So Where do we go from here? Analysis & Predictions

[MAC331]

36 minutes ago, robrob74 said:

 

 

I don't know! I don't have a problem with Tkachuk playing another year on the Backlund line. He will continue developing and I think it will still help his offensive game if he stays with them. 

 

Not saying he should...

 

if they do keep him there, next year is the year to set him free. 

 

But I do agree, they need to find a balance through the lineup.

My feeling is this, if they add Jagr and truly go for it school is out to a certain degree for Tkachuk. A line of Ferland , Backlund and Frolik would be your best option inchecking the opposition's best line. With lesser minutes and somewhat shelter situations I think we find out what we have in all 3 of Tkachuk, Bennett and Lazar. Versteeg, Stajan and Brouwer gives GG a second checking line capable of scoring and some of the responsibility keeping the opposition down.

[zima]

 

2 hours ago, robrob74 said:

Tkachuk, Bennett, Lazar

Are you sure you want to put that much nastiness on the same line it will be fun to watch but it could also back fire as far as Reffing goes they already hate us could you imagine the drama that comes with those 3 banging and crashing oh and don't forget the tormenting that line will cause. I think that is to much spice on same line need to spread it around. but again would be fun to watch and possibly could work. I hope moving MrT off of the triple M line doesn't hurt that 2nd yr blitz that seems to bit most sophmores in the bud but I guess if he starts to slump can always put the line back together again

[DirtyDeeds]

10 hours ago, MAC331 said:

Gawd I think you are dead wrong about him fitting on the 1st line, otherwise don't get him.

I think a line of Ferland, Backlund and Frolik will be better than having Tkachuk there again.

Tkachuk will need to expand his talent if this team is to improve and he won't do that working with Backlund and Frolik shutting down the opposition.

If Jagr is added I don't see a rookie making this roster initially and Stajan will remain a C of the 4th line.

Here is how Brouwer fits.

Gaudreau, Monahan, Jagr

Ferland, Backlund, Frolik

Tkachuk, Bennett, Lazar

Versteeg, Stajan, Brouwer

Hamilton, Hathaway and we likely see Gadzic the odd time

The Backlund line with Tkachuk was our #1 line pretty much all last season. They took 70% of the Defensive zone faceoffs and against pretty much all the other teams best players. They ended up driving the play more often than not, to the Offensive zone. The line also pretty much lead the team in scoring until the last month and a bit.

 

I don't think you could get a better spot for Tkachuk again this season.. at least on our team.

[kehatch]

9 hours ago, DirtyDeeds said:

The Backlund line with Tkachuk was our #1 line pretty much all last season. They took 70% of the Defensive zone faceoffs and against pretty much all the other teams best players. They ended up driving the play more often than not, to the Offensive zone. The line also pretty much lead the team in scoring until the last month and a bit.

 

I don't think you could get a better spot for Tkachuk again this season.. at least on our team.

 

Agreed. Plus, Tkachuk-Backlund-Frolik was fantastic. People keep saying Backlund and Frolik have played with the likes of Colborne and Bouma and its true. But not at the same level. Not anywhere close. 

[MAC331]

11 hours ago, DirtyDeeds said:

The Backlund line with Tkachuk was our #1 line pretty much all last season. They took 70% of the Defensive zone faceoffs and against pretty much all the other teams best players. They ended up driving the play more often than not, to the Offensive zone. The line also pretty much lead the team in scoring until the last month and a bit.

 

I don't think you could get a better spot for Tkachuk again this season.. at least on our team.

I'm not going to keep debating this with everyone. Without reviewing every play I would dare say it was the experience of Backlund and Frolik that mostly carried the defensive effectiveness. Tkachuk was on this line to learn which he did very well. This line is going to remain with the duty of checking the opposition's best line so if we want more out of Tkachuk would it not be better to remove him and put him in a more offensive capacity (potentially) with Bennett and Lazar ? You put Ferland with Backlund and Frolik have you really lost anything from what the line did last season, I think not, it might even be better results. I think not moving Tkachuk with Bennett is being closed minded and therefore the team doesn't grow.

[AlbertaBoy12]

4 hours ago, kehatch said:

 

Agreed. Plus, Tkachuk-Backlund-Frolik was fantastic. People keep saying Backlund and Frolik have played with the likes of Colborne and Bouma and its true. But not at the same level. Not anywhere close. 

