So Where do we go from here? Analysis & Predictions

[MAC331]

19 hours ago, AlbertaBoy12 said:

I agree. But if gaudreau puts up 75 points again, do we really need more out of him? I would say the problem comes in terms of giveaways/turnovers, and thats something gaudreau could fix on his own. But you could argue well if he had a better linemate, the focus wouldnt be on him as much and he wouldnt make those poor plays. But at the end of the day I think thats where he needs to improve, and his defensive zone play could get a bit better. Either way I think 70-80 points is the ceiling for gaudreau, maybe 85 with a proper RW, but I dont think a good RW is going to elevate his decision making, which needs to be much better this season.

I agree JG has to fix his stick handling and give aways this season. He should watch some Fleury film and see how to protect the puck away from being checked. He used to be effective coming back and stick checking while stealing the puck and I hope he gets back to doing that. GG did give him some bench time for bad defense this past season.

[MAC331]

17 hours ago, robrob74 said:

I think that Gaudreau will be a bit better this year. Coming off the hold out and new contract it took him awhile to adjust to internalized, fan, and organizational expectations. Now that he is used to it, he can just go out and play. The same goes with Monahan. He was just as inconsistent, but I expect a better start from both, which hopefully gives us an opposite record for the first 15-20 games than we had last year. 

 

Is Tkachuk ready to be separated from the  3M line? Do we risk him having a sphmore jinx? 

 

If we do, and sign Jagr, I prefer to put Tkachuk and Jagr with Bennett as Bennett can use some lessons on puck utilization, and Jagr could be the perfect mentor. It would've been good to have someone with him (consistently) last year for that reason, while it is helping him grow, he still could use some mentoring as we forget he's super young  and only has played 1 year as a C.

They could very well leave Tkachuk with MB/MF which doesn't hurt us however IMO it delays seeing if a Tkachuk/Bennett pairing will ever be something this team can count on. This where it is nice to have a player like Versteeg who fits almost anywhere.

[AlbertaBoy12]

6 minutes ago, MAC331 said:

So if it doesn't matter who is on his RW why would you have a problem with it being Jagr ? The worst that could happen IMO is that JG may learn a few helpful things and score more.

 

1 minute ago, MAC331 said:

I agree JG has to fix his stick handling and give aways this season. He should watch some Fleury film and see how to protect the puck away from being checked. He used to be effective coming back and stick checking while stealing the puck and I hope he gets back to doing that. GG did give him some bench time for bad defense this past season.

I just think Jagr would be a better fit with bennett and I think the flames want to give ferland the opportunity the 1st line, its totally possible they see Jagr on the 1st line but who knows.

 

I dont think JH is going to see a large improvement in terms of points, but if he can improve the stuff you just mentioned there, and as I said earlier his giveaways were terrible last season. If he could improve those things it would go a long way to making him a better hockey player and the team would be better off because of it. The reason everyone says he had a bad season last year is not based on production in my opinion, I think its based off turnovers and how poor he was when it came to being checked etc.

[MAC331]

3 minutes ago, AlbertaBoy12 said:

 

I just think Jagr would be a better fit with bennett and I think the flames want to give ferland the opportunity the 1st line, its totally possible they see Jagr on the 1st line but who knows.

 

I dont think JH is going to see a large improvement in terms of points, but if he can improve the stuff you just mentioned there, and as I said earlier his giveaways were terrible last season. If he could improve those things it would go a long way to making him a better hockey player and the team would be better off because of it. The reason everyone says he had a bad season last year is not based on production in my opinion, I think its based off turnovers and how poor he was when it came to being checked etc.

I agree with everything you and I have said regarding JG. I think he of all people but also Monahan could learn the most from playing with Jagr. Jagr will have an influence just by being here with the other players. I like the idea of a Tkachuk, Bennett, Lazar line because they all have something to prove this season, would be exciting in my books. As I have said before I honestly think Ferland has the most to learn by playing with MB and MF, not only would he be very effective keeping the opposition's top line on their heels but his mental game would improve. Just my thoughts.

[AlbertaBoy12]

2 minutes ago, MAC331 said:

I agree with everything you and I have said regarding JG. I think he of all people but also Monahan could learn the most from playing with Jagr. Jagr will have an influence just by being here with the other players. I like the idea of a Tkachuk, Bennett, Lazar line because they all have something to prove this season, would be exciting in my books. As I have said before I honestly think Ferland has the most to learn by playing with MB and MF, not only would he be very effective keeping the opposition's top line on their heels but his mental game would improve. Just my thoughts.

