So Where do we go from here? Analysis & Predictions

[MAC331]

33 minutes ago, travel_dude said:

 

I base it on what has he done for me.  This year Bouma and Brouwer have been two of the biggest letdowns.  Sure, Brouwer could be on a down year or had the same trouble adjusting to the team as Elliott.  It's a stretch to say that he is capable of raising his game to that of Backlund and Frolik's.  

 

If you care to read this article (negative slant, but the charts don't lie), you may have a different opinion about his track record.  I doubt it.  Just providing for your reading pleasure.

 

https://flamesnation.ca/2016/07/01/why-the-troy-brouwer-signing-looks-bad-for-the-flames/

 

 

I don't disagree about the letdown however as I said if he stays I still think Frolik and Backlund is who he should play along side playing more of a defensive role. We can't do anything about what they paid him but sticking him on the 4th at 4.5M would be the ultimate insult to him and us IMO. Also in the report he isn't best to serve trying to bring along the young star types so I would rather keep him away from Jankowski and use Versteeg there (if he comes back).

[travel_dude]

52 minutes ago, MAC331 said:

I don't disagree about the letdown however as I said if he stays I still think Frolik and Backlund is who he should play along side playing more of a defensive role. We can't do anything about what they paid him but sticking him on the 4th at 4.5M would be the ultimate insult to him and us IMO. Also in the report he isn't best to serve trying to bring along the young star types so I would rather keep him away from Jankowski and use Versteeg there (if he comes back).

 

He has been insulted already, playing out the season on the Stajan line.  And the insult may get worse when (if) he is exposed in the draft.  It will be public info if it happens.  

 

Since we are stuck with him, we might as well find the best situation for him to succeed.  Shelter him with Janko.  Play him with Bennett on the off-wing.  Put him with Tkachuk and Bennett.  Whatever.  He's not a top line RW.  He may find success with Backlund, but the means switching Frolik to LW.  It's a fairly big change to an already successful pair.

 

Personally, I think he needs the right players and right deployment to excel.  Janko and Versteeg may be that right mix. Neither plays a speed game really.  Use Brouwer in the slot and have those guys get the puck on net.    

[travel_dude]

Sorry, meant to add this previously.  Not included, due to small sample size, is how he fared with Ferland, Stajan and Bouma.  Also, there was no example of Frolik and Backlund.  Given the negative impact on everyone except JH (may be PP usage that bumped it up), I don't know if the results would be any more encouraging.

 

[The_People1]

1 minute ago, travel_dude said:

Sorry, meant to add this previously.  Not included, due to small sample size, is how he fared with Ferland, Stajan and Bouma.  Also, there was no example of Frolik and Backlund.  Given the negative impact on everyone except JH (may be PP usage that bumped it up), I don't know if the results would be any more encouraging.

 

 

Cool what tool do you use to generate that chart?

[travel_dude]

15 minutes ago, The_People1 said:

 

Cool what tool do you use to generate that chart?

 

Have to rely on the boys at FN.  Here's a link to the original article, but I got this chart from his twitter feed.

https://flamesnation.ca/2017/05/03/wwyd-wednesday-sign-sam-bennett-to-a-bridge-deal/

 

I don't like most of the stuff they post as they can be very negative, but they can be sources of interesting info; Hero charts, WOWY (like the one I posted), breaking down a goalie's games before and after an event (like changing to white pads).  

[The_People1]

39 minutes ago, travel_dude said:

 

Have to rely on the boys at FN.  Here's a link to the original article, but I got this chart from his twitter feed.

https://flamesnation.ca/2017/05/03/wwyd-wednesday-sign-sam-bennett-to-a-bridge-deal/

 

I don't like most of the stuff they post as they can be very negative, but they can be sources of interesting info; Hero charts, WOWY (like the one I posted), breaking down a goalie's games before and after an event (like changing to white pads).  

 

Thanks.

 

Not that we need statistical evidence to show Brouwer sucks or anything.  He fails the eyeball test as is.

