Sam Bennett

[robrob74]

46 minutes ago, The_People1 said:

 

I think Bennett is a finisher.  As in you pass him the puck in the neutral zone at full stride and he will try to finish the play all by himself.  If you pass to him inside the offensive zone, then he will take it to the net.  He is a tunnel vision player. 

 

Some skills can't be taught.  You have it or you don't.

 

Therefore, if Peters was true to his word, he would play him to his strengths where get him the puck in those situations. 

 

Hockey coaches can be a, “do it my way or no way,” or they can be, “do it my way but do it your way whenever possible,” or, put him with players that can get him the puck in stride, or in the zone to finish it.

 

Peters said he’d look at the players strengths but is it too early to see that happening?

[robrob74]

3 hours ago, cccsberg said:

Why is everyone so fixated on Bennett?  Overall the team wasn't competitive in 1 on 1 battles nor in coordinating good passing plays.  The Bennett fixation does nothing to address the overall issues, but I guess at least its a shiny object that distracts fan anger elsewhere giving others a chance to meld and grow together?  If you watched the game, Bennett did little to stand out.  If you base your analysis on limited stats, he stands out.  I don't recall a single moment in the game where Bennett was dangerous or made a dangerous scoring chance, whereas I recall many from Monahan, Dube and others.  Perhaps Bennett isn't getting the love because he's not doing much to push the team forward?  Hopefully that will change, not only for him but for the whole team.

 

I was at the game and I noticed him on the ice when he was there. He stood out as much as over half the roster when he was given the chance. 8 minutes is not much. 

 

Yes Petterson did more with approximately the same amount of time, but also had the puck in different situations where we had poor choice breakdowns. 

 

Youre just not willing to give Bennett more credit because you’re expecting more. 

 

See, I didn’t see it the same, especially since we went 0/7 on the pp. they’re on it every time. They didn’t mske much happen until the third when it was too late. I fully expect them to do what you’re saying they did with that much time on the ice and the amount of touches of the puck.

 

We got outplayed plain and simple, until we were down 3-0/4-1.

[7wit]

I thought Bennett was noticeable when he was on the ice. The team as a whole seemed like they were more interested in periphery. He was definitely not the worst player on the ice.

[robrob74]

Just now, 7wit said:

I thought Bennett was noticeable when he was on the ice. The team as a whole seemed like they were more interested in periphery. He was definitely not the worst player on the ice.

 

Nor unnoticeable.

[Flyerfan52]

18 hours ago, conundrumed said:

It's going to take a good 10-20 games to find ourselves.

Adding Neal, Lindholm, Ryan, Hanafin, Czarnik, new coach.

That's a lot of change.

Bennett might be better than most of them, guess we'll find out.

It better not. 10-20 bad/inconsistant games even early in the season can leave teams on the outside come playoff time.

[stubblejumper1]

No offense to Sam Bennett, but all this talk about a fourth liner seems misplaced.  As long as Bennett gets off the ice without picking up a minus, he is doing his job.  

 

I am as disappointed as anyone that he hasn't panned out, but it is time for fans to move on.  He is a role player.  

[conundrumed]

5 hours ago, Flyerfan52 said:

It better not. 10-20 bad/inconsistant games even early in the season can leave teams on the outside come playoff time.

I didn't mean we'll be 0-10 or 0-20, lol.

Just that it'll take time to get a finely tuned machine.

[Cowtownguy]

4 hours ago, stubblejumper1 said:

No offense to Sam Bennett, but all this talk about a fourth liner seems misplaced.  As long as Bennett gets off the ice without picking up a minus, he is doing his job.  

 

I am as disappointed as anyone that he hasn't panned out, but it is time for fans to move on.  He is a role player.  

Perhaps, but we might need to consider how we bring in players to the team. It is a shame if our highest draft pick in team history amounts to be an average player. If that is the case, then we are no better than Edmonton. I still think that he can progress under the right conditions.

