Glen Gulutzan-16th Flames Coach

[MAC331]

4 minutes ago, tmac70 said:

You like the fancy numbers and stats which are great but can be manipulated to suit a purpose. Hey if Gully gives you that warm fuzzy feeling great, I do not share your views. Hey how about this stat JG 0-0-0 for points in the last 2 games, or Smitty's last 2 games what his save percentage, and to prove to point we are 1-2-1 in the past four games, take the loser point out we are 1-3. As mentioned earlier stats can be used to prove either side.

And this is GG's fault ? how so ?

[robrob74]

8 hours ago, cccsberg said:

That statement is true, but it doesn't JUST apply to Bennett.  You have to look at all of the players and this idea that Bennett deserves special treatment because he was a high pick, versus other high picks and the team as a whole doesn't hold up.  Bennett has had many, many different opportunities, but the bottom line is to improve the team and not just a fan-favourite player.  Bennett seems to have improved defensively since being drafted but pretty much has regressed in all other areas.  If that is all he can do its on him.  We need to stop providing excuses for him and others, e.g. Lazar, Brouwer, Stajan, Brodie...  Now, some coaches and teams treat players differently than others and some ways work better than others but ultimately the player has the biggest responsibility to adapt, just like in a real job.  Enough of this millennial modelly-coddling bs.  

 

Some always talk about ample opportunities. Sure they give him a game with Gaudreau, he doesn’t do anything, but then don’t give him much more time. Then try him with another player, then another. They give him a game on the PP, nothing. 

 

They gave Monahan ample time to rekindle his game with Gaudreau when they weren’t working, and he didn’t work that well with others either. Then consistently put Brouwer on the PP even though he barely does anything, and they keep going back to him. 

 

They give bennett opportunity, but hardly give him time to utilize it. 

[robrob74]

44 minutes ago, MAC331 said:

And this is GG's fault ? how so ?

 

His inability to get the team motivated to start a game. As some point out, the inability to adapt in game to other teams’ systems. 

[cccsberg]

 

20 minutes ago, robrob74 said:

 

Some always talk about ample opportunities. Sure they give him a game with Gaudreau, he doesn’t do anything, but then don’t give him much more time. Then try him with another player, then another. They give him a game on the PP, nothing. 

 

They gave Monahan ample time to rekindle his game with Gaudreau when they weren’t working, and he didn’t work that well with others either. Then consistently put Brouwer on the PP even though he barely does anything, and they keep going back to him. 

 

They give bennett opportunity, but hardly give him time to utilize it. 

I know I'm never going to win this discussion, but that's fine because we all have our views and there really is no right or wrong here.  Rather than argue about ample time, or good line mates, how about we see if we can agree on a couple other things?  How about these?

 

1. Bennett tends to try to do too much himself and has difficulty utilizing his line mates?  As a centre, with puck distribution one of the key responsibilities, this is a huge issue.

 

2. Bennett has been unable to elevate the play of those around him, or produce in multiple situations.  We can complain about ample opportunity, or line mates, or whatever other excuse is out there, but hey, comparing him to Gaudreau, or Monahan, or Tkachuk they all did produce even when on lower lines....

 

3. When put with elite talent he does better himself, i.e. Backlund line his first season and a couple games with Gaudreau.  Yes this is true, but it is also true for basically everyone else as well.  Like, can anyone name a player that doesn't play better with Backlund/Frolik or with Gaudreau?  So, yes if the argument is Bennett needs to play with them to be better, I get it, but the problem is the same thing happens with others, so the team isn't really ahead of the curve overall.  What the team needs is Bennett to be that guy that elevates others, which he hasn't been able to do.  

 

4. Because of his draft pedigree outsiders still believe he is this great player that somehow the Flames have screwed up and a fresh start may get him going, therefore he still has some residual high trade value.  This may be true and may happen, but it doesn't really help the Flames unless he is traded.  At what point is it worthwhile to make the move and off-load him for something that IS working, or for someone else's equally frustrating "problem child"?  

