2017 development camp

[conundrumed]

7 hours ago, cross16 said:

I think its unfair to blame the coach. Normally these problems only show up when the player leaves the rink and even if they do show up at the rink the player has to want the help and it sounds like Porier wasn't having it at first. I don't think its realistic for a coach to know everything about everything in terms of his team and players and that is why in most cases I find stuff like that is unknown until the person comes forward with it.

 

either way I give him alot of credit and i'll be back cheering for him. I'm glad there was a valid reason to all of the concerns that were raised the last couple seasons because before that his development was looking great. 

 

 

Apologies if my wording wasn't great. I just meant "gives me pause" to step back in retrospect why it got so far. Players room together in the A do they not?

If so, it makes me wonder how it can be hidden. But it's only things that raise my brow and question, not stand on a morality soap box and point fingers.

I'm simply wondering, is there a lesson here we can take away and imbibe to the players on the farms of how it can get away on you and how to look out for each other?

My apologies to anyone who reads it like I'm blaming Huska, that wasn't my mindset nor intention.

Just asking questions.

[DirtyDeeds]

On 7/13/2017 at 8:05 PM, conundrumed said:

Apologies if my wording wasn't great. I just meant "gives me pause" to step back in retrospect why it got so far. Players room together in the A do they not?

If so, it makes me wonder how it can be hidden. But it's only things that raise my brow and question, not stand on a morality soap box and point fingers.

I'm simply wondering, is there a lesson here we can take away and imbibe to the players on the farms of how it can get away on you and how to look out for each other?

My apologies to anyone who reads it like I'm blaming Huska, that wasn't my mindset nor intention.

Just asking questions.

If Huska's insistence to build a 2 way game first encouraged the drinking(not wanting to change his game) then Huska likely would not have seen much indication at all.

 

As well you don't need a Big Brother attitude from this level of hockey. You want open atmosphere so the young prospects can still become young men.

[conundrumed]

8 hours ago, DirtyDeeds said:

If Huska's insistence to build a 2 way game first encouraged the drinking(not wanting to change his game) then Huska likely would not have seen much indication at all.

 

As well you don't need a Big Brother attitude from this level of hockey. You want open atmosphere so the young prospects can still become young men.

My wonder then, would be what level do you need it at? It is the point in a young player's life where it goes from $0 and living with a sponsor to hyped and contracted well into 6 figures with potentials well into 7 figures.

If you can save someone from themselves, is this not when you put your best foot forward to do so? Is it not more than telling them to stick to the outside aisles in grocery stores?

[robrob74]

We gotta remember that kids and some people like to party. And sometimes those kids get out of hand and it becomes a problem. 

 

It can go off the rails quickly. I've seen it happen to people in their 40s. You never know. Even wives or partners don't notice right away, or siblings. 

[Cowtownguy]

8 hours ago, robrob74 said:

We gotta remember that kids and some people like to party. And sometimes those kids get out of hand and it becomes a problem. 

 

It can go off the rails quickly. I've seen it happen to people in their 40s. You never know. Even wives or partners don't notice right away, or siblings. 

Yeah, I have known a number of great people who have fallen apart because of alcohol. I have known a few functioning alcoholics too. As the great Homer (Simpson) once said, "Alcohol: the cause of and solution to all of life's problems."

[YounGuns]

A few thoughts:

 

1)  I agree with Cross (and a few others, including Brad Treliving and Brian Burke) that we really need to have tempered expectations for Foo.  He may not even make the big club - I doubt he makes the big club - so to say he would play well on our first line I think is setting yourselves up for disappointment.  College free agents rarely become NHL players, let alone NHL impact players.  To say a guy should either play on our first line or go to the A...that's asking way too much out of him.  I think if he makes the team this year or any year we should be pleased.  I for one don't think he makes the team this year, and if he does I doubt he is much of a factor on the ice this year.  He might turn into a great player, and I hope I eat these words, but we really need to temper our expectations of this kid.  To put it into perspective: He's no Sam Bennett, and Bennett is struggling to find consistency on our 3rd line.  Bennett was the highest draft pick in our franchise history who just finished his 2nd year in the NHL and he still struggled to be a factor most nights.  You stick Foo on the top line playing against the caliber of players that line has to stack up against, and he'll look like a fish out of water out there and if he doesn't get injured physically his ego and development will be knocked down 10 pegs.  Bennett is awesome, he's going to be awesome, but the reality is he's struggling to find consistency as most young players do.  Foo is still a league or two down from Bennett's skill set.