I dont disagree with you on that, all im saying is I think the flames are high on ferland and want to give him the opportunity on the 1st line, that might change if Jagr comes here but maybe not. Honestly Jagr in the locker room yelling at you to protect the puck or make better choices would be good for some of the younger guys either way.

[travel_dude]

40 minutes ago, MAC331 said:

I agree JG has to fix his stick handling and give aways this season. He should watch some Fleury film and see how to protect the puck away from being checked. He used to be effective coming back and stick checking while stealing the puck and I hope he gets back to doing that. GG did give him some bench time for bad defense this past season.

 

A good portion of the times JH lost the puck when it was on his stick was due to increased slashing.  I have a harder time watching him try to do it all himself.  He's an open ice player in the O-zone, and needs to find that space.  He can win a one-on-one battle against another player, but should not expect to win a battle against two defenders.  Get in the O-zone, distribute the puck and get open again.

 

As far as backchecking, I hope he gets back to what he was doing before.  You don't have to be big to disrupt the guy with the puck or the guy you are assigned to.   

[MAC331]

9 minutes ago, travel_dude said:

 

A good portion of the times JH lost the puck when it was on his stick was due to increased slashing.  I have a harder time watching him try to do it all himself.  He's an open ice player in the O-zone, and needs to find that space.  He can win a one-on-one battle against another player, but should not expect to win a battle against two defenders.  Get in the O-zone, distribute the puck and get open again.

 

As far as backchecking, I hope he gets back to what he was doing before.  You don't have to be big to disrupt the guy with the puck or the guy you are assigned to.   

Not really, he carrys the puck out in front of himself way to much and you can't do that at the NHL level. In the O zone and I don't know if most see this especially with him and Monahan is that they can't play a true cycle game. This is where they went wrong last season with trying to use Chiasson and Brouwer as big bodies for board work. I player like Jagr helps them play the possession game within the zone and this is what's called for IMO.

[Flyerfan52]

2 hours ago, MAC331 said:

Not really, he carrys the puck out in front of himself way to much and you can't do that at the NHL level. In the O zone and I don't know if most see this especially with him and Monahan is that they can't play a true cycle game. This is where they went wrong last season with trying to use Chiasson and Brouwer as big bodies for board work. I player like Jagr helps them play the possession game within the zone and this is what's called for IMO.

If JG can pick up some of Jagr's moves that alone will teach him to protect the puck. With him around to show them it would help all our youngsters & maybe even some of the vets.

[Flyerfan52]

3 hours ago, MAC331 said:

I agree with everything you and I have said regarding JG. I think he of all people but also Monahan could learn the most from playing with Jagr. Jagr will have an influence just by being here with the other players. I like the idea of a Tkachuk, Bennett, Lazar line because they all have something to prove this season, would be exciting in my books. As I have said before I honestly think Ferland has the most to learn by playing with MB and MF, not only would he be very effective keeping the opposition's top line on their heels but his mental game would improve. Just my thoughts.

Bennett & Lazar do have something to prove but Tkachuk made his mark last year as a rookie. All he has to do is maintain (& hopefully improve a tad) & learn a bit of self control to better pick his spots/battles.

They'd probably be an interesting line but a Bennett/Lazar combo is probably better served with a steadying hand from a vet like Frolik.

 

If we add Jagr he'd be best used in limited minutes with JG & SM letting Ferland (or whoever) take the remainder. I say this because I want Jagr fresh for the PP & figure 15ish minutes of prime Jagr > 20ish minutes where the old guy is not @ full steam.

That leaves Tkachuk with Backlund & Ferland can fill in when not playing on the top line to keep his minutes up. Since that's likely 5ish minutes on the #1 he can play most shifts with those 2.

 

That leaves a pretty good mop up line of Versteeg/Stajan/Brouwer unless Brouwer throws a very nice to have spanner in the works by becoming what we thought we were getting. If that happened it could involve fancy line juggling but result in 4 pretty good lines to go with 2 dang good D pairings (& a spare).

[MAC331]

On ‎2017‎-‎09‎-‎01 at 1:29 PM, Flyerfan52 said:

Bennett & Lazar do have something to prove but Tkachuk made his mark last year as a rookie. All he has to do is maintain (& hopefully improve a tad) & learn a bit of self control to better pick his spots/battles.

They'd probably be an interesting line but a Bennett/Lazar combo is probably better served with a steadying hand from a vet like Frolik.

 

If we add Jagr he'd be best used in limited minutes with JG & SM letting Ferland (or whoever) take the remainder. I say this because I want Jagr fresh for the PP & figure 15ish minutes of prime Jagr > 20ish minutes where the old guy is not @ full steam.