[MAC331]

1 hour ago, travel_dude said:

 

He has been insulted already, playing out the season on the Stajan line.  And the insult may get worse when (if) he is exposed in the draft.  It will be public info if it happens.  

 

Since we are stuck with him, we might as well find the best situation for him to succeed.  Shelter him with Janko.  Play him with Bennett on the off-wing.  Put him with Tkachuk and Bennett.  Whatever.  He's not a top line RW.  He may find success with Backlund, but the means switching Frolik to LW.  It's a fairly big change to an already successful pair.

 

Personally, I think he needs the right players and right deployment to excel.  Janko and Versteeg may be that right mix. Neither plays a speed game really.  Use Brouwer in the slot and have those guys get the puck on net.    

I like my own suggested use of him for now.

[DirtyDeeds]

6 hours ago, MAC331 said:

Why would I think he could be part of a line that keeps the opposition in check, let me think, he has been doing it his whole career. You seem to want to base everything on scoring contribution, even there he finished with decent stats. I didn't care for his play many times throughout the season, there could be a number of reasons for it. I'm not going to let one down season allow me to think the player is useless when his track record shows much differently.

BT said close to this when he was on Fan 960 about his contract extension.

 

He said he was adjusting to new team, new system asked to be leader, asked to be mentor all things he needed to adjust too. He also said his leadership contr4ibutions in lockerroom when things were not going well early on was a big reason why team came out of that funk.

[Carty]

49 minutes ago, DirtyDeeds said:

BT said close to this when he was on Fan 960 about his contract extension.

 

He said he was adjusting to new team, new system asked to be leader, asked to be mentor all things he needed to adjust too. He also said his leadership contr4ibutions in lockerroom when things were not going well early on was a big reason why team came out of that funk.

 

That sounds like exactly what I would say to the press if I had a player whose contract I wanted to unload to Vegas or trade elsewhere...   So it is not necessarily an honest endorsement...

 

Either way, at least for now he is on the Flames roster, and Treliving is going to handle things like that diplomatically when the subject comes up, same goes for other players as well...

 

Other players that were new to the Flames and also players that have been on the team for a while had to adjust to the same system, so I just don't buy that excuse for a player with Brouwers experience...   There were a number of other players that got traded to different teams that seemed to adjust a lot faster as well...

[Flyerfan52]

7 minutes ago, Carty said:

 

That sounds like exactly what I would say to the press if I had a player whose contract I wanted to unload to Vegas or trade elsewhere...   So it is not necessarily an honest endorsement...

 

Either way, at least for now he is on the Flames roster, and Treliving is going to handle things like that diplomatically when the subject comes up, same goes for other players as well...

 

 

 

I would also say much the same 

OTOH it could be true. Rather than gamesmanship it could be a round about admistion that the current "C" & other "A"  need help in getting the rooms attention. Brouwer was given the 2nd "A" for his leadership before his 1st year as a Flame. The letter could have been stitched on the sweater of longer serving Flames but something about him made him the choice.

Remember, the leaders  of the team needn't be the highest scorers but the 1 the team takes it's cue from. Brouwer could be the counterbalance to Gio & the rather shy Monahan (awkward in front of cameras).

It's the production per $ people hate. I'd love to hear what the players say about the top dogs off camera.

********************************************************************************************************

LV will need a captain & if selected Brouwer could well be that. But no amount of posturing will get McPhee to take him if LV does the same but says he'll consider Brouwer if there is a sweetener (retained salary/a pick).

Which 1 blinks?

[MAC331]

13 hours ago, Flyerfan52 said:

OTOH it could be true. Rather than gamesmanship it could be a round about admistion that the current "C" & other "A"  need help in getting the rooms attention. Brouwer was given the 2nd "A" for his leadership before his 1st year as a Flame. The letter could have been stitched on the sweater of longer serving Flames but something about him made him the choice.

Remember, the leaders  of the team needn't be the highest scorers but the 1 the team takes it's cue from. Brouwer could be the counterbalance to Gio & the rather shy Monahan (awkward in front of cameras).