[robrob74]

5 minutes ago, cccsberg said:

 

I know I'm never going to win this discussion, but that's fine because we all have our views and there really is no right or wrong here.  Rather than argue about ample time, or good line mates, how about we see if we can agree on a couple other things?  How about these?

 

1. Bennett tends to try to do too much himself and has difficulty utilizing his line mates?  As a centre, with puck distribution one of the key responsibilities, this is a huge issue.

 

2. Bennett has been unable to elevate the play of those around him, or produce in multiple situations.  We can complain about ample opportunity, or line mates, or whatever other excuse is out there, but hey, comparing him to Gaudreau, or Monahan, or Tkachuk they all did produce even when on lower lines....

 

3. When put with elite talent he does better himself, i.e. Backlund line his first season and a couple games with Gaudreau.  Yes this is true, but it is also true for basically everyone else as well.  Like, can anyone name a player that doesn't play better with Backlund/Frolik or with Gaudreau?  So, yes if the argument is Bennett needs to play with them to be better, I get it, but the problem is the same thing happens with others, so the team isn't really ahead of the curve overall.  What the team needs is Bennett to be that guy that elevates others, which he hasn't been able to do.  

 

4. Because of his draft pedigree outsiders still believe he is this great player that somehow the Flames have screwed up and a fresh start may get him going, therefore he still has some residual high trade value.  This may be true and may happen, but it doesn't really help the Flames unless he is traded.  At what point is it worthwhile to make the move and off-load him for something that IS working, or for someone else's equally frustrating "problem child"?  

 

All good points. But I disagree only because he is so young, especially last year, to be expected to elevate games of players like Brouwer. 

 

I wonder how many goals Monahan would have in his career if he’d not have Gaudreau, and who he’d elevate? His numbers are awesome, yes. But to say Bennett has had the same opportunity as Monahan is not true. 

 

Bennett looks like a real C when playing with Gaudreau. I don’t know. I get that Bennett can get one track minded though. 

 

I think he won’t develop with us. He gets traded for scraps then becomes a Backlund or more. Backlund has similar career path before becoming injury prone. I think we botched his development too. 

[cccsberg]

It is so interesting to see how different guys develop, or fail to develop after their 17 year old draft year.  Many succeed early on because they mature early and its a man playing against boys, some because of size, aggressive play and etc.  Whether that actually translates into the NHL when its men against men and a higher level of talent overall is fascinating.  Bennett may just be that guy that succeeded early on by being fairly mature and over-aggressive versus his peers, but can't elevate his game at this higher level.  That seems to be the case so far.  He's still young so is not dead certain yet, but then again, is it really the coach's job to focus solely on him or the team overall?  

 

Right now Bennett is in a good spot, on a 3rd line with a HOF mentoring legend and a pretty talented young centre, and getting good Zone Starts and favourable opposition so its time to shine and prove what he can do.  Although I have other issues with GG, his dealing with Bennett is not one of them.  

[cross16]

9 hours ago, cccsberg said:

That statement is true, but it doesn't JUST apply to Bennett.  You have to look at all of the players and this idea that Bennett deserves special treatment because he was a high pick, versus other high picks and the team as a whole doesn't hold up.  Bennett has had many, many different opportunities, but the bottom line is to improve the team and not just a fan-favourite player.  Bennett seems to have improved defensively since being drafted but pretty much has regressed in all other areas.  If that is all he can do its on him.  We need to stop providing excuses for him and others, e.g. Lazar, Brouwer, Stajan, Brodie...  Now, some coaches and teams treat players differently than others and some ways work better than others but ultimately the player has the biggest responsibility to adapt, just like in a real job.  Enough of this millennial modelly-coddling bs.  

 

This is my biggest issue with this discussion. Why is this an either or decision? Why is it the people frame the question as it needs to be a choice of either the Flames do what's right for Bennett or they focus on winning. I view those as two things as mutually inclusive.