That leaves Tkachuk with Backlund & Ferland can fill in when not playing on the top line to keep his minutes up. Since that's likely 5ish minutes on the #1 he can play most shifts with those 2.

 

That leaves a pretty good mop up line of Versteeg/Stajan/Brouwer unless Brouwer throws a very nice to have spanner in the works by becoming what we thought we were getting. If that happened it could involve fancy line juggling but result in 4 pretty good lines to go with 2 dang good D pairings (& a spare).

GG will certainly have options available to him which is a good thing. As far as Tkachuk I would put him more in the light to continue proving himself, yes by getting better. I say to H with a veteran presence required this will be Bennett and Lazar's 3rd exposed season so I don't think they require babysitting. Turn them loose. I still think Ferland would be the best option with Backlund not Tkachuk.

[robrob74]

I moved what I said to the lines thread...

[cccsberg]

On 2017-09-01 at 1:45 PM, MAC331 said:

GG will certainly have otions available to him which is a good thing. As far as Tkachuk I would put him more in the light to continue proving himself, yes by getting better. I say to H with a veteran presence required this will be Bennett and Lazar's 3rd exposed season so I don't think they require babysitting. Turn them loose. I still think Ferland would be the best option with Backlund not Tkachuk.

I agree with the vet comment with Bennett and Lazar, and for that matter I would add Monahan, Gaudreau and Ferland to that list too.  All these guys have been here for several years and don't need to be coddled.   Bringing in at minimum two prospects this year, being Kulak and Jankowski is essential, as next year will be the same if not more.  Best to do so on a regular basis than be forced to make massive changes overnight.  Having said that, Toronto had what, 9 rookies last year and did OK, and the Pens brought up 5 guys at once two years ago and that turned out pretty good too.  Perhaps we should keep the rooks down and next year bring up Jankowski, Kilmchuk, Poirier, Mangiapanne, Andersson, Kylington and Gillies all together?

[travel_dude]

23 minutes ago, cccsberg said:

I agree with the vet comment with Bennett and Lazar, and for that matter I would add Monahan, Gaudreau and Ferland to that list too.  All these guys have been here for several years and don't need to be coddled.   Bringing in at minimum two prospects this year, being Kulak and Jankowski is essential, as next year will be the same if not more.  Best to do so on a regular basis than be forced to make massive changes overnight.  Having said that, Toronto had what, 9 rookies last year and did OK, and the Pens brought up 5 guys at once two years ago and that turned out pretty good too.  Perhaps we should keep the rooks down and next year bring up Jankowski, Kilmchuk, Poirier, Mangiapanne, Andersson, Kylington and Gillies all together?

 

There's a good chance that all of the guys listed will be ready for full time NHL by next year.  We would need to trade quite a few players to make that much room.

Lack replaced by Gilles - no trade required

Janko replaces Stajan - " "

Kylington-Andersson replaces Kulak-Stone - at least one trade needed

Klimchuk and Poirier replaces Brouwer and ??

Mangiapane replaces ??

Foo replaces ??

 

I would prefer that we bring in a player and have him beat out a vet rather than trade first and hope.  Janko likely provides enough to replace Stajan.  Gillies or Rittich is likely as good or better than Lack.  I want to see players like Poirier and Klimchuk play in a spot while we can replace them if they don;t cut it.

 

[cccsberg]

40 minutes ago, travel_dude said:

 

There's a good chance that all of the guys listed will be ready for full time NHL by next year.  We would need to trade quite a few players to make that much room.

Lack replaced by Gilles - no trade required

Janko replaces Stajan - " "

Kylington-Andersson replaces Kulak-Stone - at least one trade needed

Klimchuk and Poirier replaces Brouwer and ??

Mangiapane replaces ??

Foo replaces ??

 

I would prefer that we bring in a player and have him beat out a vet rather than trade first and hope.  Janko likely provides enough to replace Stajan.  Gillies or Rittich is likely as good or better than Lack.  I want to see players like Poirier and Klimchuk play in a spot while we can replace them if they don;t cut it.

 

This turn-over thing is a difficult one, as in when do the new guys actually get a shot?  Some say training camp but really most spots are already tied up beforehand and its almost impossible to oust a vet in TC.  If space is made in the summer, that can work, but I think the best opportunity is via injuries.   Sure, no one likes to see someone lose their jobs because of an injury but I think it happens all the time.  