 

2)  What's with people wanting to break up our 3M line by moving Tkachuk?  That line was the one consistent beacon of light all season, they mesh so well together, and people are slotting in Tkachuk with Bennett or player x, y, z?  I say heck no, the saying "don't fix it if it's not broke" barely does this justice, in the case of the 3M line I would say "if it's working way better than we could have possibly dreamed, why tinker with it?"  The 3M line was one of the best lines in hockey last year.  Don't mess with it.  Let them loose and laugh with glee.

[MAC331]

7 hours ago, YounGuns said:

A few thoughts:

 

1)  I agree with Cross (and a few others, including Brad Treliving and Brian Burke) that we really need to have tempered expectations for Foo.  He may not even make the big club - I doubt he makes the big club - so to say he would play well on our first line I think is setting yourselves up for disappointment.  College free agents rarely become NHL players, let alone NHL impact players.  To say a guy should either play on our first line or go to the A...that's asking way too much out of him.  I think if he makes the team this year or any year we should be pleased.  I for one don't think he makes the team this year, and if he does I doubt he is much of a factor on the ice this year.  He might turn into a great player, and I hope I eat these words, but we really need to temper our expectations of this kid.  To put it into perspective: He's no Sam Bennett, and Bennett is struggling to find consistency on our 3rd line.  Bennett was the highest draft pick in our franchise history who just finished his 2nd year in the NHL and he still struggled to be a factor most nights.  You stick Foo on the top line playing against the caliber of players that line has to stack up against, and he'll look like a fish out of water out there and if he doesn't get injured physically his ego and development will be knocked down 10 pegs.  Bennett is awesome, he's going to be awesome, but the reality is he's struggling to find consistency as most young players do.  Foo is still a league or two down from Bennett's skill set.

 

2)  What's with people wanting to break up our 3M line by moving Tkachuk?  That line was the one consistent beacon of light all season, they mesh so well together, and people are slotting in Tkachuk with Bennett or player x, y, z?  I say heck no, the saying "don't fix it if it's not broke" barely does this justice, in the case of the 3M line I would say "if it's working way better than we could have possibly dreamed, why tinker with it?"  The 3M line was one of the best lines in hockey last year.  Don't mess with it.  Let them loose and laugh with glee.

On your first paragraph I agree Foo will most if not all of next season in Stockton. Inregards to Bennett I think we all agree the talent is there but perhaps differ on the reasons for his struggles. Bennett has not been given a place for much success with the revolving line mates he has endured, as a matter of fact the situation has made his efforts look bad.

This leads me to your 2nd paragraph and why I think we could break up the 3M line and it being essential for the team to become better. I will be repeating what I put in Lines and Pairings however as I said there you could put almost anyone including Versteeg and Brouwer with Backlund and Frolik and get the same production of 13 to 20 goals from each player. You create a new dynamic line of Tkachuk, Bennett and Lazar then you have increased your chances from a team perspective to get increased production 5 on 5 which we need to do. This is still a team finding its way so I don't think GG should get to set yet.

[AlbertaBoy12]

2 hours ago, MAC331 said:

This leads me to your 2nd paragraph and why I think we could break up the 3M line and it being essential for the team to become better. I will be repeating what I put in Lines and Pairings however as I said there you could put almost anyone including Versteeg and Brouwer with Backlund and Frolik and get the same production of 13 to 20 goals from each player. You create a new dynamic line of Tkachuk, Bennett and Lazar then you have increased your chances from a team perspective to get increased production 5 on 5 which we need to do. This is still a team finding its way so I don't think GG should get to set yet.

