2019-20 ROSTER PLANNING

[travel_dude]

2 hours ago, kehatch said:

I really wish we pulled off the Kadri move. We need at least one more player to take some of the pressure off the top line. I don't blame the top line for the playoff loss. The Mackinnon line was simply better. That's potentially the best line in hockey, so be it. But our depth failed to take on Colorado and that's why we lost so soundly. 

 

It's why I don;t think the roster is set.

Andy Mac is a reach to make the team, but stranger things have happened.

As much as Valimaki's injury sets us back, I don;t think that influences the decision to move Brodie and perhaps Janko for another C.

And Frolik may just be used in another trade for a team with too many D and not enough F.

 

Doing nothing leaves us with a couple of holes.

The third line is shirt a RW.

The third line has a meh C.

Even replacing Neal with Mangiapane, Czarnik or Ryan just gives us a line that doesn;t score much.

I can;t see using Lucic on the 3rd line at all.

Makes no sense.

 

Perhaps bumping up Bennett to the Backlund line will turn his game around, but he's not a player like Frolik, so I don't know it will work.

That would mean Mangiapane-Janko-Frolik.

Nothing special.

 

If you move Brodie for a C, you may unlock Bennett's potential; 2 years of Janko hasn;t.

 

[GM_3300]

2 hours ago, kehatch said:

 

A few things struck me from last season.

 

First, a majority of the offensive teams had 7 forwards with 40 or more points (the Flames had 5 and then a big drop off). Second, none of the offensive teams except San Jose did well in the playoffs. And third, San Jose has offense balanced between three forward lines and their D. 

 

Gaudreau is an elite offensive player. Monahan is an average first line C but a top goal scorer. Both Lindholm and Tkachuk are very good top 6 players that bring a number of aspects to the table. Backlund is a strong defensive C with decent offensive output. The top 5 is fine. But it drops off to drastically after that. 

 

Bennett adds a physical presence and picks it up in the playoffs, but his regular season 5 on 5 has not been good. Jankowski is a great PKer but probably better off on the fourth line 5 on 5. Lucic has been in a rapid decline for 3 seasons and has not been good. Ryan is a great piece to have due to his versatility, but you can't count on him for consistent offense. Frolik has been functional, but was in the coaches bad books for most of the season and probably won't be back. Czarnik hasn't shown he can produce at a middle six level. Dube is the one guy to look at that could take a big step forward, but I think he needs another year. I have never been high on Mangiapane. 

 

I really wish we pulled off the Kadri move. We need at least one more player to take some of the pressure off the top line. I don't blame the top line for the playoff loss. The Mackinnon line was simply better. That's potentially the best line in hockey, so be it. But our depth failed to take on Colorado and that's why we lost so soundly. 

Yeah I don't know wat to say about Bennett anymore. I some ways he as been his own worst enemy and the last few years on lousy lines. This is why I say put him on RW with Tkachuk and Backlund to remove the excuses. If he is ever going to be any kind of offense contributor it has to be playing with other high end talent. I thought Mangiapane played well with Ryan and Ryan got better as he got more familiar with the team and his line mates. Czarnik really was given no real chance last season so playing with these two on a regular basis should tell us more on him and Mangiapane. I don't like the Lucic deal at all but I guess we will all live with it. He could prove instrumental on the 2nd PP, maybe he will toughen up Jankowski for us, who ends up on RW on that line could be key for some success.

[The_People1]

2 hours ago, kehatch said:

 

I really wish we pulled off the Kadri move. 

 

Kadri deserves a round of Boos when he plays here.  He puts Calgary on his No Trade list and then tries to play it off like he would've come here but just didn't want to leave Toronto.

[kehatch]

2 hours ago, GM_3300 said:

Yeah I don't know wat to say about Bennett anymore. I some ways he as been his own worst enemy and the last few years on lousy lines. This is why I say put him on RW with Tkachuk and Backlund to remove the excuses. If he is ever going to be any kind of offense contributor it has to be playing with other high end talent. I thought Mangiapane played well with Ryan and Ryan got better as he got more familiar with the team and his line mates. Czarnik really was given no real chance last season so playing with these two on a regular basis should tell us more on him and Mangiapane. I don't like the Lucic deal at all but I guess we will all live with it. He could prove instrumental on the 2nd PP, maybe he will toughen up Jankowski for us, who ends up on RW on that line could be key for some success.

