MAC331 Posted July 6, 2016 Report Share Posted July 6, 2016 Not quite. You suggested exposing Bennett. I suggested sheltering him, as he will likely have a kid on his line and would hope he gets to pot a few to bring back some of his confidence. I am not sure I said anything about "exposing" Bennett, I said this is a year he needs to transition out of any protected environment and start to take more responsibility on. Having Tkachuk on his line this season may not be the best situation to allow this to happen, another reason for Tkachuk to further develop in Junior. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
travel_dude Posted July 6, 2016 Report Share Posted July 6, 2016 I am not sure I said anything about "exposing" Bennett, I said this is a year he needs to transition out of any protected environment and start to take more responsibility on. Having Tkachuk on his line this season may not be the best situation to allow this to happen, another reason for Tkachuk to further develop in Junior. Exposing or not protecting are about the same. I don't think Bennett has proved he should move out of a protected spot yet. BH saw to that by using him too much on the wing or throwing him to the wolves as Backlund's LW. He hasn't blossomed at center enough to give him harder minutes yet. With that in mind, you can put a Shinkaruk, Poirier or Tkachuk on his LW and not worry about it. Both players get to grow. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MAC331 Posted July 6, 2016 Report Share Posted July 6, 2016 Exposing or not protecting are about the same. I don't think Bennett has proved he should move out of a protected spot yet. BH saw to that by using him too much on the wing or throwing him to the wolves as Backlund's LW. He hasn't blossomed at center enough to give him harder minutes yet. With that in mind, you can put a Shinkaruk, Poirier or Tkachuk on his LW and not worry about it. Both players get to grow. I disagree I am saying that is exactly what you don't want to do. the part I agreed with you on is he is not where he needs to be but we need him to do this progression throughout this season. It is hard to concentrate on that with a rookie further behind in that process than you. If Shinkaruk as an example makes this team I think he needs to play with someone like Backlund who is fully developed and can bring along some like Shinkaruk. If I were setting the lines with Shinkaruk on the roster this would be the line up. Gaudreau , Monahan, Frolik Shinkaruk, Backlund, Chiasson Ferland, Bennett, Brouwer Bouma, Stajan, Hathaway Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
irock19 Posted July 6, 2016 Report Share Posted July 6, 2016 He has the size and strength for the big leagues. He dominated Junior. I think he makes the team out of camp. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
travel_dude Posted July 7, 2016 Report Share Posted July 7, 2016 I disagree I am saying that is exactly what you don't want to do. the part I agreed with you on is he is not where he needs to be but we need him to do this progression throughout this season. It is hard to concentrate on that with a rookie further behind in that process than you. If Shinkaruk as an example makes this team I think he needs to play with someone like Backlund who is fully developed and can bring along some like Shinkaruk. If I were setting the lines with Shinkaruk on the roster this would be the line up. Gaudreau , Monahan, Frolik Shinkaruk, Backlund, Chiasson Ferland, Bennett, Brouwer Bouma, Stajan, Hathaway Difference in opinions. I view Backlund's as a line that you play against tough competition. It's not a place to start a player's development. I am fine with Chiasson on Backlund's RW, as he could use help from a possession guru to help improve his chances. If you go with Frolik on Monahan's line and Brouwer on Bennett's line, then it makes sense to have your natural goal scorers. Brouwer is going to help both excell. He will help both get the space to do the voodoo they do, so well. With that in mind, you can move Ferland to Backlund's LW. He's already good at playing without the puck. IMHO, you shelter the kids until they show they are ready or injuries make it necessary. We all love Monahan, but he still has a few holes in his game. I think he is past needing any sheltering, Bennett and Shinkaruk (and by extension Tkachuk) still need it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlbertaBoy12 Posted July 7, 2016 Report Share Posted July 7, 2016 I disagree I am saying that is exactly what you don't want to do. the part I agreed with you on is he is not where he needs to be but we need him to do this progression throughout this season. It is hard to concentrate on that with a rookie further behind in that process than you. If Shinkaruk as an example makes this team I think he needs to play with someone like Backlund who is fully developed and can bring along some like Shinkaruk. If I were setting the lines with Shinkaruk on the roster this would be the line up. Gaudreau , Monahan, Frolik Shinkaruk, Backlund, Chiasson Ferland, Bennett, Brouwer Bouma, Stajan, Hathaway I dont think they will go this direction they have stated that they like the pairs. I think something like this is more likely gaudrea mony chiasson tkachuk/shinkaruk-bennett-brouwer Ferland-backlund-Frolik Bouma-Stajan-Hathaway Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MAC331 Posted July 7, 2016 Report Share Posted July 7, 2016 Difference in opinions. I view Backlund's as a line that you play against tough competition. It's not a place