 

You have a team that overall struggles to score and you've got a very talent player who was a great goal scorer in junior and his rookie year that you are struggling to develop. The bottom line should be that the Flames need Bennett to improve in order to improve their chances and they should do more to make that happen. Case in point last night you have Brouwer and Janko get PP over Bennett. How is that helping to make  Bennett successful?

[cccsberg]

1 minute ago, robrob74 said:

 

All good points. But I disagree only because he is so young, especially last year, to be expected to elevate games of players like Brouwer. 

 

I wonder how many goals Monahan would have in his career if he’d not have Gaudreau, and who he’d elevate? His numbers are awesome, yes. But to say Bennett has had the same opportunity as Monahan is not true. 

 

Bennett looks like a real C when playing with Gaudreau. I don’t know. I get that Bennett can get one track minded though. 

 

I think he won’t develop with us. He gets traded for scraps then becomes a Backlund or more. Backlund has similar career path before becoming injury prone. I think we botched his development too. 

I agree he is young, only 20 so still very early.  I definitely would not be trading him for scraps.  I probably wouldn't trade him at all, at least this year unless we get good return since he is a valuable player just in a different role than expected.  That is especially true in the playoffs where refs tend to swallow their whistles and the play gets way more physical overall, which is right up Bennett's alley.  As a GM, though, I would not be counting on his progression and that means we need to focus on re-signing Backlund to a tradeable 4-5 year contract because in the short term we're a little short on C prospects.  Next year I believe Dube can jump in to the 4C role and beyond I have hopes for Phillips or Ruzicka, with others long shots, but they are likely a couple years out, at least.  

 

In comparison to Monahan, yes he now has Gaudreau but it did not start that way.  And let's look back at Junior versus play in the NHL.  Gaudreau was a puck wizard and great at both set-up and shooting, which has carried over to the NHL the same.  Monahan was the best player on a crappy team, showing leadership and being able to score even with lesser line mates by getting open and finishing well.  He did and continues to do the same in the NHL, now with Gaudreau which brings his game to the next level, sure.  Bennett was an aggressive, drive the net phenom in Junior who does the same thing now too, but is not as effective because the D and forwards are much stronger and since he never? was that great at finding others he's suffering now trying to do the same where his speed and aggressiveness don't have the same impact.  Sure, if he married those skill to better lineman play he could be something special.  We all hope that and project that in our own minds but we're not seeing it on the ice.  If he is unable to learn it and show it then he'll top out as a 3rd liner.  Not bad but not what was expected.  

[cccsberg]

1 minute ago, cross16 said:

 

This is my biggest issue with this discussion. Why is this an either or decision? Why is it the people frame the question as it needs to be a choice of either the Flames do what's right for Bennett or they focus on winning. I view those as two things as mutually inclusive.

 

You have a team that overall struggles to score and you've got a very talent player who was a great goal scorer in junior and his rookie year that you are struggling to develop. The bottom line should be that the Flames need Bennett to improve in order to improve their chances and they should do more to make that happen. Case in point last night you have Brouwer and Janko get PP over Bennett. How is that helping to make  Bennett successful?

I agree wholeheartedly as far as Brouwer goes, though I will say getting someone to set screens on the PP seems to be an issue with our more talented guys...  I thought Janko did pretty well last night in that regard.  

 

As for your first point, the thing is that when you put Bennett with Gaudreau you have to remove someone else from Gaudreau, e.g. Monahan or Ferland.  Therefore the question becomes does Bennett's improvement with Gaudreau more than make up for the drop in results from e.g. Ferland who now goes to the 3rd line?  If not then what have you really gained as a team?  There is always the other player to consider and the problem with this discussion is that people JUST focus on Bennett, forgetting the other guy, and the team overall.  As management/fans we need to forget the individual and look at the team's success, first and foremost.  Since both our 1st and 2nd lines are working well as currently constructed why would we change them?  Until Bennett shows elsewhere that he is just so talented that he will most likely DRAMATICALLY improve the 1st line by going there it isn't happening, nor should it.  

