Calgary Flames 20/21 Roster and Lines

[cross16]

35 minutes ago, JTech780 said:

 

To me Ward is an old school coach in his systems and in the way he deploys his lineup. I see that 4th line as an old school bang and crash energy line, in that situation I don't see a fit for Ryan on that line. Now I am open to an argument of weather Calgary should be running that type of line, but that is where Ward is going. All 3 of those guys will hit everything that moves, they also won't hurt you defensively, I think you are also betting big on Bennett to be able to drive play in a positive direction as well.

 

I know this is the reason but I still don't think there is value or logic in it. You can still have a physical element and use Ryan to drive the play the other way it should not be an either or scenario and that's what Ward (IMO) has created. 

 

I suspect that line will be in their own zone a lot which is the last thing you should want from your 4th line. 

[cross16]

26 minutes ago, robrob74 said:

 

I totally think that's the theory behind the approach. At home it could work a lot more, but i think on the road they'd still get the oppositions 1st or 2nd pairing. 

 

yes but then that frees up either the Lindholm line or the Backlund line for more offensive opportunities or better matchup's. In particular the Lindholm line. 

[robrob74]

3 hours ago, cross16 said:

 

yes but then that frees up either the Lindholm line or the Backlund line for more offensive opportunities or better matchup's. In particular the Lindholm line. 

 

 

It could work. I hope so. For all of the depth the Flames have had the last few years, I don't think in the end that it was used very well. The Flames have been a stop Gaudreau and you stop the Flames team. Maybe this year will be different? 

Last year the Flames were pushed early by Tkachuk and Lindholm but they didn't stick with it. I hope the complimentary players can solidify the pairs they have created.

[JTech780]

Flames activated Ryan for tonight, so he is in tonight, no sense in activating him if he isn't going to play.

 

They also activated Domingue and moved Rittich to non-roster (family reasons). They called up Zagildullin to the taxi squad.

[robrob74]

My biggest problem with how Ward deploys his players are these:

 

-The loyalty of Lucic and Lucic on the PP. 

- Playing the 4th at the beginning. I get he wants them to try create energy but I just don’t think they can without Dube. Dube helps push up ice and it gives Lucic more room. Without Dubes, there is absolutely no room out there. 
 

- Playing Gio no matter what, in all three spots, PK, PP, & 5vs5.

 

Gio would be a really good 2nd pair these days. 

[The_People1]

14 minutes ago, robrob74 said:

 

- Playing Gio no matter what, in all three spots, PK, PP, & 5vs5.

 

And 3-on-3 OT... We don't have Brodie anymore.

[robrob74]

27 minutes ago, The_People1 said:

 

And 3-on-3 OT... We don't have Brodie anymore.

and Wardo keeps rolling these guys regardless. 

[robrob74]

Here is my stab at the roster:

 

Gaudreau, Bennett, Dube 

Monahan, Lindholm, Tkachuk

Mangiapane, Backlund, Leivo/Simon

Lucic, Ryan, Nordstrom 

 

I want Gaudreau with guys who can hold it in for him, help him play a cycle game and open up ice. Both Bennett and Dube are good at moving and digging out the pucks and keeping the play alive, especially when they have guys who can do something with it when they do their work.

 

I still think we are missing a RW, maybe that’s still Lindholm, but I wanna believe he’ll end up better as a C. C is just as or more important than RW. But I think that a top 6 RW would help the team. 

[cross16]

I get you want to be a 4 line team and that makes total sense to, but boy does Ward ever need to get better and when to use it. 

 

Starting a game and a period with your 4th line was just so bad. why give your team an advantage?

 

Then in the 3rd with about 6-7 mins to go you get a great shift from the Bennett, Backs, Mang line and they spend the entire team in the o zone. Ward follows that up with his 4th line and they promptly get stuck in the d zone for the entire shift. 

 

Need better bench management from Ward. Mistakes like this have been too common from him. 