 

Bennett played a bunch of time with Backlund last season.  The rest of the time he spent with Jankowski who is actually a pretty steady player 5 on 5.  I don't think this is a line mate issue and I think the excuses have already been removed.  The guy has capped out at 26/27 points for the last three seasons and has consistently been among our minus leaders for the last 4.  I get +/- isn't the best stat, but when you are ALWAYS at the bottom despite getting sheltered minutes it isn't a good thing. The guy has been -52 since entering the league and leads the Flames by a mile over that duration.  He also led the team in PIMs once again, and generally not the good kind.  

 

I hope he can find another gear.  He as better 5 on 5 last season, dropped his dumb penalties a fair bit, and looked good in the playoffs.  I definitely liked a lot more of his game.  Hopefully he can take another step forward, but right now his lack of offense combined with poor defense and high PIMs makes him a liability. 

[GM_3300]

11 hours ago, kehatch said:

 

Bennett played a bunch of time with Backlund last season.  The rest of the time he spent with Jankowski who is actually a pretty steady player 5 on 5.  I don't think this is a line mate issue and I think the excuses have already been removed.  The guy has capped out at 26/27 points for the last three seasons and has consistently been among our minus leaders for the last 4.  I get +/- isn't the best stat, but when you are ALWAYS at the bottom despite getting sheltered minutes it isn't a good thing. The guy has been -52 since entering the league and leads the Flames by a mile over that duration.  He also led the team in PIMs once again, and generally not the good kind.  

 

I hope he can find another gear.  He as better 5 on 5 last season, dropped his dumb penalties a fair bit, and looked good in the playoffs.  I definitely liked a lot more of his game.  Hopefully he can take another step forward, but right now his lack of offense combined with poor defense and high PIMs makes him a liability. 

We will just have to disagree given your perspective.

[cross16]

13 hours ago, kehatch said:

 

Bennett played a bunch of time with Backlund last season.  The rest of the time he spent with Jankowski who is actually a pretty steady player 5 on 5.  I don't think this is a line mate issue and I think the excuses have already been removed.  The guy has capped out at 26/27 points for the last three seasons and has consistently been among our minus leaders for the last 4.  I get +/- isn't the best stat, but when you are ALWAYS at the bottom despite getting sheltered minutes it isn't a good thing. The guy has been -52 since entering the league and leads the Flames by a mile over that duration.  He also led the team in PIMs once again, and generally not the good kind.  

 

I hope he can find another gear.  He as better 5 on 5 last season, dropped his dumb penalties a fair bit, and looked good in the playoffs.  I definitely liked a lot more of his game.  Hopefully he can take another step forward, but right now his lack of offense combined with poor defense and high PIMs makes him a liability. 

 

Thing is, Jankowski drags down almost all of Bennett's numbers. Away from Jankowski Bennett has strong numbers that actually point to a solid two way player developing (which IMO the eye test backs up - I don't agree with "poor defense") and his numbers are mostly good with various linemates whereas Jankowskis' get a bump when he plays with Bennett and are not as strong when he is without him. Neal effect in play for sure here, but Bennett with those 2 actually had them in decent territory, wheras without Bennett they were terrible.

 

Not sure it's accurate to call Jankowski a pretty steady 5 on 5 player personally. i think he's below avg especially as a center and most indicators point to that. Now I agree the line mate thing can't be the only excuse and Bennett does need to take a step on his own but I still think there are more than a few things that point to numbers being dragged down by miss management. 

[cross16]

Honestly i'm not dissapointed at all in the off season i'm encouraged by it.

 

I think an aspect that does not get discussed enough is that under Treliving the Flames have traditionally churned their roster a fair bit in every off-season. Be it new coach or new players there really isn't an off season where a fairly major change has not taken place. I'm actually happy to see that the Flames are returning all their key pieces and think it's time for that group to grow together. I don't think championship caliber teams churn that much so i'm happy to see it get that opportunity, especially because I think the lack of depth people are discussing can easily be handled internally.  

 

I get you always want to see improvement and he swung on a few big moves that are disappointing they didn't go through but I think when you have a good team like they have you need to be very strategic about how you improve and you need to avoid the optics of "improving" in appearance only just for the sake of saying you improved. 

[travel_dude]

7 minutes ago, cross16 said:

Honestly i'm not dissapointed at all in the off season i'm encouraged by it.