It's the production per $ people hate. I'd love to hear what the players say about the top dogs off camera.

********************************************************************************************************

LV will need a captain & if selected Brouwer could well be that. But no amount of posturing will get McPhee to take him if LV does the same but says he'll consider Brouwer if there is a sweetener (retained salary/a pick).

Which 1 blinks?

I think Brouwer will be exposed and I think BT is likely fine with whatever happens. He didn't sign him to that contract because he didn't think there were benefits to him being a Flame. One benefit out of the chute was Versteeg coming here who helped this team a lot. Brouwer was moved around a lot while GG was trying to find solutions for his line ups which can disrupt some players efforts. We had a number of players feeling their way around for parts of the season. I think when the smoke clears Brouwer will be a Flame and GG needs to find where he best fits to make the team better.

[conundrumed]

Just a thought, but looking at the line that was so stealthy in St loo was:

Fabbri-Stasney-Brouwer

If we were to match that, would it be:

Bennett-Backlund-Brouwer?

Or maybe:

Tkachuk-Backlund Brouwer?

 

I'm with everyone else that Brouwer wasn't very good this year, but I'm also on the fence about running guys down in yr 1 where our play wasn't exactly consistent.

I think the first line I offered up is prolly closest, and I also realize that I'm kinda bending over backwards for Brouwer, but just to converse about something other than how bad he was etc.

If we can't get a 1 RW in the offseason I think we pretty much make it Frolik and force it. At worst, he makes up for JG's defence. All those turnovers you might just as well have Frolik covering them up.

The problem is, I'm leaving Tkachuk hanging, so to go against the grain of our forcing every prospect to be a 4th liner:

Tkachuk-Jankowski-Versteeg on the 2a/b line, where I know I'm not succeeding in replicating:

Tkachuk-Dvorak-Marner, but putting the same "type" of line together.

As an aside, screw you Dvorak, you're the only Knight I ever liked.

 

And I'm just throwing it out there for conversation, not my conviction, so don't worry about calling me an idiot, I already get that part. lol

[travel_dude]

14 minutes ago, conundrumed said:

Just a thought, but looking at the line that was so stealthy in St loo was:

Fabbri-Stasney-Brouwer

If we were to match that, would it be:

Bennett-Backlund-Brouwer?

Or maybe:

Tkachuk-Backlund Brouwer?

 

I'm with everyone else that Brouwer wasn't very good this year, but I'm also on the fence about running guys down in yr 1 where our play wasn't exactly consistent.

I think the first line I offered up is prolly closest, and I also realize that I'm kinda bending over backwards for Brouwer, but just to converse about something other than how bad he was etc.

If we can't get a 1 RW in the offseason I think we pretty much make it Frolik and force it. At worst, he makes up for JG's defence. All those turnovers you might just as well have Frolik covering them up.

The problem is, I'm leaving Tkachuk hanging, so to go against the grain of our forcing every prospect to be a 4th liner:

Tkachuk-Jankowski-Versteeg on the 2a/b line, where I know I'm not succeeding in replicating:

Tkachuk-Dvorak-Marner, but putting the same "type" of line together.

As an aside, screw you Dvorak, you're the only Knight I ever liked.

 

And I'm just throwing it out there for conversation, not my conviction, so don't worry about calling me an idiot, I already get that part. lol

 

I don't disagree with what you state.  As much as the 2nd line performed above expectations, you can't just use that as the only way things would work.  Camp and pre-season is to explore what best works.  I am just not that certain that Brouwer belongs with Backlund.  Then again, does Tkachuk belong there?

 

I would prefer that we get a top RW to compliment JH/Monahan.  Not just some random player, but a guy whose style and hockey sense match.  Frolik may be a good fall-back in case they don't get one for his defensice prowess.  Or maybe Tkachuk is the best choice.

 

We really only have a few pairs that played really well together for longer than a stretch; JH-Monahan, Frolik-Backlund.  

