is this our team?????

[robrob74]

2 hours ago, travel_dude said:

 

Not sure what the story is on Richardson.

He wasn't exactly a standout in the pre-season, but could be better than Gawdin.

The problem is that Gawdin is playing with grinders and he isn't adept to that style of game.

 

I have been impressed with Mangiapane and Dube.

The top line is playing like a top line, though I still see Tkachuk with lazy swipes at the puck or player.

It would be an interesting experiment to bring Coleman up to the top 6.

 

Two possibilities:

Gaudreau-Lindholm-Tkachuk

Mangiapane-Monahan-Coleman

Dube-Backlund-Pitlick

 

or

 

Gaudreau-Lindholm-Coleman

Mangiapane-Monahan-Tkachuk

Dube-Backlund-Pitlick

 

I know, you are burying Dube, but then again he could shine playing with a digger like Pitlick.

In either case, Monahan is helped by a possession beast.

Gaudreau either keeps Tkachuk or gets a greasy player that will give him space.

 

i don’t think you’re burying Dube by putting him with Backlund. I believe we are burying Backlund by putting him with Lucic and Lewis. I think putting Dube with him might ignite some tertiary scoring this club needs. 
 

Backlund isn’t a problem, he’s not a 60point guy but you seem to critique him like he is. It’s frustrating when he doesn’t bury his chances when we know he has the skill to… but at the same time, he’s one of the few to create them the way he does. But maybe putting someone with some finish and wheels, or the ability to keep opening up space will give the team an added dimension. 

[travel_dude]

#Flames at practice today:

Gaudreau-Lindholm-Tkachuk

Lucic-Monahan-Lewis

Mangiapane-Dube-Ritchie

Coleman-Backlund-Pitlick

Gawdin-Richardson

 

Hanifin-Stone

Kylington-Tanev

Valimaki-Gudbranson

 

Andersson and Zadorov not practicing.

[robrob74]

1 hour ago, travel_dude said:

 

Hmmm, I hadn't considered that.

Backlund tends to start the most of any F in the D-zone.

That might impact them negatively.

That also means that we are using Pitlick in the top 6, which is not what he is meant for.

When we get Eichel, all bets are off.

 

On a side note, EDM is terminating the contract of Kiril Maximov.

I like the name.

He's been good playing in Russian league, just not a great start to NA pro hockey.

6'3" RHS RW.

Could fit in well in Stockton.

Might feel comfortable there.

Was going to be assigned to ECHL.

 

but would it? Mangy has always played with Backlund types. I get it though because they’re smaller players so might be manhandled in the zone…

[travel_dude]

1 minute ago, robrob74 said:

 

i don’t think you’re burying Dube by putting him with Backlund. I believe we are burying Backlund by putting him with Lucic and Lewis. I think putting Dube with him might ignite some tertiary scoring this club needs. 
 

Backlund isn’t a problem, he’s not a 60point guy but you seem to critique him like he is. It’s frustrating when he doesn’t bury his chances when we know he has the skill to… but at the same time, he’s one of the few to create them the way he does. But maybe putting someone with some finish and wheels, or the ability to keep opening up space will give the team an added dimension. 

 

Burying in the defensive zone is what I was getting at.

 

[robrob74]

18 minutes ago, cross16 said:

 

Monahan is what he is at this point and I actually thought that line did a good job of compensating for that. We know he is not fleet of foot so protect that by having 2 faster and quick transition players with him and let him be F3. I thought that line did a good job of getting puck in behind the d and then Monahan was doing a really nice job higher up in the zone and keeping the puck in and allowing Mang/Dube to create. I thought that line has been one of their better ones through 2 games and I think it's the best example of complimentary skill sets. 

 

Obviously you want more for his $ but this is the reality of the situation IMO so better make the most of it. I think that line does. 

And I think it is why we can’t play Tkachuk with him, Gaudreau is good with him for that reason too. 
 

I felt when Monahan’s line found room he moved with the puck well, held onto it for the right amount of time and dished when needed. I thought it was fine.

Gaudreau, Lindholm, Tkachuk 

Dube, Monahan, Coleman 

Mangiapane, Backlund, Pitlick

Lucic, Richardson, Lewis

 

does that spread the scoring too thin. I just think we can find a way to utilize Backlund’s 2-way game more effectively. He’s been playing well and one that seems to stand out a lot for me… and might stand out more if he had some offensive help.

[robrob74]

10 minutes ago, travel_dude said:

#Flames at practice today:

Gaudreau-Lindholm-Tkachuk

Lucic-Monahan-Lewis

Mangiapane-Dube-Ritchie

Coleman-Backlund-Pitlick

Gawdin-Richardson

 

Hanifin-Stone

Kylington-Tanev

Valimaki-Gudbranson

 

Andersson and Zadorov not practicing.

weird lines! 