[cross16]

13 minutes ago, cccsberg said:

I agree wholeheartedly as far as Brouwer goes, though I will say getting someone to set screens on the PP seems to be an issue with our more talented guys...  I thought Janko did pretty well last night in that regard.  

 

As for your first point, the thing is that when you put Bennett with Gaudreau you have to remove someone else from Gaudreau, e.g. Monahan or Ferland.  Therefore the question becomes does Bennett's improvement with Gaudreau more than make up for the drop in results from e.g. Ferland who now goes to the 3rd line?  If not then what have you really gained as a team?  There is always the other player to consider and the problem with this discussion is that people JUST focus on Bennett, forgetting the other guy, and the team overall.  As management/fans we need to forget the individual and look at the team's success, first and foremost.  Since both our 1st and 2nd lines are working well as currently constructed why would we change them?  Until Bennett shows elsewhere that he is just so talented that he will most likely DRAMATICALLY improve the 1st line by going there it isn't happening, nor should it.  

 

Who said anything about putting Bennett with Gaudreau? That could be an option but it's not like it's the only one.

 

And how is it that our top two lines are working so well? Frolik has 1 5 on 5 goal this season, Tkachuk has 3. In the last 6 games basically all of the offence from this team has come from either the top line or the PP and on the season the Flames are still a bottom 10 team 5 on 5 in terms of goals for. Sorry, I don't agree at all the top 6 is working and can't be tinkered with, this teams needs more offence. I get the 2nd line has great analytics but their production is only OK so I don't agree with the notion that you can't mess with the 3M line. 

 

I"m not saying you have to give Bennett first line time, obviously that line is working but what about Benentt with Backlund and Frolik? What about Tkachuk - Backs - Bennett? What about some PP time? What about some double shifting of Gaureau or double shift Bennett on that top line with Ferland once in a while. There are plenty of options you can do and it doesn't require breaking up the top line. 

 

I get the past is the past but the frustration comes more from the lack of opportunities the Flmaes have given Bennett int he past as opposed to right now. Michael Ferland was gifted a role on the top line, Bennett never was. He had great success with Backs- Frolik and then was taken off the line and Tkachuk was gifted that spot. Talented player, with little PP time given. It is what it is, but the Flames have blown several chances to give Bennett more of an opportunity which is what started my original thought. Seems to me there is no plan in place to help develop Bennett and that's upsetting because if they did they would have a better team IMO

[redfire11]

2 hours ago, MAC331 said:

I think you fans that want GG gone are going to be disappointed . I too don't think this team has played its best hockey yet but they winning enough games as they work through some things.

And I think you fans that want GG to remain are soon going to run out of excuses. ie. "we weren't prepared, brutal road trip, 1st game home after a long RT, defense played poor, we got outworked, bounces didn't go our way, and to repeat the big one that is used regularly WE WEREN"T PREPARED."

I really hope I am wrong about GG and he gets his 1) Lines figured out, 2) has a prepared team for every game, 3) learns the advantage of matching lines, 4) creates some positive emotion, 5) fixes PP and PK (which is starting to come around) 6) maybe steal from Hartley the "proven not given motto", ETC."

[robrob74]

1 hour ago, cccsberg said:

I agree he is young, only 20 so still very early.  I definitely would not be trading him for scraps.  I probably wouldn't trade him at all, at least this year unless we get good return since he is a valuable player just in a different role than expected.  That is especially true in the playoffs where refs tend to swallow their whistles and the play gets way more physical overall, which is right up Bennett's alley.  As a GM, though, I would not be counting on his progression and that means we need to focus on re-signing Backlund to a tradeable 4-5 year contract because in the short term we're a little short on C prospects.  Next year I believe Dube can jump in to the 4C role and beyond I have hopes for Phillips or Ruzicka, with others long shots, but they are likely a couple years out, at least.  