 

14 hours ago, DirtyDeeds said:

The Backlund line with Tkachuk was our #1 line pretty much all last season. They took 70% of the Defensive zone faceoffs and against pretty much all the other teams best players. They ended up driving the play more often than not, to the Offensive zone. The line also pretty much lead the team in scoring until the last month and a bit.

 

I don't think you could get a better spot for Tkachuk again this season.. at least on our team.

I dont think the arguement has ever been made that the 3M wasent great, some people are trying to give this team a more balanced attack. If we dont help the bennett line this season we arent going to go very far with 2 good lines and 2 bad lines, as such our priority should be fixing the bottom 6. The arguement has been made that you dont fix that by taking from your best line, but the point is backlund/frolik were very good without tkachuk. If putting tkachuk with bennett gives the 3rd line some punch, I dont see the big issue, as we have plenty of players better then colborne or bouma to put with backlund.

[DirtyDeeds]

51 minutes ago, AlbertaBoy12 said:

 

I dont think the arguement has ever been made that the 3M wasent great, some people are trying to give this team a more balanced attack. If we dont help the bennett line this season we arent going to go very far with 2 good lines and 2 bad lines, as such our priority should be fixing the bottom 6. The arguement has been made that you dont fix that by taking from your best line, but the point is backlund/frolik were very good without tkachuk. If putting tkachuk with bennett gives the 3rd line some punch, I dont see the big issue, as we have plenty of players better then colborne or bouma to put with backlund.

I don't disagree with your concept however I do disagree with the thought that lines 3 and 4 would automatically be bad lines. An improvement of play from Bennett alone like in the playoffs would be an improvement. There was not too much wrong with our 4th line last year other than it was a revolving door.

 

The flaw in the concept of having 4 lines and doing it using the group we have, is much like our D corps last season. GG wasted 2+ months trying to find  3 pairings of roughly equal ability that he could just rotate . It failed miserably and he ended up putting Hamilton with Gio and Wideman with Brodie as our best 2 pairings. His other thinking of RHD be RHS's failed too. While Brodie played okay on left side he was substandard compared to his previous seasons on right side. Playing with Wideman was only a part of his poor performance.

[conundrumed]

49 minutes ago, DirtyDeeds said:

I don't disagree with your concept however I do disagree with the thought that lines 3 and 4 would automatically be bad lines. An improvement of play from Bennett alone like in the playoffs would be an improvement. There was not too much wrong with our 4th line last year other than it was a revolving door.

 

The flaw in the concept of having 4 lines and doing it using the group we have, is much like our D corps last season. GG wasted 2+ months trying to find  3 pairings of roughly equal ability that he could just rotate . It failed miserably and he ended up putting Hamilton with Gio and Wideman with Brodie as our best 2 pairings. His other thinking of RHD be RHS's failed too. While Brodie played okay on left side he was substandard compared to his previous seasons on right side. Playing with Wideman was only a part of his poor performance.

It's difficult for me to look at our forward roster and not be concerned. I agree with you the Backlund line was flat out our best line last year and is not a great idea to split up.

However, our forward ranks have a ton of question marks. To wipe those away, we are going to have to be a lot closer to 2a and 2b forwards.

It sounds like a left field idea, but that's why we're here chatting I guess.

What about Frolik with Bennett? Then Versteeg replaces Frolik?

JG-Mony-Ferland

Tkachuk-Backs-Versteeg

Frolik-Bennett-Brouwer

 

We need a lot to go right or guys stepping up if this is our top 9, so creativity is key.(Not a hardline statement.lol)

It's been pointed out enough that we can't upgrade the top 9 with over $5 mil+ for 3 - 4th liners, so I, umm, am pointing it out again..

Do we end up re-signing Stajan for $1.25?

 

At any rate, we'll see come camp, I'm a little nervous that it's same same.

 

 

[travel_dude]

1 hour ago, DirtyDeeds said:

I don't disagree with your concept however I do disagree with the thought that lines 3 and 4 would automatically be bad lines. An improvement of play from Bennett alone like in the playoffs would be an improvement. There was not too much wrong with our 4th line last year other than it was a revolving door.

 

The flaw in the concept of having 4 lines and doing it using the group we have, is much like our D corps last season. GG wasted 2+ months trying to find  3 pairings of roughly equal ability that he could just rotate . It failed miserably and he ended up putting Hamilton with Gio and Wideman with Brodie as our best 2 pairings. His other thinking of RHD be RHS's failed too. While Brodie played okay on left side he was substandard compared to his previous seasons on right side. Playing with Wideman was only a part of his poor performance.