to start a player's development. I am fine with Chiasson on Backlund's RW, as he could use help from a possession guru to help improve his chances. If you go with Frolik on Monahan's line and Brouwer on Bennett's line, then it makes sense to have your natural goal scorers. Brouwer is going to help both excell. He will help both get the space to do the voodoo they do, so well. With that in mind, you can move Ferland to Backlund's LW. He's already good at playing without the puck. IMHO, you shelter the kids until they show they are ready or injuries make it necessary. We all love Monahan, but he still has a few holes in his game. I think he is past needing any sheltering, Bennett and Shinkaruk (and by extension Tkachuk) still need it. I don't think Ferland plays well with Backlund but would compliment Bennett's style of play. Shinkaruk could stand to learn and be supported by two veterans to advance his game. You keep referring to sheltering. I am not even sure what that means, these guys are here to play the game and learn on the job if necessary, this is why you have them play with experienced players. BTW Monahan is about as fundamentally sound as a young player can be and has advanced fast because of it. I would love to hear what holes he has other than just gaining experience. I dont think they will go this direction they have stated that they like the pairs. I think something like this is more likely gaudrea mony chiasson tkachuk/shinkaruk-bennett-brouwer Ferland-backlund-Frolik Bouma-Stajan-Hathaway Time will tell Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lordxan Posted July 7, 2016 Report Share Posted July 7, 2016 Exposing or not protecting are about the same. I don't think Bennett has proved he should move out of a protected spot yet. BH saw to that by using him too much on the wing or throwing him to the wolves as Backlund's LW. He hasn't blossomed at center enough to give him harder minutes yet. With that in mind, you can put a Shinkaruk, Poirier or Tkachuk on his LW and not worry about it. Both players get to grow. This, right here is why the Brewer signing makes no sense... Yes, I do agree Bennett needs a partner, most of the top NHL teams are now 2 if not 3 lines deep with a duo, so we have mony and Johnny for line one and any RW should fit well but my gut says Poirier will be that guy that makes that top line amazing So on to our second line, Bennett and who? Well honesly on RW I see Tkachuck as the fit there and LW well who Bolling or Ferland? no way so that's a huge hole to fill IMO....Shinkaruk or Kilmchuck would be my go to Third line, ok so we have Backlund and on RW Frolik and the left over for.Shinkaruk or Kilmchuck so now on to the 4th line Stajain (yet we have a ton of options mark J? he seems to be coming along ok, not great but he's doing fair) and a ton of other prospects which in all honestly seem to be better options over Brewer and Chasson anyway best for Tkachuck seems to be if he honestly makes it and beats out the vets play him...And going by what I have seen of him he's as determined if not more so than Mnony and Johny were so I'm putting money on him making the show Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MAC331 Posted July 7, 2016 Report Share Posted July 7, 2016 This, right here is why the Brewer signing makes no sense... Yes, I do agree Bennett needs a partner, most of the top NHL teams are now 2 if not 3 lines deep with a duo, so we have mony and Johnny for line one and any RW should fit well but my gut says Poirier will be that guy that makes that top line amazing So on to our second line, Bennett and who? Well honesly on RW I see Tkachuck as the fit there and LW well who Bolling or Ferland? no way so that's a huge hole to fill IMO....Shinkaruk or Kilmchuck would be my go to Third line, ok so we have Backlund and on RW Frolik and the left over for.Shinkaruk or Kilmchuck so now on to the 4th line Stajain (yet we have a ton of options mark J? he seems to be coming along ok, not great but he's doing fair) and a ton of other prospects which in all honestly seem to be better options over Brewer and Chasson anyway best for Tkachuck seems to be if he honestly makes it and beats out the vets play him...And going by what I have seen of him he's as determined if not more so than Mnony and Johny were so I'm putting money on him making the show Tkachuk plays LW and should stay there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JTech780 Posted July 7, 2016 Report Share Posted July 7, 2016 Tkachuk plays LW and should stay there. 95% of Tkachuk's highlights are of him playing on his off wing (RW). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
travel_dude Posted July 7, 2016 Report Share Posted July 7, 2016 I don't think Ferland plays well with Backlund but would compliment Bennett's style of play. Shinkaruk could stand to learn and be supported by two veterans to advance his game. You keep referring to sheltering. I am not even sure what that means, these guys are here to play the game and learn on the job if necessary, this is why you have them play with experienced players. BTW Monahan is about as fundamentally sound as a young player can be and has advanced fast because of it. I would love to hear what holes he has other than just gaining experience. Time will tell Ferkland is underrated for his defensive play. On of his greatest strengths is his ability to go into a corner and strip the puck. He makes life tough for defenders. I don't see that a bad fit with Backlund. If anything, it adds a bigger body to help Backlund maintan possession. Shelter is commonly used in these forums and articles. Many ways to do it. Give the player preferred zone starts. Line him up against weaker competition. It was used with Monahan, Johnny. Nakladal, Kulak. Not so much with Bennett. Monahan is a fine young player and we are lucky to have him. What he lacks he makes up for in other areas in spades. I won't bother getting into the areas he needs to improve upon. You can look it up if you care to. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kehatch Posted July 7, 2016 Report Share Posted July 7, 2016 I would like to see Ferland LW to Backlund and Frolik. Backlund made Bouma and to some extent Colborne productive players. I think that is a good fit. My wish list for lines right now is: Gaudreau-Monahan-Chiasson Ferland-Backlund-Frolik Tkachuk-Bennett-Brouwer Bouma-Vey-Pribyl Giordano-Brodie Jokipakka-Hamilton Kulak-Engelland Elliott Johnson Preferably they will find a top 4 LH D to play with Hamilton moving Jokipakka to the third line. I would also like to see another top 6 RW but thst will probably need to wait a year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
robrob1974 Posted July 7, 2016 Report Share Posted July 7, 2016 95% of Tkachuk's highlights are of him playing on his off wing (RW). Players move around on the ice, it's really where they start and where they defend that defines the wing they play. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheBurn Posted July 7, 2016 Report Share Posted July 7, 2016 I'm torn with Tkachuk. On the one hand I want him to keep developing. We are not favorites for a cup so we should give him time to develop and get some more pro size. On the other hand, what use is going and playing an extra year in junior when you play a grit game and will be bigger and stronger than most. He need to play against men. If he went back to develop, I would hope it is to do so for two to three years so that he can get a chance to play top line in the ahl. I dont see this organization taking that time with him so may as well put him in the NHL if he has skill and let him grow with sheltered minutes. Give him those easy minutes and o-zone starts with Bennett. Bennett was a -11 so he needs those starts anyways and they can grow together. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MAC331 Posted July 7, 2016 Report Share Posted July 7, 2016 95% of Tkachuk's highlights are of him playing on his off wing (RW). He may shoot from there which is great but Dvorik was the RW on that line. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MAC331 Posted July 7, 2016 Report Share Posted July 7, 2016 I would like to see Ferland LW to Backlund and Frolik. Backlund made Bouma and to some extent Colborne productive players. I think that is a good fit. My wish list for lines right now is: Gaudreau-Monahan-Chiasson Ferland-Backlund-Frolik Tkachuk-Bennett-Brouwer Bouma-Vey-Pribyl Giordano-Brodie Jokipakka-Hamilton Kulak-Engelland Elliott Johnson Preferably they will find a top 4 LH D to play with Hamilton moving Jokipakka to the third line. I would also like to see another top 6 RW but thst will probably need to wait a year. You know one player getting lost in the Tkachuk hype is Brent Pollock for LW. He has had as much or more success at the Junior level as Tkachuk. In regards to Jokipakka, I think he represented himself very well with his playing time last season and it would bother me to see him with Hamilton. Should we move Wideman and they could pick up an experienced buyout such as Carle to come in then maybe you move Jokipakka into the 3rd pairing. I like our defense and think this is the year 2 or 3 of the young players should be worked in. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JTech780 Posted July 7, 2016 Report Share Posted July 7, 2016 He may shoot from there which is great but Dvorik was the RW on that line. Dvorak was the center on that line, Tkachuk lined up at LW and Marner lined up st RW, but Tkachuk and Marner played majority of the time on their off wings in the offensive zone. I think Tkachuk can line up at either wing fairly comfortably. You know one player getting lost in the Tkachuk hype is Brent Pollock for LW. He has had as much or more success at the Junior level as Tkachuk. In regards to Jokipakka, I think he represented himself very well with his playing time last season and it would bother me to see him with Hamilton. Should we move Wideman and they could pick up an experienced buyout such as Carle to come in then maybe you move Jokipakka into the 3rd pairing. I like our defense and think this is the year 2 or 3 of the young players should be worked in. I am excited to see what Pollock can do at the AHL level, I wonder with the depth at LW if Calgary will look to move him to center in Stockton. Otherwise he will be fighting with Shinkaruk, Klimchuk, Mangiapane for playing time in the AHL. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MAC331 Posted July 7, 2016 Report Share Posted July 7, 2016 I'm torn with Tkachuk. On the one hand I want him to keep developing. We are not favorites for a cup so we should give him time to develop and get some more pro size. On the other hand, what use is going and playing an extra year in junior when you play a grit game and will be bigger and stronger than most. He need to play against men. If he went back to develop, I would hope it is to do so for two to three years so that he can get a chance to play top line in the ahl. I dont see this organization taking that time with him so may as well put him in the NHL if he has skill and let him grow with sheltered minutes. Give him those easy minutes and o-zone starts with Bennett. Bennett was a -11 so he needs those starts anyways and they can grow together. The decision is while you shelter Tkachuk do you hold back Bennett with less ice time ? I don't think there is any doubt Tkachuk could survive in the NHL however it is a fine line of whether he would be physically ready. Mentally these kids are all hyped that they are NHL material but it is the evaluators and coaches that have to decide if he can stand up to the challenge or is there another player more advanced. Dvorak was the center on that line, Tkachuk lined up at LW and Marner lined up st RW, but Tkachuk and Marner played majority of the time on their off wings in the offensive zone. I think Tkachuk can line up at either wing fairly comfortably. I am excited to see what Pollock can do at the AHL level, I wonder with the depth at LW if Calgary will look to move him to center in Stockton. Otherwise he will be fighting with Shinkaruk, Klimchuk, Mangiapane for playing time in the AHL. Maybe Tkachuk can play both sides, not sure what would be best for him to concentrate on. So let me ask you this, why do you see Pollock in the AHL and not Tkachuk for further development ? Both are similar size, play a very similar game with very similar results and Pollock is likely the better skater. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JTech780 Posted July 7, 2016 Report Share Posted July 7, 2016 The decision is while you shelter Tkachuk do you hold back Bennett with less ice time ? I don't think there is any doubt Tkachuk could survive in the NHL however it is a fine line of whether he would be physically ready. Mentally these kids are all hyped that they are NHL material but it is the evaluators and coaches that have to decide if he can stand up to the challenge or is there another player more advanced. Maybe Tkachuk can play both sides, not sure what would be best for him to concentrate on. So let me ask you this, why do you see Pollock in the AHL and not Tkachuk for further development ? Both are similar size, play a very similar game with very similar results and Pollock is likely the better skater. Pollock isn't nearly as skilled as Tkachuk. Pollock projects more as a 3rd liner, he needs work on his skating and his offense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
420since1974 Posted July 7, 2016 Report Share Posted July 7, 2016 From what I'm hearing from development camp, Tkachuk needs work on his skating too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MAC331 Posted July 7, 2016 Report Share Posted July 7, 2016 Pollock isn't nearly as skilled as Tkachuk. Pollock projects more as a 3rd liner, he needs work on his skating and his offense. Who says this ? I look at their junior career stat lines and fail to see how Pollock is any less skilled than Tkachuk. If anything Pollock has been on a lesser team than Tkachuk. Just sayin, I am going to keep my eye on Pollock and Shinkaruk as candidates to crack the roster. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flyerfan52 Posted July 7, 2016 Report Share Posted July 7, 2016 You know one player getting lost in the Tkachuk hype is Brent Pollock for LW. He has had as much or more success at the Junior level as Tkachuk. In regards to Jokipakka, I think he represented himself very well with his playing time last season and it would bother me to see him with Hamilton. Should we move Wideman and they could pick up an experienced buyout such as Carle to come in then maybe you move Jokipakka into the 3rd pairing. I like our defense and think this is the year 2 or 3 of the young players should be worked in. Good point. @ 2 years older & it seems he's on an upward trajectory. Definitely worth a look. If we can trade Wideman it might be worth taking a chance on Carle. Flyers fans ran hot & cold on him (I liked him) depending who he was paired with. It depends on the contract of course. He'd probably work well with Hamilton. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Tribal Chief Posted July 7, 2016 Report Share Posted July 7, 2016 From my understand tkachuk cant goto ahl he is to young to go there atleast that is what i was told Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cccsberg Posted July 7, 2016 Report Share Posted July 7, 2016 Who says this ? I look at their junior career stat lines and fail to see how Pollock is any less skilled than Tkachuk. If anything Pollock has been on a lesser team than Tkachuk. Just sayin, I am going to keep my eye on Pollock and Shinkaruk as candidates to crack the roster. In terms of what I saw at Development Camp, Tkachuk is more competitive and effective down low whereas Pollock plays a more centre of the O-zone game, and is also faster. Pollock definitely held his own this camp and overall was probably a bit better, scoring a couple of goals.... I think both could work. Relative to expectations I was really impressed with Pollock, Tkachuk was as expected. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
travel_dude Posted July 7, 2016 Report Share Posted July 7, 2016 In terms of what I saw at Development Camp, Tkachuk is more competitive and effective down low whereas Pollock plays a more centre of the O-zone game, and is also faster. Pollock definitely held his own this camp and overall was probably a bit better, scoring a couple of goals.... I think both could work. Relative to expectations I was really impressed with Pollock, Tkachuk was as expected. What was your impression of Burke? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.