What Is Best For Matthew Tkachuk

[MAC331]

40 minutes ago, jjgallow said:

Sigh....

 

Can't fight the masses....happens every time they see a fresh new 18 year old.

Apparently some can't recognize the fine line that exists of where a young players development status sits. I have said repeatedly if he stays he would likely do OK so do you want him to do OK or return more mature in a year and be fantastic in all aspects of his game. I don't really care as I see our top line RW more of a concern for this season. I don't think Versteeg is the answer there, on this team he is more of a 3rd or 4th line player. If they don't see Chiasson as any kind of option for the top line RW then they should release him because he isn't a real good fit anywhere else either.

[travel_dude]

1 hour ago, cross16 said:

so far my vote hasn't changed, Tkachuk should be in junior. While he can physically handle the pro game I still think he is a step behind and the pro game is just a bit ahead of where he is. I think what's best for him is junior but no doubt in my mind he is going to be a player. 

 

I would like to see him play a team other than the Oilers.  The first two games were not exactly a positive experience.  

[DirtyDeeds]

14 minutes ago, travel_dude said:

 

I would like to see him play a team other than the Oilers.  The first two games were not exactly a positive experience.  

BT said he has made the team for now. Earned it. He also said any decision to send him back would be based on 2 things, 

• What is best for the player
• What is best for the team.

 

As our 2nd best LW can we send him down/back to Junior?

 

How is Junior going to have any better coaching/training/doctors etc than what he can get right here?

If as Cross said he is just a tad below the NHL.. Isn't putting im in a position to progress better than putting him back where he has pretty much done it all there?

The above is hard to describe. In video games they put in increasing levels of difficulty. They do it because once you have attained a level and it becomes easy you don't progress or get any better. Maybe this level is best for him.. Just saying..

 

Ask yourself this question. Are the Flames better with him or without him in the lineup?

[jjgallow]

1 minute ago, DirtyDeeds said:

BT said he has made the team for now. Earned it. He also said any decision to send him back would be based on 2 things, 

• What is best for the player
• What is best for the team.

 

Unfortunate that BT thinks these are 2 different things.

[cross16]

3 minutes ago, jjgallow said:

 

Unfortunate that BT thinks these are 2 different things.

 

How are they not?

 

right now it's pretty clear that tkachuk staying is the best for the flames. However, I think what you can argue is that is that best for tkachuk? just because Tkachuk is their 2nd best LW doesn't mean he should stay. That's short term thinking. 

[travel_dude]

3 minutes ago, cross16 said:

 

How are they not?

 

right now it's pretty clear that tkachuk staying is the best for the flames. However, I think what you can argue is that is that best for tkachuk? just because Tkachuk is their 2nd best LW doesn't mean he should stay. That's short term thinking. 

 

I hevn't looked at the stats to see what they point to, but is Bennett's line getting sheltered at all?  

[AlbertaBoy12]

1 minute ago, travel_dude said:

 

I hevn't looked at the stats to see what they point to, but is Bennett's line getting sheltered at all?  

last night they got 55% O zone starts, so I dont think they are getting sheltered, I think mony is getting sheltered, backlund is taking D zone starts with stajan/bennett getting whatever else.

[jjgallow]

10 minutes ago, cross16 said:

 

How are they not?

 

right now it's pretty clear that tkachuk staying is the best for the flames. However, I think what you can argue is that is that best for tkachuk? just because Tkachuk is their 2nd best LW doesn't mean he should stay. That's short term thinking. 

 

We have very different ideas right now about what's clear and not clear, clearly.   But, we...clearly, agree on the value of Tkachuk's long term development.

 

the rest of our difference is just semantics, imho.  Keeping that in mind, and back to the question:

 

Suppose the best thing for the Flames was for Tkachuck to stay, even if it hurts his development.     That's your premise, right?  I don't agree with your assessment of his play, but let's go with that premise for a moment:

 

Are the Flames winning the cup this year?  No.