 

It's funny how some teams get build.  We have 3 (arguably) top 4 RD.  Add Brodie to that and we are stacked on one side.  The other side is just Gio and Brodie because he shoots left.  I agree that Brodie was a lot more comfortable on RD.  Perhaps Hamoniic can allow him to feel a lot more settled there.  

 

It remains to be seen how the lines are drawn up for forward this year.  At the very least, Ferland has some experience playing with Monahan.  Not my first choice, but it's possible he could reach another level there.  A little bummed BT didn;t address the forward ranks much.  Went all in on defense.  Great to have that much depth, but only on defense.  Great pipeline for defense too.  Forwards are ok, but we never seem to see much improvement from the guys that should be ready for the NHL.  Poirier, Shinkaruk and Klimchuk are starting to get passed by others.  

[AlbertaBoy12]

50 minutes ago, travel_dude said:

 

It's funny how some teams get build.  We have 3 (arguably) top 4 RD.  Add Brodie to that and we are stacked on one side.  The other side is just Gio and Brodie because he shoots left.  I agree that Brodie was a lot more comfortable on RD.  Perhaps Hamoniic can allow him to feel a lot more settled there. 

Its interesting you bring this up, because I was listening to the flames from 80 feet podcast, and he was saying that he talked to GG about brodie being on the left side. The gist of what was said was that brodie is comfortable on the left side, and everyone enjoys playing their strong side. This whole brodie on the right thing is far too overblown considering his success on the right side came with gio, where on the left side he played with wideman and engelland. When brodie started playing with stone he looked more then good, and I dont see it being an issue. 

 

Personally I dont think it was an issue last season, it gets way overblown how he played on the left side.

[robrob74]

On 2017-08-04 at 0:35 PM, zima said:

 

Are you sure you want to put that much nastiness on the same line it will be fun to watch but it could also back fire as far as Reffing goes they already hate us could you imagine the drama that comes with those 3 banging and crashing oh and don't forget the tormenting that line will cause. I think that is to much spice on same line need to spread it around. but again would be fun to watch and possibly could work. I hope moving MrT off of the triple M line doesn't hurt that 2nd yr blitz that seems to bit most sophmores in the bud but I guess if he starts to slump can always put the line back together again

 

I could like the sound of:

 

Gaudreau, Monahan, Versteeg

Brouwer, Backlund, Frolik

Tkachuk, Bennet, Ferland

Stajan, Jankowski, Lazar

[MAC331]

3 hours ago, DirtyDeeds said:

I don't disagree with your concept however I do disagree with the thought that lines 3 and 4 would automatically be bad lines. An improvement of play from Bennett alone like in the playoffs would be an improvement. There was not too much wrong with our 4th line last year other than it was a revolving door.

 

The flaw in the concept of having 4 lines and doing it using the group we have, is much like our D corps last season. GG wasted 2+ months trying to find  3 pairings of roughly equal ability that he could just rotate . It failed miserably and he ended up putting Hamilton with Gio and Wideman with Brodie as our best 2 pairings. His other thinking of RHD be RHS's failed too. While Brodie played okay on left side he was substandard compared to his previous seasons on right side. Playing with Wideman was only a part of his poor performance.

Using our defense as any kind of example relative to our current forward group is laughable. Anyone could have predicted our defense was in trouble from the get go last season and Brodie with his head messed up didn't make matters any better for GG. Engelland with a bunch of rookies on trial for a 3rd pairing.

Sure there is an argument for leaving the 3M together but I don't think it is a very good one if you are a coach trying to find better 5 on 5 success for the team.

[MAC331]

32 minutes ago, AlbertaBoy12 said:

Its interesting you bring this up, because I was listening to the flames from 80 feet podcast, and he was saying that he talked to GG about brodie being on the left side. The gist of what was said was that brodie is comfortable on the left side, and everyone enjoys playing their strong side. This whole brodie on the right thing is far too overblown considering his success on the right side came with gio, where on the left side he played with wideman and engelland. When brodie started playing with stone he looked more then good, and I dont see it being an issue. 

 

Personally I dont think it was an issue last season, it gets way overblown how he played on the left side.

I will be shocked if Brodie doesn't excel playing with Hamonic, there will be no excuses for Brodie heading into 2017/18.

