So Where do we go from here? Analysis & Predictions

[The_People1]

No one is suggesting "no chemistry" or "lack of chemistry".

[MAC331]

22 hours ago, kehatch said:

 

Since Ottawa is his only NHL team so far that is all we have to go on. I agree there is a plan and the Flames like him. But I don't think its to be a scoring winger on the top line, especially this season.

Maybe or maybe not I think we will find Lazar the type that gives GG some further versatility much like Versteeg. As much as I am for giving Ferland the top line opportunity the guy gets hurt a lot. Same goes for Brouwer, as much as we all complain about his play he is a versatile player that can play any of the RW positions.

[MAC331]

8 hours ago, AlbertaBoy12 said:

It least someone sees this.

Oh I think this is also part of the equation as well because it forces the opposition to deploy their best defenders out. Let's not lose sight of what makes a line click and perform at it's best, we still need that skilled ingredient on RW with JG and SM to max out the production there. Hudler is a good example of what works best for them, what he lacked of JG's flashy style he made up with experience and smarts. He was an accomplished passer and shooter. We don't have this player yet.

It may take a Nieuwendyk (accomplished vet) for Iginla (rookie with potential) type deal but using Backlund for ?????? RW

[JTech780]

I know we all want that elite RW for the top line, but there are really only two ways to get that level of player. 1. Draft that player. That will take too long and where we should be drafting the next few years is too low to really have a high chance of getting that type of player. 2. Trade for a RW. This would most likely mean trading someone like Dougie Hamilton, which I don't support. Even a top line RW would be a secondary player and you don't give up top pairing defensemen for wingers.

[MAC331]

56 minutes ago, JTech780 said:

I know we all want that elite RW for the top line, but there are really only two ways to get that level of player. 1. Draft that player. That will take too long and where we should be drafting the next few years is too low to really have a high chance of getting that type of player. 2. Trade for a RW. This would most likely mean trading someone like Dougie Hamilton, which I don't support. Even a top line RW would be a secondary player and you don't give up top pairing defensemen for wingers.

I'm not sure I buy your last line about not trading a top 4 defenseman for a top RW or wingers as you put it. What if you have a surplus of LHSD that could replace Brodie or Giordano so you are trading from a surplus position for a team need ? You wouldn't do it ?

[cross16]

1 hour ago, JTech780 said:

I know we all want that elite RW for the top line, but there are really only two ways to get that level of player. 1. Draft that player. That will take too long and where we should be drafting the next few years is too low to really have a high chance of getting that type of player. 2. Trade for a RW. This would most likely mean trading someone like Dougie Hamilton, which I don't support. Even a top line RW would be a secondary player and you don't give up top pairing defensemen for wingers.

 

I agree that elite should not be the target, that is getting ahead of ourselves and really very, very few teams have the ability to have a line full of elite players.

 

I don't think the target should be an elite player, but I also think the target should be much higher than Ferland, Brouwer, Versteeg etc. 

[AlbertaBoy12]

1 hour ago, JTech780 said:

I know we all want that elite RW for the top line, but there are really only two ways to get that level of player. 1. Draft that player. That will take too long and where we should be drafting the next few years is too low to really have a high chance of getting that type of player. 2. Trade for a RW. This would most likely mean trading someone like Dougie Hamilton, which I don't support. Even a top line RW would be a secondary player and you don't give up top pairing defensemen for wingers.

Ive been trying to point that out for weeks. I agree with cross we need to target someone better then ferland, brouwer or versteeg, but the targets are very limited and the asking price is probably to great right now. At this point this team will be very good if we can get the bennett line going which would be my goal before even worrying about a 1st line RW. 

 

The predators just proved you can go very far with a good top 4 on D and really id rate our forward group ahead of the predators.

[The_People1]

5 minutes ago, cross16 said:

 

I agree that elite should not be the target, that is getting ahead of ourselves and really very, very few teams have the ability to have a line full of elite players.

 

While that's true, I feel the most ideal setup for the top two lines is,

 

Elite LW - Elite C - average RW

Average LW - Elite C - Elite RW

 

This gives you the flexibility to pair your Cs with one elite winger and when the situation calls for it (Power play), you can top load one line naturally without having to move guys to their off wing.

 

Ideally, you have a LHS Elite C and RHS Elite C.

[cross16]

1 minute ago, The_People1 said:

 

While that's true, I feel the most ideal setup for the top two lines is,

 

Elite LW - Elite C - average RW

Average LW - Elite C - Elite RW

 

This gives you the flexibility to pair your Cs with one elite winger and when the situation calls for it (Power play), you can top load one line naturally without having to move guys to their off wing.

 

Ideally, you have a LHS Elite C and RHS Elite C.

 

That is ideal sure but it's also really, really hard to pull off. Maybe 3, max 4 teams that I would say can boast that. Caps, Pens, Hawks and in almost all of those cases your going to have to do it at the expense of your D core. With the D core the Flames have, going to be really tough to pull off that type of a forward crop as they have 3, IMO, elite defenders (for different reasons). 