[cross16]

Just now, robrob74 said:

And I think it is why we can’t play Tkachuk with him, Gaudreau is good with him for that reason too. 
 

I felt when Monahan’s line found room he moved with the puck well, held onto it for the right amount of time and dished when needed. I thought it was fine.

Gaudreau, Lindholm, Tkachuk 

Dube, Monahan, Coleman 

Mangiapane, Backlund, Pitlick

Lucic, Richardson, Lewis

 

does that spread the scoring too thin. I just think we can find a way to utilize Backlund’s 2-way game more effectively. He’s been playing well and one that seems to stand out a lot for me… and might stand out more if he had some offensive help.

 

I'd flip Dube and Mang but I get where you are going. I just don't think you can take Mang out of the top 6 but I agree with the idea of getting Coleman some more ice time. That will likely come in time. 

[robrob74]

1 minute ago, cross16 said:

 

I'd flip Dube and Mang but I get where you are going. I just don't think you can take Mang out of the top 6 but I agree with the idea of getting Coleman some more ice time. That will likely come in time. 

but I think that’s where we get into the problem of line numbering. Mangiapane would still be getting the same ice with Backlund if he’s going up against tougher lines. And if Mangiapane is good to go against anyone like we have been saying, top 6 and elite 5v5 numbers, then it shouldn’t be a big deal. Am I wrong or are we just letting Backlund die out as a complete 3rd line D that isn’t going to score anymore?

[travel_dude]

4 minutes ago, cross16 said:

 

I'd flip Dube and Mang but I get where you are going. I just don't think you can take Mang out of the top 6 but I agree with the idea of getting Coleman some more ice time. That will likely come in time. 

 

That's where I would be too; Mangiapane-Monahan-Coleman.

There is enough speed there.

And less chance of being pushed off the puck on the boards or in close.

 

I think Dube with Backlund and Pitlick could be a thing.

[robrob74]

1 minute ago, travel_dude said:

 

That's where I would be too; Mangiapane-Monahan-Coleman.

There is enough speed there.

And less chance of being pushed off the puck on the boards or in close.

 

I think Dube with Backlund and Pitlick could be a thing.

i agree with both of course, just knowing Mang and Backs were good together could be good. But Dube seems ok with most too. 
 

although I saw Dube fall a lot last night. 

[travel_dude]

12 minutes ago, robrob74 said:

i agree with both of course, just knowing Mang and Backs were good together could be good. But Dube seems ok with most too. 
 

although I saw Dube fall a lot last night. 

 

Dube looked good with Lucic before.

Pairing him with a speedier version like Pitlick could help too.

And put him back on LW.

[robrob74]

8 minutes ago, travel_dude said:

 

Dube looked good with Lucic before.

Pairing him with a speedier version like Pitlick could help too.

And put him back on LW.

✔️

[travel_dude]

47 minutes ago, travel_dude said:

#Flames at practice today:

Gaudreau-Lindholm-Tkachuk

Lucic-Monahan-Lewis

Mangiapane-Dube-Ritchie

Coleman-Backlund-Pitlick

Gawdin-Richardson

 

Hanifin-Stone

Kylington-Tanev

Valimaki-Gudbranson

 

Andersson and Zadorov not practicing.

 

Andersson given the day off, not due to his play.

I think the middle two lines were just to allow Pitlick to practice with Backlund and Coleman.

It waters down 2 lines instead of the just moving Lucic down.

I see no value in Lucic and Lewis with Monahan, unless they are concerned about him being run over.

Kassian did that.

 

DET is going to be speed, so look at matching up against a team like that.

[cross16]

49 minutes ago, robrob74 said:

but I think that’s where we get into the problem of line numbering. Mangiapane would still be getting the same ice with Backlund if he’s going up against tougher lines. And if Mangiapane is good to go against anyone like we have been saying, top 6 and elite 5v5 numbers, then it shouldn’t be a big deal. Am I wrong or are we just letting Backlund die out as a complete 3rd line D that isn’t going to score anymore?

 

I have no doubt Mang would flourish anywhere, but I think any line with Backs is going to get tough matchup and d zone starts. I'd rather Mang get higher o zone starts and more favorable matchups because I think they need his offense more than other players. 

 

Backlund will be just fine in his role. he'll start slow, always does, but he'll come around. It's not really about labelling lines it's just situations and I don't think deploying Mang in a Backlund like role is the best idea for their offense. 

[MP5029]

I’m not a huge fan of Sutrer’s lines…even back in the early 2000’s I always found he did a few odd things that never really worked well.

 

on that note, also I really do not like the Lindholm experiment at Ctr…not that he’s a bad Ctr but he’s never really had that big success at Ctr that he did at RW.