[travel_dude]

12 minutes ago, cross16 said:

I get you want to be a 4 line team and that makes total sense to, but boy does Ward ever need to get better and when to use it. 

 

Starting a game and a period with your 4th line was just so bad. why give your team an advantage?

 

Then in the 3rd with about 6-7 mins to go you get a great shift from the Bennett, Backs, Mang line and they spend the entire team in the o zone. Ward follows that up with his 4th line and they promptly get stuck in the d zone for the entire shift. 

 

Need better bench management from Ward. Mistakes like this have been too common from him. 

 

I didn't get the starting of the 4th line.  I don't care if WPG starts their toughie line or not, we should be starting on the most minutes people.

The 4th line was horrible.

Looch wasn't good, but it was the combo that didn't work.

Made Bennett look bad.

Ryan on the 3rd line may make sense, but he did not look strong out there.

Ended last playoffs the same.

 

I would have preferred to see Simon get in there.

Leivo with Monahan was okay, just not the same page at times.

[Thebrewcrew]

In the bubble, Ward liked to start Lucic-Bennett-Dube. It was fine, because they were arguably the Flames best line.

 

I think Ward is a believer in an "identity line", one that starts periods and is designed to set the tone. I think they caught lighting-in-a-bottle in the bubble with Lucic on that line. In a regular season you just don't get enough out of Lucic to rely on him in that way. 

 

If you want a line to start every period, make it Bennett-Backlund-Mangiapane. 

[cross16]

19 minutes ago, Thebrewcrew said:

In the bubble, Ward liked to start Lucic-Bennett-Dube. It was fine, because they were arguably the Flames best line.

 

I think Ward is a believer in an "identity line", one that starts periods and is designed to set the tone. I think they caught lighting-in-a-bottle in the bubble with Lucic on that line. In a regular season you just don't get enough out of Lucic to rely on him in that way. 

 

If you want a line to start every period, make it Bennett-Backlund-Mangiapane. 

 

so I don't disagree with this rationale and that is it likely true but here is my problem and it spins into the whole "what is the Flames identify" question I have right now. If you want to set the tone fine but this is not a physical team. So what is the value is going out and setting a physical presence when you don't have the rest of the team to back it up and what do you gain? Not to mention you need to look at the risks in that situation. You are starting your worst line so you are preparing to spend time in your own zone AND you just handed a match up win to your opposition.

 

It all makes no sense to me. The Flames identity, and what you saw in the first period, is not let's go out and be the more physical team. it should be let's go out and be the faster team and put them on their heels, which is where I agree with you on what line should have started. 

 

It's just really inconsistent messaging to me. 

[The_People1]

I know it was one game but Leivo looked lost on that line with Gaudreau-Monahan.

 

Was he supposed to be the "go in the corner and dig out the puck" kind of guy?   Ala Ferland?  But he doesn't have the speed nor size to get that done.  Not physically aggressive enough.  

 

Was he supposed to be a shooter/finisher?  He didn't show he has any shot.  

 

Was he supposed to be a Hudler-type player maker?  He doesn't have the IQ.

 

Was he supposed to be a two-way defensive forward on that line?   But he didn't allow Monahan to go on the offense all game.

 

Plays generally died in his stick.  He can't be played there.  He doesn't belong.

[Sobieit]

1 minute ago, The_People1 said:

I know it was one game but Leivo looked lost on that line with Gaudreau-Monahan.

 

Was he supposed to be the "go in the corner and dig out the puck" kind of guy?   Ala Ferland?  But he doesn't have the speed nor size to get that done.  Not physically aggressive enough.  

 

Was he supposed to be a shooter/finisher?  He didn't show he has any shot.  

 

Was he supposed to be a Hudler-type player maker?  He doesn't have the IQ.

 

Was he supposed to be a two-way defensive forward on that line?   But he didn't allow Monahan to go on the offense all game.

 

Plays generally died in his stick.  He can't be played there.  He doesn't belong.

