

 

What $$'s would work? 

 

1M for Engelland? 

3.5M - 4M for Stone? 

[robrob74]

1 hour ago, MAC331 said:

I don't know if I'm one of the only ones or not. Our situation is nothing like PIT, they are stuck with that contract and chose to keep him around. I premised the trade of Gilles if we sign someone else to a 3 year deal in which situation he is available for trade IMO. We would be giving up a potential starting goalie for a top 4 defenseman now with 3 years playing experience. You can't keep everyone.

Like I said about arguing injuries, nobody wins, I would have concerns given what I know about injuries.

BTW FF killed the whole idea as everyone loves Trouba in WPG.

 

 

For me, if we sign a goalie for 3 years, this is how I see it: 

 

Year 1: gillies is probably not ready to fight for a job, plays a year in the AHL.

 

Year 2: Gillies might be ready to fight for an NHL job, but maybe he is ready for a Backup role, in which case, do we play him as a backup or send him back? 

 

Year 3: Gillies is ready to fight for a job in the NHL and is probably ready for a backup role and fight for starter minutes. We keep him and he fights for the job and possibly wins or platoons with the other starter we signed for three years.

 

The year after, he could be the starter.

 

you trade him because we signed a guy for three years, now who do we have long term? 

[Flyerfan52]

9 hours ago, travel_dude said:

 

That is what I was saying.  You don't make that trade of an asset that could be the long term solution in CGY.  Trades for goalies or signing a good one don't happen that often, and would cost us our future elsewhere.  As much as I would love to have Trouba, the deal would kill us.  We would do better to develop internally and try to sign promising College players.  That won't kill out roster.

 

The Pens would ideally keep both.  Murray is quietly replacing MAF, though.  I think we have out own version of MAF in Elliott.  At some point, we may get to see Gillies in the NHL and he could replace our #1.  Giving up on him now would be 10x worse than the Brossoit trade. 

The $s weren't the problem when the Pengies tried to trade MAF. With Murray @ 0.628 it was a very affordable tandem. Murray's new contract @3.75 kicks in after this season making the duo less affordable but doable. This is 1 example of only being able to protect 1 G bites a team (couldn't happen to a more deserving team). Whichever gets exposed is sure to be selected by LV but MAF's NMC puts him in the driver's seat as he can refuse to waive. He's unlikely to do so for an expansion & probably has a very small list of where he'd be willing to go. Think of Heatley when he wanted to be traded but only to 1 team. If a team MAF finds acceptable takes him on that team can dictate returns. P|itts has little choice as even if that GM bends them over they know that if they don't accept Murray is gone.

[MAC331]

11 hours ago, travel_dude said:

 

That is what I was saying.  You don't make that trade of an asset that could be the long term solution in CGY.  Trades for goalies or signing a good one don't happen that often, and would cost us our future elsewhere.  As much as I would love to have Trouba, the deal would kill us.  We would do better to develop internally and try to sign promising College players.  That won't kill out roster.

 

The Pens would ideally keep both.  Murray is quietly replacing MAF, though.  I think we have out own version of MAF in Elliott.  At some point, we may get to see Gillies in the NHL and he could replace our #1.  Giving up on him now would be 10x worse than the Brossoit trade. 

I wasn't saying this in a confirmation. If the team has a goalie they have faith in for the next 3 years you might as well trade Gilles for another pressing need ie Trouba as a 4th defenseman. Trouba would help us now and our future while Gilles remains a hopeful prospect. You keep using MAF in your example, the fact is nobody wants MAF at his current salary. Also trading Gilles would hardly kill us.

[MAC331]

14 hours ago, robrob74 said:

 

 

For me, if we sign a goalie for 3 years, this is how I see it: 

 

Year 1: gillies is probably not ready to fight for a job, plays a year in the AHL.

 

Year 2: Gillies might be ready to fight for an NHL job, but maybe he is ready for a Backup role, in which case, do we play him as a backup or send him back? 

 

Year 3: Gillies is ready to fight for a job in the NHL and is probably ready for a backup role and fight for starter minutes. We keep him and he fights for the job and possibly wins or platoons with the other starter we signed for three years.

 

The year after, he could be the starter.

 

you trade him because we signed a guy for three years, now who do we have long term? 

Fact is with prospects you don't know how they will turn out or if they will get injuries along the way like Gilles has experienced. I don't know how good Rittich is or Schneider or Parsons in 3 years. Doc Seaman once told me having a pipeline of good goalies is never a bad thing as you can trade them for other needs, that is all I was suggesting. Trouba could be a defenseman we have for years beginning now solidifying our top 4 group.

Anyways it doesn't matter as it won't happen. I was just saying we could use a few players like Trouba and Manning that have some fight to them, especially if we lose Engelland.

[robrob74]

1 hour ago, MAC331 said:

Fact is with prospects you don't know how they will turn out or if they will get injuries along the way like Gilles has experienced. I don't know how good Rittich is or Schneider or Parsons in 3 years. Doc Seaman once told me have a pipeline of good goalies is never a bad thing as you can trade them for other needs, that all I was suggesting. Trouba could be a defenseman we have for years beginning now solidifying our top 4 group.

Anyways it doesn't matter as it won't happen. I was just saying we could use a few players like Trouba and Manning that have some fight to them, especially if we lose Engelland.

 

 

True!

 

we can't really know who will or will not be traded.

 

[travel_dude]

Sounds like Trouba is out with an UBI.  Seems like when the young guys fight (Bennett and Hathaway) other teams' young players, they end up on the IR.  You have to love the emotion from these guys, even though it risks injury.  