 

Could the Flames win the cup at some other point in Tkachuk's career?  Yes.

 

Will hurting Tkachuk's development now, hurt the Flame's chances of a future Stanley Cup?  Yes.

 

Thus, what is good for Tkachuk's future, is good for the Flame's future.  And thus good for the Flames.  Thus, from my perspective, which is very much Stanley Cup (long term) based, they are essentially the same thing.

[MAC331]

2 minutes ago, DirtyDeeds said:

BT said he has made the team for now. Earned it. He also said any decision to send him back would be based on 2 things, 

• What is best for the player
• What is best for the team.

 

As our 2nd best LW can we send him down/back to Junior?

 

How is Junior going to have any better coaching/training/doctors etc than what he can get right here?

If as Cross said he is just a tad below the NHL.. Isn't putting im in a position to progress better than putting him back where he has pretty much done it all there?

The above is hard to describe. In video games they put in increasing levels of difficulty. They do it because once you have attained a level and it becomes easy you don't progress or get any better. Maybe this level is best for him.. Just saying..

 

Ask yourself this question. Are the Flames better with him or without him in the lineup?

Couple of comments. He had a very strong supporting cast in London to help the success he enjoyed there. Would he gain another level of confidence by going back and proving to himself he could carry that team. You ask the question would we be better with him or without him and I say it wouldn't matter much this season in our big picture. Maybe Ferland or Shinkaruk could produce the same results with the ice time and line mates. As a side note to what I am trying to say is all of Monahan, Bennett and Gaudreau carried their respective teams in Junior and college which IMO gave them the maturity to make the push into the NHL. The talent is there with Tkachuk however another year of maturity and success in Junior may be whats best for both player and team.

[JTech780]

22 minutes ago, travel_dude said:

 

I hevn't looked at the stats to see what they point to, but is Bennett's line getting sheltered at all?  

 

So far through 2 games Bennett and Tkachuk have had a 66.7% (5v5) zone starts. Looks to me like they are being sheltered.

 

On the other end of the spectrum it looks like GG is putting lots of trust in Monahan and Gaudreau as they have 36.84% and 38.1% zone starts.

 

 

[zima]

Well cross seeing how there is a vote I vote he stays he is fun to watch and isn't hurting the team sure he gets a penalty every game but he also makes things happen and his opponents keep there head on a swivel he is always in front of the net and doesn't shy away from a hit or 2 each game. He will do nothing but get better in the NHL he has nothing to prove in  junior they are not sheltering him and he is not scared of the big boys. Like  it or not I'm right he stays even Kelly Hrudey likes his game.

[travel_dude]

58 minutes ago, JTech780 said:

 

So far through 2 games Bennett and Tkachuk have had a 66.7% (5v5) zone starts. Looks to me like they are being sheltered.

 

On the other end of the spectrum it looks like GG is putting lots of trust in Monahan and Gaudreau as they have 36.84% and 38.1% zone starts.

 

 

 

There must be a discrepancy between the 1st and 2nd games.  AB12 said that the last game they were at 55%.  I'm not as happy that Johnny's line is getting buried for now. That may show trust, but you also need to give offensive players a better chance to have the shift with the puck.  If they wn the FO in the D-zone, they are using too much of the shift to gain the zone.  I say that because we are not seeing a lot of Johnny or Brosie zone entry attempts.  We see a lot of dump ins or defected into the o-zone passes from the defense.

 

I think it may be the way they are rolling the lines, but I prefer to see the O-zone FO's split between the 1st and 2nd lines.  Use Stajan and Backland to do what they do best.     

[JTech780]

55 minutes ago, travel_dude said:

 

There must be a discrepancy between the 1st and 2nd games.  AB12 said that the last game they were at 55%.  I'm not as happy that Johnny's line is getting buried for now. That may show trust, but you also need to give offensive players a better chance to have the shift with the puck.  If they wn the FO in the D-zone, they are using too much of the shift to gain the zone.  I say that because we are not seeing a lot of Johnny or Brosie zone entry attempts.  We see a lot of dump ins or defected into the o-zone passes from the defense.