[MAC331]

18 hours ago, cccsberg said:

I agree with the vet comment with Bennett and Lazar, and for that matter I would add Monahan, Gaudreau and Ferland to that list too.  All these guys have been here for several years and don't need to be coddled.   Bringing in at minimum two prospects this year, being Kulak and Jankowski is essential, as next year will be the same if not more.  Best to do so on a regular basis than be forced to make massive changes overnight.  Having said that, Toronto had what, 9 rookies last year and did OK, and the Pens brought up 5 guys at once two years ago and that turned out pretty good too.  Perhaps we should keep the rooks down and next year bring up Jankowski, Kilmchuk, Poirier, Mangiapanne, Andersson, Kylington and Gillies all together?

We could see exactly that happen if you take BT's "over ripen" comment literally this offseason. Injuries will happen so I expect some of the players you have pointed out to get some exposure this season. The one key player I was hoping for to either make the team or see a lot of NHL action would be Jankowski. It seems to me that BT is taking this season to give some of these vets enough ammunition to take a serious run at a SC. Next season who knows what remains.

[DirtyDeeds]

20 hours ago, cccsberg said:

I agree with the vet comment with Bennett and Lazar, and for that matter I would add Monahan, Gaudreau and Ferland to that list too.  All these guys have been here for several years and don't need to be coddled.   Bringing in at minimum two prospects this year, being Kulak and Jankowski is essential, as next year will be the same if not more.  Best to do so on a regular basis than be forced to make massive changes overnight.  Having said that, Toronto had what, 9 rookies last year and did OK, and the Pens brought up 5 guys at once two years ago and that turned out pretty good too.  Perhaps we should keep the rooks down and next year bring up Jankowski, Kilmchuk, Poirier, Mangiapanne, Andersson, Kylington and Gillies all together?

I have no problem with bringing up prospects... however you don 't bring them up unless there is an injury or they have earned the right to play. 

[Flyerfan52]

3 hours ago, DirtyDeeds said:

I have no problem with bringing up prospects... however you don 't bring them up unless there is an injury or they have earned the right to play. 

If a prospect proves so worthy that sending him back to junior would be a mistake (Tkachuk) they stay. Same if a player proves himself ready to graduate from AHL to NHL. I just don't see the point of view where player x was drafted whatever years ago so he must be ready. Some take years while others are good AHLers that never make the transition. They are either good AHL lifers or cross the pond to become stars in Euro leagues.

It's a narrow path where some work their butts off to become NHLers while others stick with the skills (usually offensive since defense doesn't excite the crowd) that got them drafted & figure they can get by on that alone. Many grinders are former junior stars that couldn't transition their offense to the big league so adapted & are earning $1+ million while the 1s that didn't are scoring in the AHL @ much less $s wondering why they never get called up.

As a rule of thumb I fiqure that any player with 3ish years in the AHL is unlikely to be a top 6/top4 so unless he works hard to get 1 of the depth spots he stays where he is. It's become a youth driven league so there is no reason to pay a kid 0.9 when a Lazar gets 0.95 or a vet like Verseeg will play for 1.75. You pay for "bang for the buck" & unless a talented kid learns late to adapt his game he's a "black ace" if he's lucky.

[cccsberg]

7 minutes ago, Flyerfan52 said:

If a prospect proves so worthy that sending him back to junior would be a mistake (Tkachuk) they stay. Same if a player proves himself ready to graduate from AHL to NHL. I just don't see the point of view where player x was drafted whatever years ago so he must be ready. Some take years while others are good AHLers that never make the transition. They are either good AHL lifers or cross the pond to become stars in Euro leagues.

It's a narrow path where some work their butts off to become NHLers while others stick with the skills (usually offensive since defense doesn't excite the crowd) that got them drafted & figure they can get by on that alone. Many grinders are former junior stars that couldn't transition their offense to the big league so adapted & are earning $1+ million while the 1s that didn't are scoring in the AHL @ much less $s wondering why they never get called up.

As a rule of thumb I fiqure that any player with 3ish years in the AHL is unlikely to be a top 6/top4 so unless he works hard to get 1 of the depth spots he stays where he is. It's become a youth driven league so there is no reason to pay a kid 0.9 when a Lazar gets 0.95 or a vet like Verseeg will play for 1.75. You pay for "bang for the buck" & unless a talented kid learns late to adapt his game he's a "black ace" if he's lucky.

So if we take the three years in the AHL as the endpoint to be an impact NHLer, who would that be with the Flames?  Let's see, I think Wotherspoon, Kulak, Poirier and Shinkaruk.  All the guys waiver eligible.  Well, this is their year or it'll be onwards to other, younger guys.