 

having said that, we are down a Ctr after trading Bennet…so we kinda need to keep Lindholm at Ctr but…I’m also (and here is the Sutter thing) not liking Tkacuck at RW, I’d love to see Gaudreau and Monahan with maybe Coleman

 

And Tkacuck and Lindholm with ??? I dunno, pick someone, this lack of RW’s is the real problem and has yet to be addressed!? The team has some really good options at LW and Ctr but really nothing at the top 2 RW level…Coleman on the 2nd line RW with Gaudreau and Monahan would probably be a solid 2nd line but there is still that issue on the top line…it would be really nice if they could land a RW for a Tkacuck Lindholm line…that would really help square this team up with three sold lines:

 

 Tachuck/Lindholm/ and a real RW

Gaudreau/Monahan/Coleman

Manji/Backlund/Dube 

 

that would give you a really balance 1,2,3 punch, and honestly I’d not even really worry about “top” line I’d probably roll those first two equally and the 3rd line would be just about the same but keep them for D zone face offs and possession critical situations…but mostly roll 3 lines equally.

 

this team is not a super star team, it’s a balance team and right now the RW is not balanced.

 

I forgot, not a huge fan of his D pairing either…I don’t know why he’s trying to force the Anderson Hanifin pair…go with what worked…Tanev ans Hanifin

 

also, I think Valimaki needs to be pairs with Anderson, more so now than ever with Anderson looking like a beast, I think Valimaki could really grow fast into a top 4 with Anderson…

 

Hanifin/Tanev 

Valimaki/Anderson

Big z/Kylington 

 

I think those combos would really click both in providing solid D and also being mobile and helping generate some offence from the back end… 

 

also, it sure would be nice if Markstrom was playing like a 6 mil goalie instead of a 3 mil goalie 😏

[robrob74]

17 minutes ago, MP5029 said:

I’m not a huge fan of Sutrer’s lines…even back in the early 2000’s I always found he did a few odd things that never really worked well.

 

on that note, also I really do not like the Lindholm experiment at Ctr…not that he’s a bad Ctr but he’s never really had that big success at Ctr that he did at RW.

 

having said that, we are down a Ctr after trading Bennet…so we kinda need to keep Lindholm at Ctr but…I’m also (and here is the Sutter thing) not liking Tkacuck at RW, I’d love to see Gaudreau and Monahan with maybe Coleman

 

And Tkacuck and Lindholm with ??? I dunno, pick someone, this lack of RW’s is the real problem and has yet to be addressed!? The team has some really good options at LW and Ctr but really nothing at the top 2 RW level…Coleman on the 2nd line RW with Gaudreau and Monahan would probably be a solid 2nd line but there is still that issue on the top line…it would be really nice if they could land a RW for a Tkacuck Lindholm line…that would really help square this team up with three sold lines:

 

 Tachuck/Lindholm/ and a real RW

Gaudreau/Monahan/Coleman

Manji/Backlund/Dube 

 

that would give you a really balance 1,2,3 punch, and honestly I’d not even really worry about “top” line I’d probably roll those first two equally and the 3rd line would be just about the same but keep them for D zone face offs and possession critical situations…but mostly roll 3 lines equally.

 

this team is not a super star team, it’s a balance team and right now the RW is not balanced.

 

I forgot, not a huge fan of his D pairing either…I don’t know why he’s trying to force the Anderson Hanifin pair…go with what worked…Tanev ans Hanifin

 

also, I think Valimaki needs to be pairs with Anderson, more so now than ever with Anderson looking like a beast, I think Valimaki could really grow fast into a top 4 with Anderson…

 

Hanifin/Tanev 

Valimaki/Anderson

Big z/Kylington 

 

I think those combos would really click both in providing solid D and also being mobile and helping generate some offence from the back end… 

 

also, it sure would be nice if Markstrom was playing like a 6 mil goalie instead of a 3 mil goalie 😏

i mean, you could’ve had 
 

Tkachuk, Bennett, Lindholm 

and Benny and Lindholm could alternate draws. 
 

then your lines look good for the rest. 
 

you’re right about still lacking a top RWer

[JTech780]

Gaudreau-Lindholm-Tkachuk

There is nothing wrong with this line, so I would keep it intact.

 

Coleman-Backlund-Pitlick

This line is going to be a nightmare for other teams. Every guy on this line is hard on the puck and they can skate. They will be relentless.

 

I think Dube and Mangiapane are 2/3 of your second line. I have no issues with Dube centering that line as his speed with really help down the middle. I would rather see Monahan with them than Ritchie, but to be honest I am not so sure Monahan can skate well enough to play in Sutter's system.

 

I don't know if practicing Monahan on the 4th line is more about sending a message or if that is just where he fits on this team at this point.