[AlbertaBoy12]

4 minutes ago, The_People1 said:

 

While that's true, I feel the most ideal setup for the top two lines is,

 

Elite LW - Elite C - average RW

Average LW - Elite C - Elite RW

 

This gives you the flexibility to pair your Cs with one elite winger and when the situation calls for it (Power play), you can top load one line naturally without having to move guys to their off wing.

 

Ideally, you have a LHS Elite C and RHS Elite C.

Thats the perfect world for sure and the benefit to using pairs. I think we have the right idea with mony, gaudreau, tkachuk and bennett, even backlund/frolik. We really do need a a elite right shot to add to this group. Which is why im of the thinking depending how this season goes, with janko and bennett maybe we are able to trade backlund down the road for that player.

[robrob74]

3 hours ago, MAC331 said:

Oh I think this is also part of the equation as well because it forces the opposition to deploy their best defenders out. Let's not lose sight of what makes a line click and perform at it's best, we still need that skilled ingredient on RW with JG and SM to max out the production there. Hudler is a good example of what works best for them, what he lacked of JG's flashy style he made up with experience and smarts. He was an accomplished passer and shooter. We don't have this player yet.

It may take a Nieuwendyk (accomplished vet) for Iginla (rookie with potential) type deal but using Backlund for ?????? RW

 

And yet I hated that deal! Long run, sure, it was good. But it marked the end of that era. 

 

We also couldnt contend for the cup after that. When you look at other deals, Fleury, Gilmour, etc, they never worked out. They should have tried to continue building around those players.

 

Sure, we gained iginla, but failed to build around him.

[MAC331]

37 minutes ago, robrob74 said:

 

And yet I hated that deal! Long run, sure, it was good. But it marked the end of that era. 

 

We also couldnt contend for the cup after that. When you look at other deals, Fleury, Gilmour, etc, they never worked out. They should have tried to continue building around those players.

 

Sure, we gained iginla, but failed to build around him.

Never got the mix right but were close a few times. This team now has a good average age and the core is well positioned to grow together. Where this all goes surrounds Backlund and how well both Bennett and Jankowski progress this season IMO.

[travel_dude]

12 hours ago, kehatch said:

The thing holding back the Monahan line isn't the RW and it isn't a lack of chemistry. It's our inability to put out three effective lines. 

 

 

 

I'll go one step further.  Last year we didn't have two d-pairings that you could trot out.  Chances were that Gio-Hammy would not be on the ice with Monahan.  The other two options weren't able to support the line.   You can see the impact of this in the fancy stats when certain defensive pairs played with the top lines.  

[The_People1]

49 minutes ago, AlbertaBoy12 said:

Thats the perfect world for sure and the benefit to using pairs. I think we have the right idea with mony, gaudreau, tkachuk and bennett, even backlund/frolik. We really do need a a elite right shot to add to this group. Which is why im of the thinking depending how this season goes, with janko and bennett maybe we are able to trade backlund down the road for that player.

 

Yes totally agreed about Janko and Bennett, Which makes me a bit mad BT decided to go "all in" this year because it's such a gamble.  We don't really know what we have in them.  That, and we should've stood pat on Hamonic and see where Rasmus Andersson is.  Not to mention our young goalies... 

 

... Bennett.  Once we find out, then we extend Backlund long term or, trade Backlund... Or trade Bennett.  One them should fetch a good RW.

 

... Janko, ditto. Could cause someone to be traded for a RW.

 

... Andersson, maybe emerges as top 4 by end of season.  Spend the Hamonic assets on an elite RW instead.

[The_People1]

6 minutes ago, travel_dude said:

 

I'll go one step further.  Last year we didn't have two d-pairings that you could trot out.  Chances were that Gio-Hammy would not be on the ice with Monahan.  The other two options weren't able to support the line.   You can see the impact of this in the fancy stats when certain defensive pairs played with the top lines.  

 

Well except our inability to get a RW could be the reason we fail at putting together 3 stud lines.

[robrob74]

10 minutes ago, MAC331 said:

Never got the mix right but were close a few times. This team now has a good average age and the core is well positioned to grow together. Where this all goes surrounds Backlund and how well both Bennett and Jankowski progress this season IMO.

 

I think we need Backlund for a few more years, to bridge the two you mention. If we can sign him, do it. He'll be tradeable when the youth are ready to take over.

[AlbertaBoy12]

3 minutes ago, The_People1 said:

 

Yes totally agreed about Janko and Bennett, Which makes me a bit mad BT decided to go "all in" this year because it's such a gamble.  We don't really know what we have in them.  That, and we should've stood pat on Hamonic and see where Rasmus Andersson is.  Not to mention our young goalies... 

 

... Bennett.  Once we find out, then we extend Backlund long term or, trade Backlund... Or trade Bennett.  One them should fetch a good RW.