[MAC331]

30 minutes ago, travel_dude said:

Sounds like Trouba is out with an UBI.  Seems like when the young guys fight (Bennett and Hathaway) other teams' young players, they end up on the IR.  You have to love the emotion from these guys, even though it risks injury.  

He was cut and bleeding on his head. I think it is good that Bennett is showing he will stand up for himself, Monahan could take a lesson here.

[travel_dude]

17 minutes ago, MAC331 said:

He was cut and bleeding on his head. I think it is good that Bennett is showing he will stand up for himself, Monahan could take a lesson here.

 

I saw that, but it's not clear what the injury is.  The cuts looked to be inflicted by the visor scraping his head, but it could be Bennett's knuckles.  One would think that stitches to the head wouldn't keep a player out any more than missing teeth or a split lip.  I know they like to be safe, but the players tend to play through cuts more so than other injuries.

[Carty]

Trouba is out with a CM...   Cracked melon...

 

[AlbertaBoy12]

I wonder if he is concussed from being beaten up.

[JTech780]

Just another point on Bennett, he and Larkin at this point seem to be the only full time centers to come out off-the-wall 1st round.

 

If you are comparing Bennett with Draisaitl or Reinhart you aren't really comparing apples and apples, as Draisaitl and Reinhart are used primarily as wingers, even at that Draisaitl is being played with McDavid because of a lack of options and Reinhart gets to run shot gun with Eichel or O'Reilly.

 

Bennett is being groomed as a center and as the season progresses he is coming along nicely. The points will come but it is tough when you are seeing 3rd line minutes and no PP time. Which isn't entirely his fault being behind Backlund and Monahan. We just have more depth than Edmonton or Buffalo.

[MAC331]

17 hours ago, JTech780 said:

Just another point on Bennett, he and Larkin at this point seem to be the only full time centers to come out off-the-wall 1st round.

 

If you are comparing Bennett with Draisaitl or Reinhart you aren't really comparing apples and apples, as Draisaitl and Reinhart are used primarily as wingers, even at that Draisaitl is being played with McDavid because of a lack of options and Reinhart gets to run shot gun with Eichel or O'Reilly.

 

Bennett is being groomed as a center and as the season progresses he is coming along nicely. The points will come but it is tough when you are seeing 3rd line minutes and no PP time. Which isn't entirely his fault being behind Backlund and Monahan. We just have more depth than Edmonton or Buffalo.

When all is said and done this will have been a great learning season for Bennett where he and the team will be better for it.

[JA_Boomer]

So Bennett was demoted to centering the 4th line last night. I'm not really sure why as I've been happy with his game over the past two weeks. I think it was just to rattle him and but a burr in his saddle to motivate him like GG did with Monahan earlier in the season. I think Bennett will be back on the 3rd line tomorrow. I've thought that Bennett and Versteeg have worked well together but Brouwer is playing like a 4th liner.

[hockeypriest2]

5 hours ago, JA_Boomer said:

So Bennett was demoted to centering the 4th line last night. I'm not really sure why as I've been happy with his game over the past two weeks. I think it was just to rattle him and but a burr in his saddle to motivate him like GG did with Monahan earlier in the season. I think Bennett will be back on the 3rd line tomorrow. I've thought that Bennett and Versteeg have worked well together but Brouwer is playing like a 4th liner.

I wish Brouwer was playing like a 4th liner...4th line players are useful and have importance...

 

As far as Bennett goes, he is fine...I think this has been a good learning year for him and he has come a long way as far as being a 200 ft player...His offense will come when he starts playing with better players and getting some pp opportunities...Versteeg and Brouwer are not exactly great top 9 wingers...I do think Versteeg is a good option for a team up against the cap and he has been a great signing...Brouwer has been a bust

[MAC331]

11 hours ago, hockeypriest2 said:

I wish Brouwer was playing like a 4th liner...4th line players are useful and have importance...

 

As far as Bennett goes, he is fine...I think this has been a good learning year for him and he has come a long way as far as being a 200 ft player...His offense will come when he starts playing with better players and getting some pp opportunities...Versteeg and Brouwer are not exactly great top 9 wingers...I do think Versteeg is a good option for a team up against the cap and he has been a great signing...Brouwer has been a bust

Perhap GG wanted to see how Stajan and Brouwer played together, maybe it wasn't about Bennett at all.

[travel_dude]

11 hours ago, hockeypriest2 said:

I wish Brouwer was playing like a 4th liner...4th line players are useful and have importance...

 

As far as Bennett goes, he is fine...I think this has been a good learning year for him and he has come a long way as far as being a 200 ft player...His offense will come when he starts playing with better players and getting some pp opportunities...Versteeg and Brouwer are not exactly great top 9 wingers...I do think Versteeg is a good option for a team up against the cap and he has been a great signing...Brouwer has been a bust

 

Brouwer needs the right fit, just like Bennett does.  They have been trying him in a lot of spots and combinations, but a lot of it is square peg stuff.  Playing him as the extra winger on the top PP unit doesn't work.  He played with Monahan when Monahan and/or Johnny were struggling.  

 

Take away the stigma of calling it the 4th line and Bouma-Stajan-Brouwer may the best fit.  We were almost there with Versteeg-Stajan-Brouwer.  They played bascally the same minutes as JH-Mony-Ferland.

 

Since we are talking about Bennett, I would put him with Versteeg and Chaisson for now.  Bennett's Corsi suffers playing with Brouwer.  Chaisson may not be the smartest NHL player, but he is direct.  You know where he is going to go.  You see what you get.  Maybe the added speed on the wing will take some of the defensive pressure off Bennett.