 

In comparison to Monahan, yes he now has Gaudreau but it did not start that way.  And let's look back at Junior versus play in the NHL.  Gaudreau was a puck wizard and great at both set-up and shooting, which has carried over to the NHL the same.  Monahan was the best player on a crappy team, showing leadership and being able to score even with lesser line mates by getting open and finishing well.  He did and continues to do the same in the NHL, now with Gaudreau which brings his game to the next level, sure.  Bennett was an aggressive, drive the net phenom in Junior who does the same thing now too, but is not as effective because the D and forwards are much stronger and since he never? was that great at finding others he's suffering now trying to do the same where his speed and aggressiveness don't have the same impact.  Sure, if he married those skill to better lineman play he could be something special.  We all hope that and project that in our own minds but we're not seeing it on the ice.  If he is unable to learn it and show it then he'll top out as a 3rd liner.  Not bad but not what was expected.  

 

IN the NHL, Monahan has always had Hudler and/or Gaudreau, therefore, has always had upper level skill to move with. Is Brouwer a Hudler? Is Versteeg? Versteeg is a lot closer than Brouwer, but not up to the level Hudler was at while Monahan was a rookie. Hudler could control space and partially space. 

[robrob74]

14 minutes ago, redfire11 said:

And I think you fans that want GG to remain are soon going to run out of excuses. ie. "we weren't prepared, brutal road trip, 1st game home after a long RT, defense played poor, we got outworked, bounces didn't go our way, and to repeat the big one that is used regularly WE WEREN"T PREPARED."

I really hope I am wrong about GG and he gets his 1) Lines figured out, 2) has a prepared team for every game, 3) learns the advantage of matching lines, 4) creates some positive emotion, 5) fixes PP and PK (which is starting to come around) 6) maybe steal from Hartley the "proven not given motto", ETC."

 

I agree. And what is the point of home ice if you don’t utilize the option to line match?

[travel_dude]

1 hour ago, cross16 said:

And how is it that our top two lines are working so well? Frolik has 1 5 on 5 goal this season, Tkachuk has 3. In the last 6 games basically all of the offence from this team has come from either the top line or the PP and on the season the Flames are still a bottom 10 team 5 on 5 in terms of goals for. Sorry, I don't agree at all the top 6 is working and can't be tinkered with, this teams needs more offence. I get the 2nd line has great analytics but their production is only OK so I don't agree with the notion that you can't mess with the 3M line. 

 

I"m not saying you have to give Bennett first line time, obviously that line is working but what about Benentt with Backlund and Frolik? What about Tkachuk - Backs - Bennett? What about some PP time? What about some double shifting of Gaureau or double shift Bennett on that top line with Ferland once in a while. There are plenty of options you can do and it doesn't require breaking up the top line. 

 

Spot on.  Alluded to this int the Lines and Pairings thread.  Is good possession a winning strategy?  Only if it's combined with good defense and scoring enough.  What is the benefit of turning Tkachuk into a defensive player, when scoring is also required.  

 

I also think the idea of power vs power only gets you so far.  Monahan versus Matthews.  Yeah, we shut down his line.  Then again, his line shut down ours.  Our only consistent scoring line.  Last change should be an advantage.  

 

Leave the top line the way it is.  It's working better than any other year.  Johnny is actually playing a lot better without the puck.  Ferland can create turnovers.  Great.  Fix the 3rd line.  A struggling Bennett shuts down an effective Janko and/or Jagr.  Give those guys a consistent 100 foot player; Tkachuk or Frolik.

[tmac70]

4 hours ago, MAC331 said:

And this is GG's fault ? how so ?

 We had this dance once before did we not?  If my memory is correct you took your ball and bat and went home.