I think you have the right idea here mac, I dont think you are suddenly going to see a change in deployment of the backlund line because you move tkachuk off that line, people seem to forget he was still buried with colborne, jones, etc.( I honestly dont remember all his linemates). The flames have also said they are commited to pairings, and unless they view that pairing as brouwer LOL, I think we see tkachuk move to the spot they envisioned him in which is next to bennett. I dont agree with you about lazar on the bennett line, I think versteeg would fit better there, but we will see in training camp.

[Fins&FIre15]

Not really sure whats with everyone's love affair with Tkachuk and Bennett on the same line. If we had to, I would much rather try him with the top 2 before trying him with Bennett.

 

No reason to break up one of the best lines in hockey yet.

[AlbertaBoy12]

1 hour ago, Fins&FIre15 said:

No reason to break up one of the best lines in hockey yet.

Theres been plenty of reasons to break it up listed , youre just choosing to ignore reading them, or just dont think they are reasons.

 

People seem to forget how good backlund did before tkachuk.

[zima]

I think leaving well enough alone why break up the 3M line they were the most consistent line most of last yr. They were producing even when no other line was but saying that it wouldn't hurt to try some young kid like poirier or Mang with the 2 m line just to see what it is all about and learn a little defensive offence from the best defensive starting line. Considering that is where that line starts most of there play it would be a great learning experience for who ever they decide to give a chance. Janks I think will start with Bennett or Stag Janks was taught from the start of his college career how to play a Defensive game old hat for him.    

[cross16]

2 hours ago, Fins&FIre15 said:

Not really sure whats with everyone's love affair with Tkachuk and Bennett on the same line. If we had to, I would much rather try him with the top 2 before trying him with Bennett.

 

No reason to break up one of the best lines in hockey yet.

 

Mostly because I think most of us are tired of seeing the Flames highest drafted player every get stuck with scrubs and then question why he can't perform. 

 

that and also tired of seeing the Flames not have good enough 3rd/4th lines. 

[MAC331]

2 hours ago, Fins&FIre15 said:

Not really sure whats with everyone's love affair with Tkachuk and Bennett on the same line. If we had to, I would much rather try him with the top 2 before trying him with Bennett.

 

No reason to break up one of the best lines in hockey yet.

Most everyone has provided their reasons for taking Tkachuk off that line if you don't buy the fact that we need another good line then that is your prerogative.

[The_People1]

14 hours ago, YounGuns said:

A few thoughts:

 

1)  I agree with Cross (and a few others, including Brad Treliving and Brian Burke) that we really need to have tempered expectations for Foo.  He may not even make the big club - I doubt he makes the big club - so to say he would play well on our first line I think is setting yourselves up for disappointment.  College free agents rarely become NHL players, let alone NHL impact players.  To say a guy should either play on our first line or go to the A...that's asking way too much out of him.  I think if he makes the team this year or any year we should be pleased.  I for one don't think he makes the team this year, and if he does I doubt he is much of a factor on the ice this year.  He might turn into a great player, and I hope I eat these words, but we really need to temper our expectations of this kid.  To put it into perspective: He's no Sam Bennett, and Bennett is struggling to find consistency on our 3rd line.  Bennett was the highest draft pick in our franchise history who just finished his 2nd year in the NHL and he still struggled to be a factor most nights.  You stick Foo on the top line playing against the caliber of players that line has to stack up against, and he'll look like a fish out of water out there and if he doesn't get injured physically his ego and development will be knocked down 10 pegs.  Bennett is awesome, he's going to be awesome, but the reality is he's struggling to find consistency as most young players do.  Foo is still a league or two down from Bennett's skill set.

 

2)  What's with people wanting to break up our 3M line by moving Tkachuk?  That line was the one consistent beacon of light all season, they mesh so well together, and people are slotting in Tkachuk with Bennett or player x, y, z?  I say heck no, the saying "don't fix it if it's not broke" barely does this justice, in the case of the 3M line I would say "if it's working way better than we could have possibly dreamed, why tinker with it?"  The 3M line was one of the best lines in hockey last year.  Don't mess with it.  Let them loose and laugh with glee.