I agree.  I think he isn't a strong skater and he plays a similar game to Monahan.  They need a good skater, someone who can forecheck, hit and wear opponents down.

 

Have they ever tried Gaudreau Monahan Bennett? I can't remember if this has ever been done with all three together.

Then Mang Backlund Leivo would be alright.

[Thebrewcrew]

21 minutes ago, cross16 said:

 

so I don't disagree with this rationale and that is it likely true but here is my problem and it spins into the whole "what is the Flames identify" question I have right now. If you want to set the tone fine but this is not a physical team. So what is the value is going out and setting a physical presence when you don't have the rest of the team to back it up and what do you gain? Not to mention you need to look at the risks in that situation. You are starting your worst line so you are preparing to spend time in your own zone AND you just handed a match up win to your opposition.

 

It all makes no sense to me. The Flames identity, and what you saw in the first period, is not let's go out and be the more physical team. it should be let's go out and be the faster team and put them on their heels, which is where I agree with you on what line should have started. 

 

It's just really inconsistent messaging to me. 

 

I have no idea either. The Flames don't have an identity. I don't think the coach even knows. This was also a big criticism of the team, prior to the pause. 

 

Are they physical? No, they aren't really built that way.

Are they like CBJ, will they outwork teams? Meh, not really since Hartley left.

Are they a defensive team? No. They don't have the buy-in from their best players to play that way. 

 

I think they should be an offensively inclined team, that uses their speed and skill to take advantage of their opponents.

 

It seems like the coach wants them to be a little bit of all 4 items I listed. In theory, that would be the perfect team, in reality though that's not how the Flames are built. Have to make use of what you have, which is offensively inclined players. 

 

[cross16]

So Monahan - Gaudreau faced 33% O zone starts last night. Only Bennett and Lucic started less the O zone (per Kent Wilson)

 

that is some bizarre deployment and makes the line configuration for me make even less sense. I am really trying hard to give Ward a chance but the more I see the less I like. There really seems to be a lack of plan/vision for this team from the head coach. 

[travel_dude]

16 minutes ago, cross16 said:

So Monahan - Gaudreau faced 33% O zone starts last night. Only Bennett and Lucic started less the O zone (per Kent Wilson)

 

that is some bizarre deployment and makes the line configuration for me make even less sense. I am really trying hard to give Ward a chance but the more I see the less I like. There really seems to be a lack of plan/vision for this team from the head coach. 

 

When the supposed "shutdown" line had 60% O-zone starts, it's even more perplexing.

 

Expose the Monahan line to the same thing they had in the playoffs (more D-zone time).

Use the best 2-way C more in the O-zone.

I must have missed all the scoring from the shutdown line.

 

The first period was good and showed the type of play they are capable of.

The second period showed that the 4th line is well behind other team.

Have to figure out if the 4th line is an going to be rough and tough or play with pace.

I'm not saying Leivo should sit, but Simon was a better fit for the Monahan line.

And figure out what role Lucic is going to have.

He's not up to speed for rushes.

He's losing possession when he gets it.

The line looks bad.

 

I would like to see Gio play with someone else.

He looked like he lost a couple of steps.

Tanev was good.

Nesterov seemed solid.

Valimaki only struggled a bit.

Hanifin was an adventure at times.

[robrob74]

1 hour ago, cross16 said:

 

so I don't disagree with this rationale and that is it likely true but here is my problem and it spins into the whole "what is the Flames identify" question I have right now. If you want to set the tone fine but this is not a physical team. So what is the value is going out and setting a physical presence when you don't have the rest of the team to back it up and what do you gain? Not to mention you need to look at the risks in that situation. You are starting your worst line so you are preparing to spend time in your own zone AND you just handed a match up win to your opposition.

 

It all makes no sense to me. The Flames identity, and what you saw in the first period, is not let's go out and be the more physical team. it should be let's go out and be the faster team and put them on their heels, which is where I agree with you on what line should have started. 

 

It's just really inconsistent messaging to me. 