[MAC331]

1 hour ago, travel_dude said:

 

It's funny how some teams get build.  We have 3 (arguably) top 4 RD.  Add Brodie to that and we are stacked on one side.  The other side is just Gio and Brodie because he shoots left.  I agree that Brodie was a lot more comfortable on RD.  Perhaps Hamoniic can allow him to feel a lot more settled there.  

 

It remains to be seen how the lines are drawn up for forward this year.  At the very least, Ferland has some experience playing with Monahan.  Not my first choice, but it's possible he could reach another level there.  A little bummed BT didn;t address the forward ranks much.  Went all in on defense.  Great to have that much depth, but only on defense.  Great pipeline for defense too.  Forwards are ok, but we never seem to see much improvement from the guys that should be ready for the NHL.  Poirier, Shinkaruk and Klimchuk are starting to get passed by others.  

I don't think there is much wrong with our forward ranks really. Who is it you think was available for the top line RW ? The real good ones around the league are rare and unlikely to be traded to us when we have no real good talent to trade. If the plan was to give Ferland the opportunity all along then fine, adjust from there if he isn't doing the job. I think bringing Versteeg back solved a lot of possible situations with other lines.

Who is passing Poirier, Shinkaruk and Klimchuk in Stockton ? if anything they are the prime replacements for covering off injuries this season. Poirier has some proving to do but I think he is up for it.

[Flyerfan52]

Barring a trade or UFA signing (yeah, Jagr) I figure Frolik is our best RW so use him with Monahan & Gaudreau from the start of training camp & see if they can develope chemistry. He's sneaky fast so can keep up with Gaudreau since the Flames seem determined to keep the Johnny/Sean pairing together & base the game on Gaudreau's speed.

I'd prefer to do more to try to find ways to improve that involve more than just rearranging lines but those aren't ideas that would be popular  so rather than start a war I'll leave it @ this.

[cross16]

Brodie doesn't need any excuses he played pretty well last year. If plays the same this year, minus the slow start, we should be happy. played much better then people give him credit. 

[LouCifer]

18 hours ago, robrob74 said:

 

I could like the sound of:

 

Gaudreau, Monahan, Versteeg

Brouwer, Backlund, Frolik

Tkachuk, Bennet, Ferland

Stajan, Jankowski, Lazar

 

Hey robrob, I was thinking about Versteeg on the top line as well. He's got some nice mitts, shifty moves, and - despite the website this article is posted on, I think he's a great read - Todd Cordell pointed out how often he puts the puck to the net (http://www.hockeybuzz.com/blog.php?post_id=86716). I've read the desire to grab Jagr for this season, and contemplated it myself as well, but perhaps Versteeg can be that winger that enters the zone with JH that other teams will be forced to pay attention to as well. It also wouldn't hurt to have someone on that line who has a penchant for throwing rubber at the net. It did become frustrating at times to see JH and Mony create opportunities that never saw a shot on net. As far as I'm concerned, the worst that could happen with more shots on net is more offensive zone face offs. Better than back checking due to missed opportunities and loss of possession in the offensive zone. My one negative for this combo is the lack of sandpaper and protection here. Ferland does provide both, and I'm sick of the liberties (stickwork) league-wide that players take on stars. 

 

I would tinker with your other other lines tho robrob, and go with:

Frolik,Backlund,Ferland

Tkachuk, Bennet, Lazar

Brouwer, Stajan/Jankowski

 

[AlbertaBoy12]

17 hours ago, cross16 said:

Brodie doesn't need any excuses he played pretty well last year. If plays the same this year, minus the slow start, we should be happy. played much better then people give him credit. 

Well thats the weird thing because brodie was a minus 16 and his possession stats werent as great as before everyone assumed he had a bad season. While he wasent as great as he was with gio, I thought he had a very good season last year and as you pointed out his slow start didnt help at all. But having a better partner should make things easier for him, hamonic is for sure better then stone.

[AlbertaBoy12]

19 hours ago, robrob74 said:

 

I could like the sound of:

 

Gaudreau, Monahan, Versteeg

Brouwer, Backlund, Frolik

Tkachuk, Bennet, Ferland

Stajan, Jankowski, Lazar

That first line was tried last year and while it was during a slow start, I dont know if versteeg adds another needed element to the first line, so im not sold hes a good fit there.While im ok with backlund having brouwer on his wing, id rather see frolik/brouwer play their strong sides in that situation, and im sure it would be a very productive line. Id rather see versteeg with bennett, they had great chemistry down the stretch.