 

1. Foo - agreed.  When you compare Foo with where Jimmy Vesey was, Vesey was polished.  Yet the impact he had in his rookie NHL season was average at best.  He started slow, then went on a but of a run in November.... Then when the going got tough after December, he sort of faded away again.  All in all, I find the biggest challenge for college players entering the NHL is conditioning and stamina because college doesn't play as many games as CHL and AHL.

 

If Foo makes the Flames and pots 20-points, then we should be thrilled.  He's most likely a guy who can provide energy and surprise with offense on the 4th line.  It's extremely unlikely he will impact the Flames in a 1st line capacity.

 

2. Agreed to an extent.  Tkachuk works great with Backlund and Frolik but the idea was to have him sheltered with two vets in his rookie year.  Now the challenge on Tkachuk is going to the next level and reaching that 75 to 85 point level and that's unlikely to happen with Backlund and Frolik who are more defensively minded.

[conundrumed]

Tkachuk's coming into the dreaded "sophomore slump" year.

I think it's best avoided by keeping him with Backs and Frolik.

Why change it? Let him grow...

[AlbertaBoy12]

1 hour ago, conundrumed said:

Tkachuk's coming into the dreaded "sophomore slump" year.

I think it's best avoided by keeping him with Backs and Frolik.

Why change it? Let him grow...

mony and johnny didnt have sophomore slumps, same with other players around the league, lets not worry about that too much.

[conundrumed]

37 minutes ago, AlbertaBoy12 said:

mony and johnny didnt have sophomore slumps, same with other players around the league, lets not worry about that too much.

So you mean we shouldn't worry about it...?

Like it never happens?

[MAC331]

1 hour ago, conundrumed said:

So you mean we shouldn't worry about it...?

Like it never happens?

All GG can do is put any player in the best position to exceed.

[AlbertaBoy12]

1 hour ago, conundrumed said:

So you mean we shouldn't worry about it...?

Like it never happens?

No, but if I was GG I would put tkachuk in the best position to succeed like mac said and getting o zone starts with bennett is probably better then getting hammered with backlund. IT also serves the dual purpose of making the team better.

[Fins&FIre15]

10 hours ago, AlbertaBoy12 said:

Theres been plenty of reasons to break it up listed , youre just choosing to ignore reading them, or just dont think they are reasons.

 

People seem to forget how good backlund did before tkachuk.

I mostly just skim through the comments to the most recent ones, sorry if I missed a few posts. I've also been a backlund supporter way before most people, so I don't need a reminder on that one. (I hope you didn't read that in a snobbish tone, because It wasnt meant that way lol)

 

9 hours ago, cross16 said:

 

Mostly because I think most of us are tired of seeing the Flames highest drafted player every get stuck with scrubs and then question why he can't perform. 

 

that and also tired of seeing the Flames not have good enough 3rd/4th lines. 

Aside from playoffs he hasn't really deserved a chance to play with non scrubs. We drafted him to create offense, hes simply not cutting it. It's scary how bad his regression looked this year. He had barely any offensive flash and blame for that should not rest solely on his linemates.

 

9 hours ago, MAC331 said:

Most everyone has provided their reasons for taking Tkachuk off that line if you don't buy the fact that we need another good line then that is your prerogative.

Versteeg-Bennett-Lazar sounds like an alright line to me, or Gaudreau-Monahan-Tkachuk if were taking him off that line. I apologize that I'm late to this discussion...in the development camp thread. >_____>

[AlbertaBoy12]

7 hours ago, Fins&FIre15 said:

I mostly just skim through the comments to the most recent ones, sorry if I missed a few posts. I've also been a backlund supporter way before most people, so I don't need a reminder on that one. (I hope you didn't read that in a snobbish tone, because It wasnt meant that way lol)

Its all good I totally agree on breaking up the best line in hockey, im just trying to find a way to make the team better, and id rather have 3 good scoring lines then one super line which while good doesnt account for a ton of goals. 