[conundrumed]

I don't agree on shifting sides with Tkachuk, he's a LW. Our LW is JG then Tkachuk, which is great. Move Bennett to LW I believe would really strengthen our LW, huge. Putting Bennett at C and Tkachuk at RW, suddenly, we are way weak on the LW. We need strength of position somewhere.

I think most teams we could catch in bad matchups if we could at least load a side. At the very least.

[MAC331]

2 hours ago, conundrumed said:

I don't agree on shifting sides with Tkachuk, he's a LW. Our LW is JG then Tkachuk, which is great. Move Bennett to LW I believe would really strengthen our LW, huge. Putting Bennett at C and Tkachuk at RW, suddenly, we are way weak on the LW. We need strength of position somewhere.

I think most teams we could catch in bad matchups if we could at least load a side. At the very least.

I think it was good in a learning way that Tkachuk was placed with Backlund and Frolik but we need to move on and develop further Bennett and now Lazar. In order to play to our strengths I think we should have a LW side of Gaudreau, Tkachuk, Frolik and Ferland, this is where these 4 belong. Down the middle of we have Monahan, Bennett, Backlund and Jankowski we have our pillars in place. On RW we will be searching for the top line but if nothing good presents itself re-sign Versteeg and use him there. Lazar with Bennett and Brouwer with Backlund should serve us well. RW for the 4th line is wide open. This is not a bad way to head into camp.

[calgaryflames84]

Are we giving up on Ferland as top RW? This guy has the tools to be a total beast. If he can get on a roll and work on his accuracy a bit he could be Jarome Iginla 2.0. Our team is young, let's let them build chemistry as opposed to always wanting to bust up the lines. I like our top 2 lines. Although I have a feeling that Backlund will be dealt this year, love Backs and I hope he doesn't go but he will fetch a great player or possibly a 1st overall and I think that's what BT will do. In that case I think Bennett moves up into the #2 Center with TK and Frolik. They may go out and grab some new guys but I'd be happy with just bringing back Versteeg, signing Stone and bringing up guys like Janko, Magipane and Anderson or Kulak next year. This team is only experience away from being a contender. Possibly bringing in somebody like Bishop while Gillies gets some NHL experience as a backup. I'd like to resign Johnson as well

[The_People1]

1 hour ago, calgaryflames84 said:

Are we giving up on Ferland as top RW? This guy has the tools to be a total beast. If he can get on a roll and work on his accuracy a bit he could be Jarome Iginla 2.0. Our team is young, let's let them build chemistry as opposed to always wanting to bust up the lines. I like our top 2 lines. Although I have a feeling that Backlund will be dealt this year, love Backs and I hope he doesn't go but he will fetch a great player or possibly a 1st overall and I think that's what BT will do. In that case I think Bennett moves up into the #2 Center with TK and Frolik. They may go out and grab some new guys but I'd be happy with just bringing back Versteeg, signing Stone and bringing up guys like Janko, Magipane and Anderson or Kulak next year. This team is only experience away from being a contender. Possibly bringing in somebody like Bishop while Gillies gets some NHL experience as a backup. I'd like to resign Johnson as well

 

No way we should trade Backlund for a 1st overall.  Are you kidding me?

 

 

But seriously, I do hope you're right and we trade Backlund though.  I was hoping we could trade Backlund for Rakell last off-season.  No way that happens now that Rakell has taken his game to another level... but Backlund could land a good 1st line RW.  In regards to Ferland, if Backlund goes, then Tkachuk - Bennett - Ferland is a line that has potential.  Toughness, agitation, size, speed, and skill.  Maybe Klimchuk graduates with Jankowski on a line with Frolik as the vet.   Brouwer simply needs to go one way or another.