 

Johnny-Mony-Ferland

Frolik-Backlund-Brouwer

Tkachuk-Bennett-Versteeg

Stajan-Janko-Lazar

 

Those would be my lines to start training camp if I was GG, and then go from there depending how players look. It really doesnt leave much room for any rookies to make the team, but I dont think that was the intention all along.

[The_Tribal Chief]

So im Gonna Ask a Question We know the Flames do there Summer Work outs all year when do they get back on the and start Skating getting there legs Back

[MAC331]

On ‎2017‎-‎08‎-‎05 at 4:12 PM, cross16 said:

Brodie doesn't need any excuses he played pretty well last year. If plays the same this year, minus the slow start, we should be happy. played much better then people give him credit. 

I think it fair to say he had more than a slow start and really wasn't very good for most of last season. Like the rest of the team he got better closer to the end of the season. I really like Brodie but his decision making has to be way better this coming season because indecision was what I saw to much of last season.

[MAC331]

On ‎2017‎-‎08‎-‎06 at 10:08 AM, AlbertaBoy12 said:

That first line was tried last year and while it was during a slow start, I dont know if versteeg adds another needed element to the first line, so im not sold hes a good fit there.While im ok with backlund having brouwer on his wing, id rather see frolik/brouwer play their strong sides in that situation, and im sure it would be a very productive line. Id rather see versteeg with bennett, they had great chemistry down the stretch.

 

Johnny-Mony-Ferland

Frolik-Backlund-Brouwer

Tkachuk-Bennett-Versteeg

Stajan-Janko-Lazar

 

Those would be my lines to start training camp if I was GG, and then go from there depending how players look. It really doesnt leave much room for any rookies to make the team, but I dont think that was the intention all along.

You know Versteeg when in his prime in CHI he was one of the best 3rd line players around. I can see trying Ferland with JG and SM is fine, we have nothing to lose because I don't think we have anyone that is better. Even if we added Jagr would he really out produce what you might get from Ferland, maybe in assists but I say not likely. I would position Versteeg on LW with Backlund and Frolik to have one of the best checking/secondary scoring lines. If Ferland falters GG can change Versteeg with Ferland either way Ferland stands to gain a lot of knowledge playing on either line. We won't lose much if anything with Versteeg playing with JG and SM.

Tkachuk, Bennett and Lazar is the line that has to come together IMO.

I'm sorry but I see Jankowski in Stockton and absolutely no problem with Stajan and Brouwer being part of the 4th line for us. This gives us a stronger team and should keep the Backlund line fresher.

[Flyerfan52]

1 that keeps coming up on HF that I find interesting.

Would you do Bennett & the Flames 1st in 2019 for Wayne Simmonds?

 

Points made there include Simmonds with Gaudreau & Monahan could be deadly.

For the Flyers if Bennett does become what was expected it fits into the time line for all those young. D. The pick is 2019 because the Flames don't have 1 in 2018.

 

As a fan of both teams I'm not sure but will comment with pros/cons to responses (which I hope will be reasonable & not of the Brouwer straight across variety).

I guess from the Calgary side it comes down to if they believe the Flames are close enough that adding a top RW does the trick, are they that sure Bennett is the real thing & if a 1st rounder in 2 years is that needed (it does mean 3 years without a 1st rounder).

From the Philadelphia side it comes to what the cost will be to re-sign Simmonds in 2 years (more than the current 4.25), if Bennett can replace him on either wing(loaded with centers) & if the pipe is getting emptied with kids replacing the current players (2 picks in the 1st next year with all their own + for 3 years doesn't seem to make it a problem).

It comes down to the Flyers still rebuilding & if the Flames are willing to go "all in" I guess.

 

[kehatch]

I would love Simmonds. But with all of the picks traded out recently I don't think we can afford to give up a first and a young up and commer like Bennett for a guy with two years left under contract. Plus, I don't know we have the cap space to sign him and Backlund. 

 

I would definitely consider it because of how great a fit he would be. But I don't think its practical. 

[cross16]

As much as I really like Simmonds I have to agree that would not be a wise move. Thst would be the ultimate sell out to try and win a cup for two years because the cap would tear them apart after. Doesn't make sense for me, I'd prefer to extend the window. No guarantees Simmonds on this team wins them a cup.