 

[tmac70]

2 hours ago, redfire11 said:

And I think you fans that want GG to remain are soon going to run out of excuses. ie. "we weren't prepared, brutal road trip, 1st game home after a long RT, defense played poor, we got outworked, bounces didn't go our way, and to repeat the big one that is used regularly WE WEREN"T PREPARED."

I really hope I am wrong about GG and he gets his 1) Lines figured out, 2) has a prepared team for every game, 3) learns the advantage of matching lines, 4) creates some positive emotion, 5) fixes PP and PK (which is starting to come around) 6) maybe steal from Hartley the "proven not given motto", ETC."

Rinse repeat and replay...Like a bad version of ground hog day. His role is to have them properly prepared to play ever night. His role is to have them prepared for battle and if they do not wish to battle than its his role to remove and replace with others that will. I think for most of us it is the lack of intensity and compete level that we miss from a few years back, its gone.

[MAC331]

2 hours ago, redfire11 said:

And I think you fans that want GG to remain are soon going to run out of excuses. ie. "we weren't prepared, brutal road trip, 1st game home after a long RT, defense played poor, we got outworked, bounces didn't go our way, and to repeat the big one that is used regularly WE WEREN"T PREPARED."

I really hope I am wrong about GG and he gets his 1) Lines figured out, 2) has a prepared team for every game, 3) learns the advantage of matching lines, 4) creates some positive emotion, 5) fixes PP and PK (which is starting to come around) 6) maybe steal from Hartley the "proven not given motto", ETC."

You could be critical of every team in the NHL if that is how you want to see things. Last I looked we were in 4 wins less than the top teams in each Conference and its the end of November. We haven't played our best hockey yet, use whatever reasons or excuses as you prefer to call them you want. 1. I think for the most part the lines are figured out, 2.we play systems hockey but if the players compete level or execution isn't there maybe we need a few different players,3. can't comment on matching lines,4. what positive emotion are you wanting, 5. PP and PK is all about player execution, 6 where do you see the need for changes ? Most of the failure to win falls on the players IMO not executing and making a lot of mistakes. 

[MAC331]

10 minutes ago, tmac70 said:

Rinse repeat and replay...Like a bad version of ground hog day. His role is to have them properly prepared to play ever night. His role is to have them prepared for battle and if they do not wish to battle than its his role to remove and replace with others that will. I think for most of us it is the lack of intensity and compete level that we miss from a few years back, its gone.

So you want a different brand of hockey altogether which explains why you find fault and complain consistently about this team.

[ABC923]

3 hours ago, cross16 said:

 

This is my biggest issue with this discussion. Why is this an either or decision? Why is it the people frame the question as it needs to be a choice of either the Flames do what's right for Bennett or they focus on winning. I view those as two things as mutually inclusive.

 

You have a team that overall struggles to score and you've got a very talent player who was a great goal scorer in junior and his rookie year that you are struggling to develop. The bottom line should be that the Flames need Bennett to improve in order to improve their chances and they should do more to make that happen. Case in point last night you have Brouwer and Janko get PP over Bennett. How is that helping to make  Bennett successful?

Bennett logged almost the same amount of PP time as Janko and Brouwer.

[MAC331]

29 minutes ago, tmac70 said:

 We had this dance once before did we not?  If my memory is correct you took your ball and bat and went home.

 

I did , that doesn't sound like me. I get that you don't like this coach or how the team is not the same team from a few years back. Maybe you need to catch up.

[MAC331]

3 hours ago, cross16 said:

 

Who said anything about putting Bennett with Gaudreau? That could be an option but it's not like it's the only one.

 

And how is it that our top two lines are working so well? Frolik has 1 5 on 5 goal this season, Tkachuk has 3. In the last 6 games basically all of the offence from this team has come from either the top line or the PP and on the season the Flames are still a bottom 10 team 5 on 5 in terms of goals for. Sorry, I don't agree at all the top 6 is working and can't be tinkered with, this teams needs more offence. I get the 2nd line has great analytics but their production is only OK so I don't agree with the notion that you can't mess with the 3M line. 