[travel_dude]

7 hours ago, robrob74 said:

 

Therefore, if Peters was true to his word, he would play him to his strengths where get him the puck in those situations. 

 

Hockey coaches can be a, “do it my way or no way,” or they can be, “do it my way but do it your way whenever possible,” or, put him with players that can get him the puck in stride, or in the zone to finish it.

 

Peters said he’d look at the players strengths but is it too early to see that happening?

 

IS that what we need to do?

Find the right players to feed Bennett and see if he can finish?

In other words, a line's sole purpose is to get Sam the puck.

It's a two way street.  HE has to make plays to people that are open or have a better chance.

 

Maybe it's just what I saw, but he seems to shoot crossbar height.  IIRC, that was where he scored in pre-season.

Goal scorers have a toolbox of shots.  

If he's not one, then pass the puck to someone that is.

 

Saying all that, it's one game.  He played on a line with other skilled players.  They did what they are supposed to do, and just didn;t get any points.  It's not the end of the world that Bennett play 8 minutes or that they didn't score.  The 4th line was not the reason we lost.  

[robrob74]

They should just trade him. He’s a bum!

[stubblejumper1]

It sounds like a lot of people feel that Sam Bennett should be put in a situation where others help generate more scoring chances for him.  My question is why would the Flameswant to turn Bennett into a one dimensional 20 goal scorer when he seems to naturally be an "energy" player who goes out and works hard every shift, plays the body and keeps the puck out of his own net?  It doesn't hurt to have a few of those guys on the team. 

[MAC331]

12 hours ago, travel_dude said:

 

IS that what we need to do?

Find the right players to feed Bennett and see if he can finish?

In other words, a line's sole purpose is to get Sam the puck.

It's a two way street.  HE has to make plays to people that are open or have a better chance.

 

Maybe it's just what I saw, but he seems to shoot crossbar height.  IIRC, that was where he scored in pre-season.

Goal scorers have a toolbox of shots.  

If he's not one, then pass the puck to someone that is.

 

Saying all that, it's one game.  He played on a line with other skilled players.  They did what they are supposed to do, and just didn;t get any points.  It's not the end of the world that Bennett play 8 minutes or that they didn't score.  The 4th line was not the reason we lost.  

I don't think any line should be all about Bennett, it should always be about finding chemistry. I agree with cross that since the addition of Tkachuk, then Jankowski and now Dube that Bennett has become less of a priority. If they don't recognize what they are doing to this player he will end up like Lazar.

I like what they did with Tkachuk his first season by putting him with the two seasoned players Backlund and Frolik but in the process they treated Bennett as a 3rd rate player providing him 3rd rate wingers. We should expect what we have gotten from him so far. My thinking from the first time I watched Tkachuk said here is the compliment to Bennett and still think these two belong together. The line I would like to see is Tkachuk, Bennett and Lindholm. Yes by putting him back at C.

[cccsberg]

20 hours ago, robrob74 said:

 

I was at the game and I noticed him on the ice when he was there. He stood out as much as over half the roster when he was given the chance. 8 minutes is not much. 

 

Yes Petterson did more with approximately the same amount of time, but also had the puck in different situations where we had poor choice breakdowns. 

 

Youre just not willing to give Bennett more credit because you’re expecting more. 

 

See, I didn’t see it the same, especially since we went 0/7 on the pp. they’re on it every time. They didn’t mske much happen until the third when it was too late. I fully expect them to do what you’re saying they did with that much time on the ice and the amount of touches of the puck.

 

We got outplayed plain and simple, until we were down 3-0/4-1.

I have nothing against Bennett, I just like to call it like I see it.  If you were at the game and focusing on Bennett then you obviously had a better view.  Question:  what do you think Bennett (or anyone for that matter) needs to do to get shifted up?  

[cccsberg]

14 hours ago, Cowtownguy said:

Perhaps, but we might need to consider how we bring in players to the team. It is a shame if our highest draft pick in team history amounts to be an average player. If that is the case, then we are no better than Edmonton. I still think that he can progress under the right conditions.