 

I think it may be the way they are rolling the lines, but I prefer to see the O-zone FO's split between the 1st and 2nd lines.  Use Stajan and Backland to do what they do best.     

 

I believe they were somewhere between 75 and 80% zone starts in game 1.

[zima]

I watched that game last night and if we blocked all those shots then we really got beat on another problem I have is Chuky has no hits well I seen him hit a few players in that game and last game as well?

So if eveyone says that he had a very good supporting cast last yr and that is why he was so successful and this yr that support will not be there. If he is on his own and he gets totally destroyed and is below average due to no support from all those great players he played with where will his confidence be at the end of a disappointing yr in London?  Have you really done him any favors ?  Here he has a huge cast to play with and great young kid to work with why would you take that away ? I have seen a bit of what those kids in the A brought this yr i'm not impressed. 

[conundrumed]

2 hours ago, zima said:

I watched that game last night and if we blocked all those shots then we really got beat on another problem I have is Chuky has no hits well I seen him hit a few players in that game and last game as well?

So if eveyone says that he had a very good supporting cast last yr and that is why he was so successful and this yr that support will not be there. If he is on his own and he gets totally destroyed and is below average due to no support from all those great players he played with where will his confidence be at the end of a disappointing yr in London?  Have you really done him any favors ?  Here he has a huge cast to play with and great young kid to work with why would you take that away ? I have seen a bit of what those kids in the A brought this yr i'm not impressed. 

Are you implying Hunter's Knight's are no good this year? Bwahaha. Best franchise in the CHL, for a while now.

With or without Tkachuk. The best part of sending Tkachuk down is he has the best safety net available.

And Parsons is his goalie.

Drafting Knights is not a bad plan, they don't have to be rushed.

[travel_dude]

9 minutes ago, conundrumed said:

Are you implying Hunter's Knight's are no good this year? Bwahaha. Best franchise in the CHL, for a while now.

With or without Tkachuk. The best part of sending Tkachuk down is he has the best safety net available.

And Parsons is his goalie.

Drafting Knights is not a bad plan, they don't have to be rushed.

 

Unless Tkachuk starts to force his will on the team, he will probably go back before his 9 games are up.  He looked so good starting out, but seems to be wallowing a bit now, and the coach is not giving him any leeway.  Sort of how Johnny started his first season.  Playing a team out of the conference may help him get back on track.  Unfortunately, the coach seems to like to switch players around mid game to start things going.  That is having an adverse effects so far.

 

Comparing Shinkaruk or Poirier to Tkachuk, he is less NHL ready.  He has the size, but is not used to the size of the guys he is trying to go through.  I don't think that skating has been the issue.  

[conundrumed]

All I'm saying is that sending Tkachuk down isn't a condemnation of Tkachuk. He has a good place to go.

The team as a whole is pretty confused right now, send Matt down to a year of stability and only getting better.

Bring Poirier back, lower expectations.

[travel_dude]

38 minutes ago, conundrumed said:

All I'm saying is that sending Tkachuk down isn't a condemnation of Tkachuk. He has a good place to go.

The team as a whole is pretty confused right now, send Matt down to a year of stability and only getting better.

Bring Poirier back, lower expectations.

 

I'm not complaining.  I want him to be 100% NHL ready, or at least close to it.  I think Poirier and Shinkaruk are closer.  They are all prospects, so we need to manage their progression as well.  Neither was better than Tkachuk in the pre-season, but that doesn't mean too much if they are able to gets ther legs under them in the AHL.

[zima]

I was going to argue the point again but a waste of time the arm chair management has already decided he needs to have another yr of Junior just like mono Bennett and JH I guess we will see. But he has palyed as well as any one else to this point on this team which of course isn't saying much.