 

I"m not saying you have to give Bennett first line time, obviously that line is working but what about Benentt with Backlund and Frolik? What about Tkachuk - Backs - Bennett? What about some PP time? What about some double shifting of Gaureau or double shift Bennett on that top line with Ferland once in a while. There are plenty of options you can do and it doesn't require breaking up the top line. 

 

I get the past is the past but the frustration comes more from the lack of opportunities the Flmaes have given Bennett int he past as opposed to right now. Michael Ferland was gifted a role on the top line, Bennett never was. He had great success with Backs- Frolik and then was taken off the line and Tkachuk was gifted that spot. Talented player, with little PP time given. It is what it is, but the Flames have blown several chances to give Bennett more of an opportunity which is what started my original thought. Seems to me there is no plan in place to help develop Bennett and that's upsetting because if they did they would have a better team IMO

I like Bennett where he is on LW leave the player alone and let him sink or swim there. I honestly wish Jagr would call it a day as I don't see where he is helping the cause. If anyone can be successful playing with Backlund and Frolik let it be Brouwer so we can get some energy into a 4th line. Form a line of Bennett, Jankowski and Tkachuk on RW, I would like to see how he plays on the RS. They could simply release Versteeg IMO. 4th line Lomberg, Lazar, Hathaway turn them loose.

[travel_dude]

18 minutes ago, MAC331 said:

I like Bennett where he is on LW leave the player alone and let him sink or swim there. I honestly wish Jagr would call it a day as I don't see where he is helping the cause. If anyone can be successful playing with Backlund and Frolik let it be Brouwer so we can get some energy into a 4th line. Form a line of Bennett, Jankowski and Tkachuk on RW, I would like to see how he plays on the RS. They could simply release Versteeg IMO. 4th line Lomberg, Lazar, Hathaway turn them loose.

 

Did you enjoy the one game where they were forced to play Brouwer with the 2M's.  It wasn't that pretty.

Give Bennett two vets he's had some measure of success with.  

 

Sorry, there is no way to release Versteeg, he has a contract.  If you mean waive him and he clears and fails to report, then you might be able to do that.  He's not about to fail to report, and you are stuck with $800k in dead cap space.  

[redfire11]

50 minutes ago, MAC331 said:

You could be critical of every team in the NHL if that is how you want to see things. Last I looked we were in 4 wins less than the top teams in each Conference and its the end of November. We haven't played our best hockey yet, use whatever reasons or excuses as you prefer to call them you want. 1. I think for the most part the lines are figured out, 2.we play systems hockey but if the players compete level or execution isn't there maybe we need a few different players,3. can't comment on matching lines,4. what positive emotion are you wanting, 5. PP and PK is all about player execution, 6 where do you see the need for changes ? Most of the failure to win falls on the players IMO not executing and making a lot of mistakes. 

It sounds like you want a TimBits league where everyone receives a participation Stanley Cup.

 

I DON"T!!!!

[MAC331]

49 minutes ago, travel_dude said:

 

Did you enjoy the one game where they were forced to play Brouwer with the 2M's.  It wasn't that pretty.

Give Bennett two vets he's had some measure of success with.  

 

Sorry, there is no way to release Versteeg, he has a contract.  If you mean waive him and he clears and fails to report, then you might be able to do that.  He's not about to fail to report, and you are stuck with $800k in dead cap space.  

I am not so sure it was as ugly as you like to make out either for one game. I don't like what is going on with Tkachuk on that line this year and it wouldn't bother me at all to have a primary chequing line that involved Frolik, Backland and Brouwer.

I really could careless what the repercussions are if Versteeg was gone and we could get on with other players.

[MAC331]

48 minutes ago, redfire11 said:

It sounds like you want a TimBits league where everyone receives a participation Stanley Cup.

 

I DON"T!!!!

Glad that's how you see it and nice immature reply.