It seems like your angst is because of draft position waste, which is a wasted opportunity, more than anything to do with Bennett himself.  But try as the NHL does, forecasting 17 year olds 3-5 years down the line is very difficult, to say the least.  We hope we do well on average even if any specific choice turns out to be much less than anticipated.

[conundrumed]

8 minutes ago, cccsberg said:

I have nothing against Bennett, I just like to call it like I see it.  If you were at the game and focusing on Bennett then you obviously had a better view.  Question:  what do you think Bennett (or anyone for that matter) needs to do to get shifted up?  

I think for anyone it's all about momentum.

I recall Huska saying he plays Lomberg on whichever line he thinks needs a boost, be it 1 or 4.

So if you're on the ice and able to swing momentum in favour more often than not, that'll get noticed.

If you lose momentum or it's just killing time for 40 seconds, that'll get you noticed too, but in the wrong way.

[Cowtownguy]

17 minutes ago, cccsberg said:

It seems like your angst is because of draft position waste, which is a wasted opportunity, more than anything to do with Bennett himself.  But try as the NHL does, forecasting 17 year olds 3-5 years down the line is very difficult, to say the least.  We hope we do well on average even if any specific choice turns out to be much less than anticipated.

To a certain extent, that is true. More importantly, I think that Bennett has untapped potential. When placed with anchors, he shifted his game in a way that does not play to his natural strengths. I don't think that he is a case of misidentifying offensive potential. I think that Mac has a point that he became a lower priority when we acquired Tkachuk. Now that we have more offensive prowess, we should put him together with players who can help him with his stunted development. I also think that putting him with Tkachuk might remind him of how to play a more three-dimensional way. 

 

Having said that, maybe he did just mature early and this is his ceiling. To exploit all of our potential, I think it wise to give him a shot with some bonafide talented people. If he still does not pan out (i.e. he does not have the talent or his potential is permanently stunted), then put him in the direction of Backlund. I don't think Backlund ever found his groove with the Flames. I think we messed him up a little. There are plenty of tools who can play a defensive game. The talent should be nurtured.

[Cowtownguy]

13 minutes ago, conundrumed said:

I think for anyone it's all about momentum.

I recall Huska saying he plays Lomberg on whichever line he thinks needs a boost, be it 1 or 4.

So if you're on the ice and able to swing momentum in favour more often than not, that'll get noticed.

If you lose momentum or it's just killing time for 40 seconds, that'll get you noticed too, but in the wrong way.

Interesting.

[MAC331]

3 minutes ago, Cowtownguy said:

To a certain extent, that is true. More importantly, I think that Bennett has untapped potential. When placed with anchors, he shifted his game in a way that does not play to his natural strengths. I don't think that he is a case of misidentifying offensive potential. I think that Mac has a point that he became a lower priority when we acquired Tkachuk. Now that we have more offensive prowess, we should put him together with players who can help him with his stunted development. I also think that putting him with Tkachuk might remind him of how to play a more three-dimensional way. 

 

Having said that, maybe he did just mature early and this is his ceiling. To exploit all of our potential, I think it wise to give him a shot with some bonafide talented people. If he still does not pan out (i.e. he does not have the talent or his potential is permanently stunted), then put him in the direction of Backlund. I don't think Backlund ever found his groove with the Flames. I think we messed him up a little. There are plenty of tools who can play a defensive game. The talent should be nurtured.

The Backlund comparison is a valid one as Sutter pounded the two way game into him. I believe the natural talent is there with Bennett and if they want him to be a star vs a soldier they need to play him with the stars IMO. Use Backlund and Frolik to bring along another star in the making in Dube but don't give Dube instant status over Bennett just because of what he did in x-games.

[MAC331]

8 minutes ago, Cowtownguy said:

Interesting.

I know he means and I see that instinct to win in Bennett however he can't do much with limited playing time. If they want him to be a difference maker put him in a position to carry out the mission.