 

[The_People1]

6 hours ago, sak22 said:

I don't really see the point in pulling the scapegoat card this early or at all, but I know its Monahan and now that we got rid of our oldest worn out toy he is 2nd on the list now for toys we need to take to the trash.  If Monahan was deadweight the other two don't get 5 or more shots, that line had more than enough chances to be the difference in the game, they didn't convert but not Monahan's fault that it didn't happen.  I find fans funny, It's a game that if it was reversed we'd say we only won because of Markstrom but lose like it and the last thing we want to do is credit the other goalie, its the same with all sports I guess its never the other teams pitcher its strictly your teams hitters, never the other teams QB always your teams defense.

 

Just suggesting Backlund would fit better there.  That's all.

[The_People1]

7 hours ago, travel_dude said:

#Flames at practice today:

Gaudreau-Lindholm-Tkachuk

Lucic-Monahan-Lewis

Mangiapane-Dube-Ritchie

Coleman-Backlund-Pitlick

Gawdin-Richardson

 

Hanifin-Stone

Kylington-Tanev

Valimaki-Gudbranson

 

Andersson and Zadorov not practicing.

 

Right on.  It's not going to be popular but that's the brutal truth of where Monahan should play.  I'm glad Sutter sees that too.

 

I'm sure Stone is just practicing as a place holder for Andersson.  Kylington-Tanev could be a worthwhile experiment for a game or two.  Again, unpopular maybe but Zadorov sitting a game to watch from the press box could help him.

[The_People1]

3 hours ago, MP5029 said:

on that note, also I really do not like the Lindholm experiment at Ctr…not that he’s a bad Ctr but he’s never really had that big success at Ctr that he did at RW.

 

RHS for faceoffs.  That's a primary reason to have Lindholm at Center.  If we get Eichel then we can move Lindholm back to RW.  Gawdin is the only other RHS Center we have on the depth chart so we are stuck with Lindholm at Center for now.

[robrob74]

6 minutes ago, The_People1 said:

 

RHS for faceoffs.  That's a primary reason to have Lindholm at Center.  If we get Eichel then we can move Lindholm back to RW.  Gawdin is the only other RHS Center we have on the depth chart so we are stuck with Lindholm at Center for now.

 

Iginla used to take draws. Lindholm could go on wing just to take draws. Or do you want the C to be a right handed shot in the actual position? Lindholm could take the draw and then play RW during the actual play after the draw is taken?

[The_People1]

1 hour ago, robrob74 said:

 

Iginla used to take draws. Lindholm could go on wing just to take draws. Or do you want the C to be a right handed shot in the actual position? Lindholm could take the draw and then play RW during the actual play after the draw is taken?

 

But if we lose the draw then everyone has to defend their man and play the X's and O's properly.  Sometimes you don't get to switch so easily.

[robrob74]

4 hours ago, The_People1 said:

 

But if we lose the draw then everyone has to defend their man and play the X's and O's properly.  Sometimes you don't get to switch so easily.

i get it, but these guys are at the highest level, wouldn’t they be coached to defend if they get out there? They must know the role? It’s communication and I really wonder if this team is good at communicating with each other out there. 

[conundrumed]

12 hours ago, JTech780 said:

Gaudreau-Lindholm-Tkachuk

There is nothing wrong with this line, so I would keep it intact.

 

Coleman-Backlund-Pitlick

This line is going to be a nightmare for other teams. Every guy on this line is hard on the puck and they can skate. They will be relentless.

 

I think Dube and Mangiapane are 2/3 of your second line. I have no issues with Dube centering that line as his speed with really help down the middle. I would rather see Monahan with them than Ritchie, but to be honest I am not so sure Monahan can skate well enough to play in Sutter's system.

 

I don't know if practicing Monahan on the 4th line is more about sending a message or if that is just where he fits on this team at this point.

 

I agree with your 1st & 3rd lines and why break up Dube-Mangia when they've been great together. Ritchie shouldn't even be on the roster. Can't say Mony's too slow and replace him with Ritchie, that makes no sense. Net crasher? Use Pitlick then. A lot of great C's are always trailing due to D responsibilities. The 2nd line has been great, I have no idea why it would be changed.

Not reading much into practice lines. I think Sutter just wants to see all of his options for line-mashing.

Detroit looked pretty fast last night with moving the puck and forechecking. Greiss has been outstanding. But it was CBJ and, outside of goaltending, they don't look very good.

Couldn't get any sense of Detroit's play getting hemmed in, CBJ never did it.

 

[cross16]

See what happens in the game but those lines feel like sending a message to me. I'll be surprised if they go into the game like that. 

 

I think it's far too early to pull the plug on Monahan or suggest he belongs on the 4th line. I think he's playing much better than he is getting credit for here.