 

I think an aspect that does not get discussed enough is that under Treliving the Flames have traditionally churned their roster a fair bit in every off-season. Be it new coach or new players there really isn't an off season where a fairly major change has not taken place. I'm actually happy to see that the Flames are returning all their key pieces and think it's time for that group to grow together. I don't think championship caliber teams churn that much so i'm happy to see it get that opportunity, especially because I think the lack of depth people are discussing can easily be handled internally.  

 

I get you always want to see improvement and he swung on a few big moves that are disappointing they didn't go through but I think when you have a good team like they have you need to be very strategic about how you improve and you need to avoid the optics of "improving" in appearance only just for the sake of saying you improved. 

 

I guess the point is that he tried to move out a few key players; Frolik at TDL and Brodie/Janko (rumor) this summer.

While it may be encouraging that he hasn't made any big changes, he has tried.

No, you don't follow up a Kadri trade attempt by trying to make a deal for a lesser player for the sake of a trade.

But, trying to improve your #3C isn't a bad idea, especially if you feel that Janko doesn't move the needle.

With the 3rd line the same as last year (insert Lucic for Neal), you won't see any improvement. 

[GM_3300]

29 minutes ago, travel_dude said:

 

I guess the point is that he tried to move out a few key players; Frolik at TDL and Brodie/Janko (rumor) this summer.

While it may be encouraging that he hasn't made any big changes, he has tried.

No, you don't follow up a Kadri trade attempt by trying to make a deal for a lesser player for the sake of a trade.

But, trying to improve your #3C isn't a bad idea, especially if you feel that Janko doesn't move the needle.

With the 3rd line the same as last year (insert Lucic for Neal), you won't see any improvement. 

Who isn't to say the 3rd line C might be Ryan and Jankowski bumped down to the 4th line. Ryan is the more complete player, give him Mangiapane who he played well with and give Czarnik a full opportunity on RW we just might have something new.

[GM_3300]

46 minutes ago, cross16 said:

Honestly i'm not dissapointed at all in the off season i'm encouraged by it.

 

I think an aspect that does not get discussed enough is that under Treliving the Flames have traditionally churned their roster a fair bit in every off-season. Be it new coach or new players there really isn't an off season where a fairly major change has not taken place. I'm actually happy to see that the Flames are returning all their key pieces and think it's time for that group to grow together. I don't think championship caliber teams churn that much so i'm happy to see it get that opportunity, especially because I think the lack of depth people are discussing can easily be handled internally.  

 

I get you always want to see improvement and he swung on a few big moves that are disappointing they didn't go through but I think when you have a good team like they have you need to be very strategic about how you improve and you need to avoid the optics of "improving" in appearance only just for the sake of saying you improved. 

So long as Peters can hit on some new dynamics amongst this player group we should be fine but again who knows how far we go next season.

[The_People1]

1 hour ago, cross16 said:

Honestly i'm not dissapointed at all in the off season i'm encouraged by it.

 

On a scale of 0-10 disappointment where 10 is maximum disappointment, i would be surprised if you were at zero.  Our most pressing need was goaltending and we swapped Smith for Talbot.  Not exactly the earth shattering move we needed.  Next, Neal was a problem and we dealt with that by swapping for another team's problem.

 

Two sideways moves aside from losing Fantenberg, Prout, and buying out Stone.  

 

I'm not at level 10 disappointment but probably a 4 or 5.  We really didn't do anything in for a team that may be 1 or 2 pieces away from winning it all.  This is a missed opportunity.

[cross16]

24 minutes ago, The_People1 said:

 

On a scale of 0-10 disappointment where 10 is maximum disappointment, i would be surprised if you were at zero.  Our most pressing need was goaltending and we swapped Smith for Talbot.  Not exactly the earth shattering move we needed.  Next, Neal was a problem and we dealt with that by swapping for another team's problem.

 

Two sideways moves aside from losing Fantenberg, Prout, and buying out Stone.  

 

I'm not at level 10 disappointment but probably a 4 or 5.  We really didn't do anything in for a team that may be 1 or 2 pieces away from winning it all.  This is a missed opportunity.

 

So to clarify, my moments were based more on my opinion of Treliving and some of the shade being thrown his way. In order to know whether or not it's a missed opportunity we would have to understand what the opportunities actually were or are. If you are just generally disappointed because you wanted to see activity that's fine, but what i'm referring to is disappointment in the GM. 