[MAC331]

6 hours ago, calgaryflames84 said:

Are we giving up on Ferland as top RW? This guy has the tools to be a total beast. If he can get on a roll and work on his accuracy a bit he could be Jarome Iginla 2.0. Our team is young, let's let them build chemistry as opposed to always wanting to bust up the lines. I like our top 2 lines. Although I have a feeling that Backlund will be dealt this year, love Backs and I hope he doesn't go but he will fetch a great player or possibly a 1st overall and I think that's what BT will do. In that case I think Bennett moves up into the #2 Center with TK and Frolik. They may go out and grab some new guys but I'd be happy with just bringing back Versteeg, signing Stone and bringing up guys like Janko, Magipane and Anderson or Kulak next year. This team is only experience away from being a contender. Possibly bringing in somebody like Bishop while Gillies gets some NHL experience as a backup. I'd like to resign Johnson as well

Sooner or later it comes down to the money and who you want to give it to on your team. My guess is the Flames see Bennett as a better option than Backlund in the near future and will give him the money vs giving it to Backlund. Right or wrong any decision will effect this team. Personally from a pure team building standpoint there is no way I would trade Backlund or Frolik for the next 3 or 4 years. If Backlund would do a 5 year deal at 4.5M per season I would extend him tomorrow.

I would love to say Ferland could be the guy for our top line RW however I don't have that sense about him being the full answer. I think he provided some of what those other two need, size, mobility, scoring touch and distraction for the opposition. I think I just sold myself on him. LOL. No doubt we can use him practically anywhere I just think we need that constant threat at all times type of RW to draw the attention away from JG. We don't have that player for RW so Ferland could find himself there next season and hopefully he grabs the opportunity and we never look back.

[travel_dude]

2 hours ago, MAC331 said:

Sooner or later it comes down to the money and who you want to give it to on your team. My guess is the Flames see Bennett as a better option than Backlund in the near future and will give him the money vs giving it to Backlund. Right or wrong any decision will effect this team. Personally from a pure team building standpoint there is no way I would trade Backlund or Frolik for the next 3 or 4 years. If Backlund would do a 5 year deal at 4.5M per season I would extend him tomorrow.

I would love to say Ferland could be the guy for our top line RW however I don't have that sense about him being the full answer. I think he provided some of what those other two need, size, mobility, scoring touch and distraction for the opposition. I think I just sold myself on him. LOL. No doubt we can use him practically anywhere I just think we need that constant threat at all times type of RW to draw the attention away from JG. We don't have that player for RW so Ferland could find himself there next season and hopefully he grabs the opportunity and we never look back.

 

Agree to a lot of what you said, except for Bennett getting money over Backlund.  The top end of Bennett is probably way higher than Backlund, but we have not seen that yet.  Not Sam's fault, as he has been in beast mode for a long time, just suffering through the line design.  I think Bennett gets a decent raise, but more of a bridge contract at lower money.  3x3 or something like that.  Give him the incentive to get a Monahan deal. Don't buy the UFA years right now, as he would want a bigger cheque.  It's a low risk signing.  Higher risk would be to sign him for 8 years at a decent rate, since he hasn't provded to be Monahan level yet.  

 

I love what Ferland brings to the team.  A little disappointed with him in the playoffs, though.  I think he is a perfect 2nd/3rd line player.  Give him PP time to show that next level we think he can show.  As far as RW goes, I'm not sure the fit is 100%.  He looked good playing on the 1st line on RW.  He has a wicked shot that works on the off wing.  The rush is where I am concerned with him.  I think he is better coming down the center of main street, not on the right side.

 

Ideally, we get a top line RW, and use Ferland on LW with Bennett or Backlund or Janko.     

[MAC331]

1 minute ago, travel_dude said:

 

Agree to a lot of what you said, except for Bennett getting money over Backlund.  The top end of Bennett is probably way higher than Backlund, but we have not seen that yet.  Not Sam's fault, as he has been in beast mode for a long time, just suffering through the line design.  I think Bennett gets a decent raise, but more of a bridge contract at lower money.  3x3 or something like that.  Give him the incentive to get a Monahan deal. Don't buy the UFA years right now, as he would want a bigger cheque.  It's a low risk signing.  Higher risk would be to sign him for 8 years at a decent rate, since he hasn't provded to be Monahan level yet.  