 

I think it's ok to have an energy line. I actually wouldn't care if every line had it's own identity as long as each line was engaged and playing to their ability. How do these guys get sparked? They started off great last night, but they just stopped skating in the 2nd and then the third was ok, but they lost all of their momentum. I wonder, starting Lucic, Bennett and Nordstrom is a problem because they weren't fully used to playing on the same line? They're still new and I thought they seemed to be in their own end more than not in the first. To me, it feels like Ward doesn't necessarily have a feel for who's going, or he still thinks he needs to get Lucic going. 

 

But you're also right, what is the identity? Is that Ward and coaching that determines it, or is that BT?

We have players with skill who could be good players, I just havent put them in the good category because they're inconsistent. 

I think that that line of Bennett didn't have to be aggressive. When he got moved to Backlund's line, he and Mang really put some pressure on and created turnovers, and that's how I saw Bennett with Dube last season. Hitting was part of it, but they also got energy from the pressure they put on by skating. Youre right, the team is full of skaters, but they don't use their speed enough for most of the game. There's going to be pushback by the other team, but how do you respond? I don't know if coaching is sending the message to sit back and absorb it, because that's what it seems like they do. It kills everything theyve worked up to.

 

For me, I'd just much rather be in the other team's zone. I think the best defense is a good offense. You exert less energy by pressuring, and in turn, the other team gets tired out. I would like them to defend from the offensive zone to our blueline, and of course in our end, but the team has good transitional D that our own end will still be ok and important. So I guess I'd want our team to be a pressure team. Gaudreau is a good defender in those 2 zones. He sucks in the defensive end though. In his 99 point season he was playing an all-round game in those two zones, which made him successful. He's less effective when he's only playing with the puck in those two zones. 

[robrob74]

1 hour ago, Sobieit said:

I agree.  I think he isn't a strong skater and he plays a similar game to Monahan.  They need a good skater, someone who can forecheck, hit and wear opponents down.

 

Have they ever tried Gaudreau Monahan Bennett? I can't remember if this has ever been done with all three together.

Then Mang Backlund Leivo would be alright.

 

They have, but they only try it for a period or two and then go away from it if it doesn't work. They don't let it gain any traction. Plus Bennett tends to change his game with those two, much like how Ferland did. They need to coach him and ask him to play the dog after a bone style with them, and not to change. It's what will make him successful with that line. I honestly think that Monahan isn't the guy for Gaudreau, they both have the same demeanor on the ice, too passive. Johnny needs a few guys who will keep the play going, much like Mangiapane and Bennett did last night in the 3rd. Johnny and Monny are going on a break-in, but teams have figured out a way to stop that and then they can't sustain pressure once they get into the zone. I would like to see more sustained play in the offensive zone, pass around and keep possession. They do it well on the PP, but can't seem to do it on 5vs5.  

[robrob74]

1 hour ago, Thebrewcrew said:

 

I have no idea either. The Flames don't have an identity. I don't think the coach even knows. This was also a big criticism of the team, prior to the pause. 

 

Are they physical? No, they aren't really built that way.

Are they like CBJ, will they outwork teams? Meh, not really since Hartley left.

Are they a defensive team? No. They don't have the buy-in from their best players to play that way. 

 

I think they should be an offensively inclined team, that uses their speed and skill to take advantage of their opponents.

 

It seems like the coach wants them to be a little bit of all 4 items I listed. In theory, that would be the perfect team, in reality though that's not how the Flames are built. Have to make use of what you have, which is offensively inclined players. 

 

 

I would add in:

 

Are they a pressure team? Which I guess could be another version of the CBJ, outwork. I think that pressuring could mean out work, but I also think that pressure in the offensive zone leads to good defensive habits. If they're engaged there, they can and will be engaged in the Dzone. Maybe I am wrong and that's just how I like to play hockey. I am not a good skater so i have to make up for it in the "try hard." 