 

So don't really agree that it's a missed opportunity and that is also looking at things with a very narrow lens. Why can't Dube be one of those missing pieces? What can't that piece be acquired at the deadline? Why is the off season, and in particular outside improvement only, the only criteria? I think at the end of the day there are 2 things at play for me there. 

1 - This is a very good team and i don't think it's difficult to see how they can be better next year or at least as good. 

2 - Team building is a very fluid and more dynamic process. Criticizing 1 aspect of it (that also isn't finished mind you) is near sighted. 

 

I like the idea that this team is very good and is being given a chance to grow as a team as most championship teams have to.  Would have loved to see a more or two, like the Kadri deal, to meet a need but when you have limited needs those deals become tougher. 

 

[The_People1]

29 minutes ago, cross16 said:

 

So to clarify, my moments were based more on my opinion of Treliving and some of the shade being thrown his way. In order to know whether or not it's a missed opportunity we would have to understand what the opportunities actually were or are. If you are just generally disappointed because you wanted to see activity that's fine, but what i'm referring to is disappointment in the GM. 

 

So don't really agree that it's a missed opportunity and that is also looking at things with a very narrow lens. Why can't Dube be one of those missing pieces? What can't that piece be acquired at the deadline? Why is the off season, and in particular outside improvement only, the only criteria? I think at the end of the day there are 2 things at play for me there. 

1 - This is a very good team and i don't think it's difficult to see how they can be better next year or at least as good. 

2 - Team building is a very fluid and more dynamic process. Criticizing 1 aspect of it (that also isn't finished mind you) is near sighted. 

 

I like the idea that this team is very good and is being given a chance to grow as a team as most championship teams have to.  Would have loved to see a more or two, like the Kadri deal, to meet a need but when you have limited needs those deals become tougher. 

 

 

Sure, there's still time but to grade the off season in isolation, then it is in itself disappointing to some degree.

 

I don't think we disagree in the overall health of the team and BT's abilities, just that the off-season has been disappointing.  Unless you don't place that much value in the off-season.  But i would disagree there.  Lots of work should be done in the off-season.

 

I know he's tried to make moves based on the Kadri deal, so i'm not completely disappointed.  I'm just partly disappointed.  

[travel_dude]

52 minutes ago, The_People1 said:

 

Sure, there's still time but to grade the off season in isolation, then it is in itself disappointing to some degree.

 

I don't think we disagree in the overall health of the team and BT's abilities, just that the off-season has been disappointing.  Unless you don't place that much value in the off-season.  But i would disagree there.  Lots of work should be done in the off-season.

 

I know he's tried to make moves based on the Kadri deal, so i'm not completely disappointed.  I'm just partly disappointed.  

 

And to be clear, BT tends to make the majority of his roster moves in the summer.

Holes were identified, and he made attempts to fix them.

It takes two to make a deal, but the trades haven't panned out.

Lucic for Neal wasn't exactly on the top of my wish list.

 

Overall, I get why he wasn't a big player in FA.

The "rumors" of being in on Ferland and Maroon in FA haven't panned out either.

I'm not disappointed with him not overpaying again for a prized UFA.

Not like he had much of a chance.

We would probably have regretted a lot of the July 1st deals.

[cross16]

1 hour ago, The_People1 said:

 

Sure, there's still time but to grade the off season in isolation, then it is in itself disappointing to some degree.

 

I don't think we disagree in the overall health of the team and BT's abilities, just that the off-season has been disappointing.  Unless you don't place that much value in the off-season.  But i would disagree there.  Lots of work should be done in the off-season.

 

I know he's tried to make moves based on the Kadri deal, so i'm not completely disappointed.  I'm just partly disappointed.  

 

Sounds like we are actually more aligned maybe then even I thought. Might be n issue of semantics because I guess i'm not "dissapointed" but it's also not like i'm thrilled either. It would have been awesome for the Kadri deal to go through or another deal like it so i'ts not like i'm sitting here happy that little has been done i'm just not disapointed either because I think the lack of churn can be positive too. 

 

Off-season is important no doubt but I also think the importance of it varies with the level of your team. Flames need a couple pieces for sure but when it's more limited like that you have the potential to accomplish that at other times of the year, where a team with plenty of needs (Devils for example) need to make more changes in the off-season because it's just simply not feasible to do it at other points of the season. 