 

Backlund Line had 37 goals combined

Mony-gaudreau 32 goals 

Bennett-Brouwer 16 goals combined

 

Im just using the most frequent groups of players there obviously we can add in other players to change the number for bennett and if we add ferland we get an extra 7 or 8 extra goals, along with chiasson, brouwer and anyone else tried on the top line. id rather see the bennett line be more of a threat and gain 20- 30 goals on the season, while the backlund line loses 10-15 goals on the season. This last part is not proven math just guesstimates.

 

Disclaimer the above numbers are 5 on 5, and it starts to show what a real problem we have

[cross16]

8 hours ago, Fins&FIre15 said:

Aside from playoffs he hasn't really deserved a chance to play with non scrubs. We drafted him to create offense, hes simply not cutting it. It's scary how bad his regression looked this year. He had barely any offensive flash and blame for that should not rest solely on his linemates.

 

 

Not entirely no, but it's also really difficult to create offence and utilize your teammates when your line mates are the likes of Versteeg, Brouwer, Chiasson etc. 

 

Bennett has to play better no question but I also think its unrealistic to think he can perform like a 4th overall pick playing with the linemates he has played with. That's incredibly difficult for a 20 year old kid to do. 

[AlbertaBoy12]

1 hour ago, cross16 said:

 

Not entirely no, but it's also really difficult to create offence and utilize your teammates when your line mates are the likes of Versteeg, Brouwer, Chiasson etc. 

 

Bennett has to play better no question but I also think its unrealistic to think he can perform like a 4th overall pick playing with the linemates he has played with. That's incredibly difficult for a 20 year old kid to do. 

I thought bennetts biggest problem is he looked like a guy trying to create too much and no confidence in his linemates on offence. 

[robrob74]

2 hours ago, cross16 said:

 

Not entirely no, but it's also really difficult to create offence and utilize your teammates when your line mates are the likes of Versteeg, Brouwer, Chiasson etc. 

 

Bennett has to play better no question but I also think its unrealistic to think he can perform like a 4th overall pick playing with the linemates he has played with. That's incredibly difficult for a 20 year old kid to do. 

 

 

Monahan and Gaudreau has always had each other, and they had Hudler to start their career. 

 

Bennett had a year of Backlund, but as a winger. 

 

Fins,

 

i think youre being a little harsh on the kid. I get the disappointment though. We all thought Bennett would do 10-20 points better, but it turns out learning to play C in the toughest league in the world is a tough task. 

 

His 2-way game is shaping up like Backlund's. I think we just have to be patient. A year in the AHL would've been good for him as he lost a better part of a year's development.  The team botched that part of his career. I would have taken the patient approach.

 

10 hours ago, Fins&FIre15 said:

I mostly just skim through the comments to the most recent ones, sorry if I missed a few posts. I've also been a backlund supporter way before most people, so I don't need a reminder on that one. (I hope you didn't read that in a snobbish tone, because It wasnt meant that way lol)

 

Aside from playoffs he hasn't really deserved a chance to play with non scrubs. We drafted him to create offense, hes simply not cutting it. It's scary how bad his regression looked this year. He had barely any offensive flash and blame for that should not rest solely on his linemates.

 

Versteeg-Bennett-Lazar sounds like an alright line to me, or Gaudreau-Monahan-Tkachuk if were taking him off that line. I apologize that I'm late to this discussion...in the development camp thread. >_____>

 

[AlbertaBoy12]

5 minutes ago, robrob74 said:

 

His 2-way game is shaping up like Backlund's. I think we just have to be patient. A year in the AHL would've been good for him as he lost a better part of a year's development.  The team botched that part of his career. I would have taken the patient approach.

 

 

Except he couldnt go the AHL till this past season, and youre not going to take a guy who spent the better part of 2 seasons with the team, and send him to the AHL. That would be poor management and would lead to a rift forming between the team. Bennett played a key role on this team last season, whether it be pk time or his even strength minutes, he didnt deserve to go down to the AAA. As others have pointed out its not easy for a 20 year old to learn center with crappy wingers, im fine with how the flames have developed him.