 

Could it be that the team is just too skilled? They don't need the "try hard" factor because they've never had to. They could always rely on their skill? 

[robrob74]

1 hour ago, cross16 said:

So Monahan - Gaudreau faced 33% O zone starts last night. Only Bennett and Lucic started less the O zone (per Kent Wilson)

 

that is some bizarre deployment and makes the line configuration for me make even less sense. I am really trying hard to give Ward a chance but the more I see the less I like. There really seems to be a lack of plan/vision for this team from the head coach. 

 

The only rationale I can think of is that he thinks that Johnny and Monny are a rush line. Starting them in the offensive zone means they can't get the momentum up the ice, plus if they lose the draw, they don't have anyone to go and get it for them. I really think it speaks to how flawed the line is and the need to try something new. On the PP they're great because they have the room to pass it around, but at 5Vs5 they just can't seem to do that anymore. 

 

But then, I wonder if they can get used to playing with the puck in the offensive zone if they have more offensive zone starts. 

[robrob74]

 

54 minutes ago, travel_dude said:

Tanev was good.

Nesterov seemed solid.

Valimaki only struggled a bit.

Hanifin was an adventure at times.

 

I actually feel like Gio needs to be deployed less often. Minimize his minutes. He can't play the top pair minutes anymore. He is still good at everything, but not great. Is he still the best defensemen the Flames have? I might say he is top3, but he's starting to lose battles, and position. Maybe should play some PPs but not every PP? 

Has Andersson surpassed Gio? Tanev was probably the 2nd best D last night after Andersson. Maybe they need to start minimizing Gio's minutes, and if they want him on in the end of the game he'd maybe still have the energy to play D. 

 

There were a few times it seemed that Ward deployed some players right away after a shift, and were possibly tired. 

[cross16]

15 minutes ago, robrob74 said:

 

The only rationale I can think of is that he thinks that Johnny and Monny are a rush line. Starting them in the offensive zone means they can't get the momentum up the ice, plus if they lose the draw, they don't have anyone to go and get it for them. I really think it speaks to how flawed the line is and the need to try something new. On the PP they're great because they have the room to pass it around, but at 5Vs5 they just can't seem to do that anymore. 

 

But then, I wonder if they can get used to playing with the puck in the offensive zone if they have more offensive zone starts. 

 

Some good stuff here I agree with especially your last point. To date, yes the success of that line has been they are a rush line and they do their damage off the rush but I also think that's part of the reason they've become easier to defend. There is no plan B and there needs to be. 

 

Burying them in the d zone because that's what they use to be good at is not an effective strategy to try and create that plan B. 

[cross16]

35 minutes ago, robrob74 said:

 

I think it's ok to have an energy line. I actually wouldn't care if every line had it's own identity as long as each line was engaged and playing to their ability. How do these guys get sparked? They started off great last night, but they just stopped skating in the 2nd and then the third was ok, but they lost all of their momentum. I wonder, starting Lucic, Bennett and Nordstrom is a problem because they weren't fully used to playing on the same line? They're still new and I thought they seemed to be in their own end more than not in the first. To me, it feels like Ward doesn't necessarily have a feel for who's going, or he still thinks he needs to get Lucic going. 

 

I 100% agree with this and just for the record I love an energy line and think you need one. No problem with that idea. 

 

It's starting a period and the game with them I have a problem with, especially on the road. 

[robrob74]

2 minutes ago, cross16 said:

 

Some good stuff here I agree with especially your last point. To date, yes the success of that line has been they are a rush line and they do their damage off the rush but I also think that's part of the reason they've become easier to defend. There is no plan B and there needs to be. 

 

Burying them in the d zone because that's what they use to be good at is not an effective strategy to try and create that plan B. 

 

This is where I have a problem with the coaching. They're the strategists and aren't coaching them to try new things. Gaudreau does the same things, skate in, gets double teamed and then lose the puck. Or they aren't negotiating what to do in the offensive zone to keep pressure on... Like you said, no plan B.