[cross16]

3 hours ago, travel_dude said:

 

I guess the point is that he tried to move out a few key players; Frolik at TDL and Brodie/Janko (rumor) this summer.

While it may be encouraging that he hasn't made any big changes, he has tried.

No, you don't follow up a Kadri trade attempt by trying to make a deal for a lesser player for the sake of a trade.

But, trying to improve your #3C isn't a bad idea, especially if you feel that Janko doesn't move the needle.

With the 3rd line the same as last year (insert Lucic for Neal), you won't see any improvement. 

 

By just about any measure you can think of, Neal was one of the worst players in the league last year. So while i'ts not exactly one that should be touted as an "improvement" I'm also not sure this statement is fair. 

[robrob74]

I would try

Bennett, Ryan, Mangiapane

 

AlThough  Bennett can be a shooter, like Mangiapane.

[robrob74]

45 minutes ago, travel_dude said:

 

And to be clear, BT tends to make the majority of his roster moves in the summer.

Holes were identified, and he made attempts to fix them.

It takes two to make a deal, but the trades haven't panned out.

Lucic for Neal wasn't exactly on the top of my wish list.

 

Overall, I get why he wasn't a big player in FA.

The "rumors" of being in on Ferland and Maroon in FA haven't panned out either.

I'm not disappointed with him not overpaying again for a prized UFA.

Not like he had much of a chance.

We would probably have regretted a lot of the July 1st deals.

 

Min the Kadri deal it took three and Kadri put the stop on.

[travel_dude]

1 hour ago, cross16 said:

 

By just about any measure you can think of, Neal was one of the worst players in the league last year. So while i'ts not exactly one that should be touted as an "improvement" I'm also not sure this statement is fair. 

 

I'm just not convinced we are better as a result of the trade.

I get why we did it, just seems like one bad year vs several bad years.

[kehatch]

5 hours ago, cross16 said:

 

Thing is, Jankowski drags down almost all of Bennett's numbers. Away from Jankowski Bennett has strong numbers that actually point to a solid two way player developing (which IMO the eye test backs up - I don't agree with "poor defense") and his numbers are mostly good with various linemates whereas Jankowskis' get a bump when he plays with Bennett and are not as strong when he is without him. Neal effect in play for sure here, but Bennett with those 2 actually had them in decent territory, wheras without Bennett they were terrible.

 

Not sure it's accurate to call Jankowski a pretty steady 5 on 5 player personally. i think he's below avg especially as a center and most indicators point to that. Now I agree the line mate thing can't be the only excuse and Bennett does need to take a step on his own but I still think there are more than a few things that point to numbers being dragged down by miss management. 

 

I am not trying to oversell Jankowski. I like him as a fourth line C and as a PKer.  I agree he is weak as a third line C.  I just don't see him as the reason that Bennett hasn't succeeded.  

 

Bennett has over 300 games in the NHL over four full seasons.  Backlund is often put forward as the example for patience given his slow development.  By this point Backlund was a 0.5 PPG player.  Bennett's offense regressed after his first season and has stalled since.  That is not a good sign and very few players turn that around.  He is on the ice for a lot of goals against and is a liability on penalties taken vs penalties drawn, so we need that offense to turn around for him to be an asset on the ice.

 

I don't think the Flames should give up on him.  Last season was a step forward in a number of areas.  I just don't think this is about his line mates.  

[GM_3300]

1 hour ago, kehatch said:

 

I am not trying to oversell Jankowski. I like him as a fourth line C and as a PKer.  I agree he is weak as a third line C.  I just don't see him as the reason that Bennett hasn't succeeded.  

 

Bennett has over 300 games in the NHL over four full seasons.  Backlund is often put forward as the example for patience given his slow development.  By this point Backlund was a 0.5 PPG player.  Bennett's offense regressed after his first season and has stalled since.  That is not a good sign and very few players turn that around.  He is on the ice for a lot of goals against and is a liability on penalties taken vs penalties drawn, so we need that offense to turn around for him to be an asset on the ice.

 

I don't think the Flames should give up on him.  Last season was a step forward in a number of areas.  I just don't think this is about his line mates.  