 

I love what Ferland brings to the team.  A little disappointed with him in the playoffs, though.  I think he is a perfect 2nd/3rd line player.  Give him PP time to show that next level we think he can show.  As far as RW goes, I'm not sure the fit is 100%.  He looked good playing on the 1st line on RW.  He has a wicked shot that works on the off wing.  The rush is where I am concerned with him.  I think he is better coming down the center of main street, not on the right side.

 

Ideally, we get a top line RW, and use Ferland on LW with Bennett or Backlund or Janko.     

I think that is what I was saying that at some point the salary crossover between the two has to be taken into consideration. I really have no doubt Bennett will take off as soon as next season.

Ferland is offering the team a lot of versatility which is a good thing. Where he settles in remains to be seen IMO.We may have to wait out this ideal top line RW to arrive.

[Die hard Flame]

Personally, although Brian Elliott had played an inspirational role in the 11 consecutive wins, goal tending had been the most significant issue for the Calgary Flames. In game 4, this was one factor(apart from extraneous variables) that contributed to their defeat.  Alternatively, there was something vital missing during the playoffs...intensity, drive and will to win.  Inherently, it was as though the fear of combating the Ducks still existed in the mind of the players...like a ghost.  As a rule, people articulate that our players don't have the physicality, but it is more the skill and the aspiration that plays a pivotal role.  

 

1.  Kris Versteeg was particularly prominent in the Flames' capitalization efforts; and Sean Monahan had been impressive. 

2.  Although Troy Brouwer did not score, his leadership qualities had been conspicuous.

3.  Sam Bennett played exceedingly well in terms of aggressive hits and demonstrating the no quit attitude.    

 

[zima]

So Ferland is Arbitration eligible are we going to try and sign him or let him walk like Colburn. I bet Fer thinks he is an elite player or close to it and is going to ask for the moon or does he go with a 3 yr 3 mil contract ? Chason is also in that realm but im sure we will not try resign unless he agrees to a cap friendly contract.  Smid is gone finally he got himself an awesome paid vacation contract Bolig is gone eng, wides , Chad and Elliot gone I hope Saying that they both could of had bad yrs but would you take a chance on that?  Hathaway probaly gone Arbitration elig as well as spoon and Vey so know we start a new group of kids to replace the old. I just hope Bennett is'nt thinking he deserves same as Mony he should site in the 3 mil or a show me more contract.

[travel_dude]

Just now, MAC331 said:

I think that is what I was saying that at some point the salary crossover between the two has to be taken into consideration. I really have no doubt Bennett will take off as soon as next season.

Ferland is offering the team a lot of versatility which is a good thing. Where he settles in remains to be seen IMO.We may have to wait out this ideal top line RW to arrive.

 

I think there are several versions of the ideal top line RW:

• a skilled player that can make/receive passes and finish the play (Hudler type); this setup may not work as well in the playoffs if the opposing team is able to lay the body on the wingers
• a big body player that can skate and finish the play 

Ferland has shown the ability to play at this level, but his LHS can be a detriment to developing plays.  He has taken a few steps forward this past season, so he may be the right guy for the job long term.

 

[travel_dude]

4 minutes ago, zima said:

So Ferland is Arbitration eligible are we going to try and sign him or let him walk like Colburn. I bet Fer thinks he is an elite player or close to it and is going to ask for the moon or does he go with a 3 yr 3 mil contract ?

 

I think Ferland sees himself as a good player, not a great one.  He would love to get a big raise, but won't pull a Bouma.  He appreciates what the Flames have done for him, saving him from his vices and giving him a chance to play at a high level.  He will settle for whatever he feels is a fair offer.  

[redfire11]

The Flames have in Gaudreau possibly one of the most dynamic players in the NHL. But as a team we are doing NOTHING to emphasize/protect/ensure that. Sean M is a 6/3 200 lb center man; he finds and makes space in the slot but he does nothing to protect JG his set up man. We need SM and Ferland to start creating space for JG if they want JG to remain on their line. If not we need to find a Center and RW to open up the JG potential. Unless we find a way to protect JG we need to realize the Flames are not the type of team that can fully utilize a potential generational player in JG and should look to make a trade before he is long term injured or has regressed to a point of low value.