[MAC331]

17 hours ago, zima said:

I watched that game last night and if we blocked all those shots then we really got beat on another problem I have is Chuky has no hits well I seen him hit a few players in that game and last game as well?

So if eveyone says that he had a very good supporting cast last yr and that is why he was so successful and this yr that support will not be there. If he is on his own and he gets totally destroyed and is below average due to no support from all those great players he played with where will his confidence be at the end of a disappointing yr in London?  Have you really done him any favors ?  Here he has a huge cast to play with and great young kid to work with why would you take that away ? I have seen a bit of what those kids in the A brought this yr i'm not impressed. 

London is about as good a Junior organization you will find. He would be fine there and well support but perhaps more relied upon which should bring out the best in him. The time itself provides for another year of both physical and mental preparation for NHL play. There will be merits to both sides of the discussion.

[MAC331]

11 hours ago, zima said:

I was going to argue the point again but a waste of time the arm chair management has already decided he needs to have another yr of Junior just like mono Bennett and JH I guess we will see. But he has palyed as well as any one else to this point on this team which of course isn't saying much.

Are you not part of the armchair management ? your views are not necessarily wrong either. We will see what the real management decides.

[travel_dude]

12 hours ago, zima said:

I was going to argue the point again but a waste of time the arm chair management has already decided he needs to have another yr of Junior just like mono Bennett and JH I guess we will see. But he has palyed as well as any one else to this point on this team which of course isn't saying much.

 

Every player is different.  Bennett went back to junior after his surgery.  He was on a very good team that was going to the playoffs.  They lost out early and he came back to the Flames as any junior player would.  He was used in the playoffs and managed 3 goals in 11 games, but also looked like a bulldog out there.

 

Monahan has the possibility of going back to a poorly run junior team, where he would be one of the leaders on a bad team.  He scored 9 points in his first 9.  We had few options at the time for a center.

 

Johnny Hockey started his first 5 games with little impact.  He sat for a game then never looked back.

 

Tkachuk has not done anything as impactful in his first 3 games.  Too early to tell if he is 100% ready for the NHL.  He has shown flashes, but like his line, has contributed very little on the scoreboard.  If the line can get going, then he gets a shot.

 

[cross16]

Big different with Monahan too, was MOnahan had already played 3 season of Junior, Tkachuk as 1, so not only were you sending Monahan down to a bad program you were sending him down to a league he had already excelled in. Tkachuk was terrific in the O last year but thats just 1 year so learning consistancy and being the "guy" on your junio team holds a lot of value for his development IMO. There wasn't the same draw for Monahan with junior becuase I think you legitimately had to question how much Monahan would have learned had he gone back to junior.

 

Tkachuk has a few more games but so far with every game the decision is becoming more obvious that he needs to go back to junior. For me, he's trending in the wrong direction and ever game falls a little further behind in terms of making an impact on the game. yes he his physical and no he isn't backing down but that's not enough for me to keep him here. I don't think he is ready for this level yet and It doesnt' make sense to me (nor do I think its right by him) to keep him up here and hope that he gets ready over the course of the season. He's got too good of a situation waiting for him in London to make that risky play. 

[conundrumed]

Can someone explain to me the Oilers keeping Draisatl up for 40 odd games before sending him back down?

How does that work in terms of contract, and was that a terrible move?

[cross16]

23 minutes ago, conundrumed said:

Can someone explain to me the Oilers keeping Draisatl up for 40 odd games before sending him back down?

How does that work in terms of contract, and was that a terrible move?

 

Not terrible, but not exactly the greatest decision.

 

It burnt a year on his ELC so he is an RFA after this season. Had they sent him down after the 9 games he woudln't be RFA until the following season. However, they didn't burn a year as it relates to his UFA status. Last year was his first year accuring towards UFA status so he still has another 6 years to go (including this one) before he qualifies for UFA status.

 

That's why they senr him down when they did. They had burnt the 9 games, but didn't accure a year to UFA status. So not terrible, but not ideal like I said.