This isn't about blame when it comes to Bennett, it's more about circumstance IMO. What would Bennett have become if he was left with Backlund and Frolik ? We will never know but we do know that with all the movement and line mates he has experienced his development has gone no where. As you say, he isn't a player we should give up on because he did show real positive signs in is play last season, especially as an example of compete required by all members of this team.

[redfire11]

1 hour ago, GM_3300 said:

it's more about circumstance IMO. What would Bennett have become if he was left with Backlund and Frolik ?

Tkachuk would be on the third line last year and we would be paying Bennett 7m a year and Tkachuk 3m a year

[cccsberg]

15 minutes ago, redfire11 said:

Tkachuk would be on the third line last year and we would be paying Bennett 7m a year and Tkachuk 3m a year

Wishful thinking.... if only that was the case.

[kehatch]

Bennett's most common lines last season EV (according to Dobber Hockey) are below.  Bennett's was most commonly with Backlund and Tkachuk for the first half of the season.  He was demoted to Jankowski/Neal for the third quarter of the season and then with Jankowski/Czarnik to finish it off.  

 

 

 

Bennett was the second most common line mate of the Backlund/Tkachuk pair

 

 

With Backlund and Tkachuk

• Bennett played 195 EV minutes with those two.  They had a CF% of 55.43 and a GF% of 52.63 (+1 goal differential).  
• Bennett without those two played 476 EV minutes.  He had a CF% of 53.70 and a GF% of 42.86 (-6 goal differential)
• Those two played without Bennett for 628 EV minutes.  They had a CF% of 57.51 and a GF% of 61.82 (+23 goal differential). 

For comparison

• Those two played with Frolik for 427 EV minutes. They had a CF% of 59.16 and a GF% of 67.44 (+15 goal differential).
• Those two played with Czarnik for 73 EV minutes. They had a CF% of 57.52 and a GF% of 33.33 (-2 goal differential).

 

With Jankowski and Neal

• Bennett played 153 EV minutes with those two.  They had a CF% of 50.98 and a GF% of 37.50 (-4 goal differential).  
• Bennett without those two played 385 EV minutes.  He had a CF% of 54.41 and a GF% of 54.29 (+3 goal differential)
• Those two played without Bennett for 185 EV minutes.  They had a CF% of 48.01 and a GF% of 37.50 (-2 goal differential). 

For comparison

• Those two played with Mangiapane for 61 EV minutes. They had a CF% of 49.54 and a GF% of 0 (-2 goal differential).
• Those two played with Czarnik for 47 EV minutes. They had a CF% of 50.68 and a GF% of 100 (+1 goal differential).

 

With Jankowski and Czarnik

• Bennett played 100 EV minutes with those two.  They had a CF% of 62.16 and a GF% of 40.00 (-2 goal differential).  
• Bennett without those two played 457 EV minutes.  He had a CF% of 54.09 and a GF% of 53.85 (+3 goal differential)
• Those two played without Bennett for 162 EV minutes.  They had a CF% of 55.17 and a GF% of 70.00 (+4 goal differential). 

 

There is definitely evidence that Neal and Jankowski brought Bennett down.  But there is just as much evidence that Bennett was a liability on the Backlund line.  The simple truth is he was given plenty of time on the Backlund line but there were better options.  

 

A disturbing trend with Bennett, and his has been for his career, is the goals against.  His goals against per 60-minutes played (GA/60) is near the top of the team.  When you have a depth player playing pretty sheltered minutes, putting up limited offense, and taking lots of PIMS you expect that GA to be DOWN.  Which sums up the player.  His PIMS and GA make him a liability, and he doesn't provide the upside to make up for it.  If he can't get his offense going or get the issues under control then he doesn't have an NHL career ahead of him.  

 

[kehatch]

3 hours ago, GM_3300 said:

This isn't about blame when it comes to Bennett, it's more about circumstance IMO. What would Bennett have become if he was left with Backlund and Frolik ? We will never know but we do know that with all the movement and line mates he has experienced his development has gone no where. As you say, he isn't a player we should give up on because he did show real positive signs in is play last season, especially as an example of compete required by all members of this team.

 

See above.  Bennett wasn't left with the Backlund line because it was less effective with him on it.  The NHL is not a development league.  Players are not given top 6 times without merit. The alternate universe to evaluate is "what if Bennett played well enough to stay on the Backlund line for the entire season". But he didn't.  And that isn't on the coaches, his third line line mates, or anyone else except for Sam Bennett.