 

... Janko, ditto. Could cause someone to be traded for a RW.

 

... Andersson, maybe emerges as top 4 by end of season.  Spend the Hamonic assets on an elite RW instead.

This is probably about where we are right now exactly. If bennett and janko are ready to take middle 6 minutes then you can trade backlund if not I dont see the harm in trading janko if need be. But at the end of the day with a good defensive corp like the one assembled and if we have solid goaltending we should be able to compete this season no problems. If we can get bennetts line going it wont matter as much whos on the 1st line RW.

[The_People1]

2 hours ago, AlbertaBoy12 said:

This is probably about where we are right now exactly. If bennett and janko are ready to take middle 6 minutes then you can trade backlund if not I dont see the harm in trading janko if need be. But at the end of the day with a good defensive corp like the one assembled and if we have solid goaltending we should be able to compete this season no problems. If we can get bennetts line going it wont matter as much whos on the 1st line RW.

 

Ya, generally speaking, you don't go "all in" just to compete.  Do it when you are contending for the Cup.

[Cowtownguy]

I am very interested in how Nail Yakupov plays this year. The dude seems like a total tool attitude wise, and needs to be de-Edmontoned, but he went for very little. Was he not a #1 pick a few years ago? If St. Louis can get him to take electro-convulsive shock therapy to forget his time with the Oilers, he might turn it around. I hope that was not an opportunity lost. 

 

I never mentioned him before. I think it is important to stay away from cancers from other teams. I just cannot help but wonder if he can return to his former self. This is his last chance in the NHL after all.

[AlbertaBoy12]

47 minutes ago, The_People1 said:

 

Ya, generally speaking, you don't go "all in" just to compete.  Do it when you are contending for the Cup.

After seeing what the preds did, I would say our current roster has just as good chance to compete whether you think they were a Cinderella team or not 

[MAC331]

3 hours ago, robrob74 said:

 

I think we need Backlund for a few more years, to bridge the two you mention. If we can sign him, do it. He'll be tradeable when the youth are ready to take over.

I wouldn't have a problem with extending Backlund at all. I am wondering what the hold up on getting Bennett a new contract, be nice to know that dollar.

[MAC331]

8 hours ago, The_People1 said:

 

Yes totally agreed about Janko and Bennett, Which makes me a bit mad BT decided to go "all in" this year because it's such a gamble.  We don't really know what we have in them.  That, and we should've stood pat on Hamonic and see where Rasmus Andersson is.  Not to mention our young goalies... 

 

... Bennett.  Once we find out, then we extend Backlund long term or, trade Backlund... Or trade Bennett.  One them should fetch a good RW.

 

... Janko, ditto. Could cause someone to be traded for a RW.

 

... Andersson, maybe emerges as top 4 by end of season.  Spend the Hamonic assets on an elite RW instead.

Why do you have such a problem with picking up a top 4 defenseman when one is available ? If you build from the net out why waste bringing in Smith and Lack while you are waiting for the ideal top RW ? Sounds rather silly to me. We had to make a goalie change regardless to better the team. We had to get better defensemen to better the team. If all we are waiting for is some youth to mature a bit more (which they could through this season ) and an ideal RW why would you not set your sights on contending for the Cup.

I think BT has done a good job restructuring the roster so far, maybe he has his eye on a few other possibilities.

[robrob74]

24 minutes ago, MAC331 said:

I wouldn't have a problem with extending Backlund at all. I am wondering what the hold up on getting Bennett a new contract, be nice to know that dollar.

 

Could it be similar to the Pageau contract? Maybe it is term as well? Maybe the Flames want a longer term at lower cost, while Bennett's camp wants shorter for the bridge? 

 

I was hoping about 2.5M. Pageau had similar numbers and got 3.1 per.

 

my gut says about 2.75/yr over 2 years. 

[travel_dude]

2 hours ago, Cowtownguy said:

I am very interested in how Nail Yakupov plays this year. The dude seems like a total tool attitude wise, and needs to be de-Edmontoned, but he went for very little. Was he not a #1 pick a few years ago? If St. Louis can get him to take electro-convulsive shock therapy to forget his time with the Oilers, he might turn it around. I hope that was not an opportunity lost. 

 

I never mentioned him before. I think it is important to stay away from cancers from other teams. I just cannot help but wonder if he can return to his former self. This is his last chance in the NHL after all.

 

He's getting the chance to turn his career back around.....in Colorado.  Signed as a UFA

When Comeau is playing top 3 minutes, then you have a good chance to actually play.

[kehatch]

7 hours ago, travel_dude said:

 

I'll go one step further.  Last year we didn't have two d-pairings that you could trot out.  Chances were that Gio-Hammy would not be on the ice with Monahan.  The other two options weren't able to support the line.   You can see the impact of this in the fancy stats when certain defensive pairs played with the top lines.  

 

I agree. Hockey is played with 5 skaters. This year we should be able to ice three solid pairs on the back end which will help the forwards.