[Flyerfan52]

43 minutes ago, cccsberg said:

So if we take the three years in the AHL as the endpoint to be an impact NHLer, who would that be with the Flames?  Let's see, I think Wotherspoon, Kulak, Poirier and Shinkaruk.  All the guys waiver eligible.  Well, this is their year or it'll be onwards to other, younger guys.

Yep. Many say give them a chance in the NHL whether ready or not & say the vets are blocking them. On the other hand just keeping them blocks spots for the next wave of draftees since they are good enough to be top end AHLers with the minutes while the recent kids are held back.

The good AHLers help the minor league team finish better but keep all but the best younger 1s from getting prime minutes. I don't much care about the Calder Cup in a developement league if winning that retards the developement of the best prospects.

[cccsberg]

4 hours ago, Flyerfan52 said:

Yep. Many say give them a chance in the NHL whether ready or not & say the vets are blocking them. On the other hand just keeping them blocks spots for the next wave of draftees since they are good enough to be top end AHLers with the minutes while the recent kids are held back.

The good AHLers help the minor league team finish better but keep all but the best younger 1s from getting prime minutes. I don't much care about the Calder Cup in a developement league if winning that retards the developement of the best prospects.

I don't mind any AHLers as long as they are still developing.  If not and they don't have the talent to make it to the next level it's time to either drop them or change their team status into a more long-term support role. Probably though it's never a clear-cut thing and there are lots of judgement calls, with more than a few guys that never get a real chance to prove themselves in the NHL.

[MAC331]

10 hours ago, cccsberg said:

I don't mind any AHLers as long as they are still developing.  If not and they don't have the talent to make it to the next level it's time to either drop them or change their team status into a more long-term support role. Probably though it's never a clear-cut thing and there are lots of judgement calls, with more than a few guys that never get a real chance to prove themselves in the NHL.

I heard the path to the NHL described once as a funnel for talent, it start with a wide opening and gradually narrows where only a select few get through. I believe this is how it goes and a lot has to go right for you as a player to make it. I have said this before about Poirier and Klimchuk, now throw Shinkaruk in the mix that they likely end up being 3rd and 4th line wingers so they better improve defensively.

[cccsberg]

23 minutes ago, MAC331 said:

I heard the path to the NHL described once as a funnel for talent, it start with a wide opening and gradually narrows where only a select few get through. I believe this is how it goes and a lot has to go right for you as a player to make it. I have said this before about Poirier and Klimchuk, now throw Shinkaruk in the mix that they likely end up being 3rd and 4th line wingers so they better improve defensively.

Yeah I agree with that, though with Baertschi as an example in Vancouver, or Lazar here, or Agostino last year via the AHL sometimes you get a second life when you get traded/land with another team and they have stars in their eyes and actually give you a shot based on long-prior successes.  The bottom line is you only get so many chances and when it comes you need to perform.

[travel_dude]

16 hours ago, Flyerfan52 said:

Yep. Many say give them a chance in the NHL whether ready or not & say the vets are blocking them. On the other hand just keeping them blocks spots for the next wave of draftees since they are good enough to be top end AHLers with the minutes while the recent kids are held back.

The good AHLers help the minor league team finish better but keep all but the best younger 1s from getting prime minutes. I don't much care about the Calder Cup in a developement league if winning that retards the developement of the best prospects.

 

The problem I have with the AHL is that it masks a player's ability at the NHL level.  You see guys like Shore or Agostino that can score tons at the AHL level but fail in the NHL.  Then you see guys that made the circuit from NCAA to ECHL to AHL to ECHL to NHL etc.  Never really made an impact at the NCAA or AHL level but look to be a decent enough NHL player.

 

We have moved in from some AHL guys; no problem.  The problem is that we never saw what some players were capable of, even in a losing season.  Much more important to start grinders or "good character" guys.  

 

[MAC331]

1 hour ago, cccsberg said:

Yeah I agree with that, though with Baertschi as an example in Vancouver, or Lazar here, or Agostino last year via the AHL sometimes you get a second life when you get traded/land with another team and they have stars in their eyes and actually give you a shot based on long-prior successes.  The bottom line is you only get so many chances and when it comes you need to perform.

I agree you need to perform no matter where you are or its guaranteed you won't advance. There also has to exist the opportunities for the player to advance based on his performance and those are not always there. Baertschi was a mixed bag while here much like Backlund in the early going, the coaches didn't like their lack of defensive effort. Then this becomes like you are on the wrong side of ever getting a fair shot at breaking through. Perserverance and determination has to be your best qualities during these times

[MAC331]

When does Camp actually begin for these guys ? First pre-season game is the 18th. No Bennett, No Jagr.