[MP5029]

You know what, I’m super disappointed out of the gate with the coaching...why in the hell are they not rolling 4 lines equally, they actually can do this but they really need to mix things up.

 

I have always agreed Backlund should anchor the 3rd line.  He’s been super as no. 2 and like Bennett he took a few years to get to where he’s at, and he was very quite about his climb.

 

in any event I’d like to see a few experiments this year...say 3-5 games

 

Bennett and Tachuck 

 

Bennett and Jankowski 

 

I would also like to see 

 

Tachuck on the RW on the top line for a bit with JH and Mony...this is something I think could really pan out and would also really make a difference in the other lines but the only way this happens is if they are willing to roll 4 lines pretty much evenly....

 

JH-Mony-Tachuck 

 

Bennett -Jankowski-Lindholm/Neil

 

Dube-Backlund-Lindholm/Neil

 

Carik (sp)-Ryan-Lazar or whoever 

 

the 4 th nine may not be able to roll evenly but the first three could all, be rather dangerous and fairly even, granted this is not quite even spread of talent but fairly close and the 2nd and 3rd lines are about as close to even as you could get...

 

all and all I think this type of division of skills and more equality of ice time across the lines would generate trouble night in night out for many teams. And yes I do expect JH and Monahan’s points to go down a bit with less ice time but I’m really good with that if other produce more then normal because of it, I’d rather they drop 10 Pts each and see the other forwards pick up 10 each...that’s a loss of 20 Pts from two guys and a pick up of 100pts between 10 others that would be huge and quite reasonable if done the right way 

 

balance is the key to this team, they are not balanced lines just yet but If  they do i think the team will excel to the next level...we don’t have a generational superstar, heck our 2 super star guys are barely that, I’d say they are actually more top level star players, but this year we have more star players so play to that strength and balance out the lines in both skill and ice time!!!!!

 

They have yet to really try this and seem crazy focused on top line to bottom line talent and division of ice time 

 

[cross16]

For about a 2-3 week span last year, Sam Bennett was the best Flames on the ice and was one of the better players in the entire league. absolutely small sample size, but why should we be so content to let that slide in favour of an energy player?

 

not suggesting hell be he best player in the league but I'd be wanting to find the happy medium, not settle. 

[DirtyDeeds]

On 10/4/2018 at 6:50 AM, ABC923 said:

So, Sam Bennett, the new Sven Baertschi?  Plays minimal minutes on the fourth line, never scores (never on the ice after all), eventually traded for pennies on the dollar and maybe has a career somewhere else?  Looks like it.

So let me ask you the obvious question... Who does he deserve to play up higher in the LW roster??

 

Are you going to demote JH or Tkachuk below him, so Bennett can get more time or better linemates?

 

The obvious answer is 3rd or 4th line minutes is where he has played himself to.

[Going4TheCup]

18 hours ago, robrob74 said:

They should just trade him. He’s a bum!

I would like him to be traded too but what can the Flames get for him??

[conundrumed]

21 minutes ago, DirtyDeeds said:

So let me ask you the obvious question... Who does he deserve to play up higher in the LW roster??

 

Are you going to demote JH or Tkachuk below him, so Bennett can get more time or better linemates?

 

The obvious answer is 3rd or 4th line minutes is where he has played himself to.

Too true. Bennett has to earn his minutes, regardless of linemates.

[travel_dude]

21 minutes ago, Going4TheCup said:

I would like him to be traded too but what can the Flames get for him??

 

The sense is that BT will hang up the phone unless it's overpaying.

I can't even imagine what that would look like.

We seem set on defense.

Stud goalie?

It's not like we need another top 6 winger, unless he was part of an upgrade trade.

Bennett/Frolik for Panarin.  Not going to happen but I sense that's the only way they trade him.

 

No point in trading him for a bottom 6 winger.

 

With that out of the way, I would prefer he earns a big raise.

That means he plays as well as Tkachuk and earns a bigger role.

At that point, you evaluate what you have.