That's bacause there was a certain poster here who said that's what's Bennett would be, just play him with Gaudreau etc.
GDT: Stanley Cup Playoffs 2023-24
- Thread starter Bounces R Way
- Start date
I coach hockey, so every few years I get what can almost be described as a man crush on a different NHL coach. For the longest time it was Cooper, now it’s on to Maurice for how he has this team playing.
Or realistically, a handful of delusional posters that say he still is that
Lol fair then I didn't realize you were just referencing that poster. To be fair though, while some posters were unrealistically/delusionally high on Bennett, there were even more posters who wrote him off and would've happily sold him for a 4th.
Reality is he's much more valuable than most fans (other than a select few who used hyperbole to create unrealistic expectations) gave him credit for, and his actual value is somewhere in the middle. Not some meh 3rd line LW he was treated like when he was here, and not some 1C that we hoped when we drafted him. But a quality 2C who steps up in the playoffs and is an invaluable piece of a cup team who we still sold horribly low on.
It's hard to think about (and the expansion draft made it almost impossible to keep Bennett), but imagine Gaudreau-Bennett-Tkachuk on one line and then we actually swung for the fences in 2021/22 on a guy like Stone or Eichel with a huge package of expendable assets. That's what we needed to reach that next level and become a contender. And I know people will argue that we were never really gonna land Eichel or Stone, but if we somehow did, this whole "you need a top-3 pick to rebuild and get a 1C" narrative would look very different.
Last edited:
Ace Rimmer
Stoke me a clipper.
The Samuel L Bennett fiasco was botched by Flames management and coaching staff from start to finish. On this I think we can mostly agree.
I just hope the organization has done some hard learning about mismanagement of young star players. Specifically what not to do next time.
I just hope the organization has done some hard learning about mismanagement of young star players. Specifically what not to do next time.
Volica
Papa Shango
- May 15, 2012
- 21,500
- 11,153
Conroy is saying the right things, and so far doing the right things.
Reminder of the plethora of old hasbeens that got time over Bennett. Or deeply flawed players.
Mobiandi
Registered User
- Jan 17, 2015
- 21,250
- 17,816
We can bring up Brouwer. Jankowski. Even Chris Stewart.
Bennett’s development was ruined here because the Flames mortgaged their entire contention window on Sean Monahan being this team’s #1C. He had all the leeway to play through a million injuries while stapled to Gaudreau’s hip for 7 years. Worst thing is that there is still a contingent of fans that would probably do it all over again.
The egg on this org’s face is well overdue.
At least for what it’s worth, Conroy always was vehemently opposed to how Bennett was developed here.
Bennett’s development was ruined here because the Flames mortgaged their entire contention window on Sean Monahan being this team’s #1C. He had all the leeway to play through a million injuries while stapled to Gaudreau’s hip for 7 years. Worst thing is that there is still a contingent of fans that would probably do it all over again.
The egg on this org’s face is well overdue.
At least for what it’s worth, Conroy always was vehemently opposed to how Bennett was developed here.
Last edited:
The problem was that Bennett was never consistently surrounded with enough talent. It doesn’t matter whether he was playing 1C, 2C, 3C, or 3 LW he was not put in a position to succeed.
The thing is, expecting him to take over 1C when he had never displayed consistently favourable results lower in the lineup is just as crazy as expecting him to display favourable results lower in the lineup with Lucic, Brouwer, etc as his line mates.
There’s a probable chance that if was he given proper line mates, Bennett would still be in Calgary having similar success that he is in Florida. And that’s regardless of slot in the lineup he was playing.
Which is exactly the situation I foresee with Pelletier at this point. Different scenario with injuries, and arguably a less exciting player. But still, it’s hard to pencil a lineup for next year where he isn’t on the 4th line.
The thing is, expecting him to take over 1C when he had never displayed consistently favourable results lower in the lineup is just as crazy as expecting him to display favourable results lower in the lineup with Lucic, Brouwer, etc as his line mates.
There’s a probable chance that if was he given proper line mates, Bennett would still be in Calgary having similar success that he is in Florida. And that’s regardless of slot in the lineup he was playing.
Which is exactly the situation I foresee with Pelletier at this point. Different scenario with injuries, and arguably a less exciting player. But still, it’s hard to pencil a lineup for next year where he isn’t on the 4th line.
In other news, Tkachuk is dog sh%t against Edmonton, yet again.
Tkachuk Norris
Registered User
- Jun 22, 2012
- 15,767
- 6,941
Tkachuk Norris
Registered User
- Jun 22, 2012
- 15,767
- 6,941
Better than the crap you’ve been spouting lately. It’s true. He’s been the best defenceman 5 on 5 on a Stanley Cup Final team by a significant margin these playoffs. Bouchard racks up the points on the PP but 5 on 5 he’s still very meh.
Last edited:
How? He has not been utilized as their 1D, nor produced results that say “1D”. In fact, he’s been dramatically outperformed by the guys they use as 1 and 2 at 5 on 5, even before you take into account special teams effects. So I’m not sure where you’re getting any of this from.
Honestly, having someone who confidently posts this calling my opinions crap, actually gives me a massive degree of affirmation, so thanks for that.
Last edited:
Bjornar Moxnes
Registered User
Bouchard has defensive flaws, but his 5on5 play has been dominant. Plus how can you take Kulak over Ekholm? Ekholm is superior in every strong traits that Kulak has.
Fig
Absolute Horse Shirt
- Dec 15, 2014
- 13,142
- 8,575
Some of it was bad coaching, some was bad luck too. When Bennett struggled at 3C, originally the idea was to push him back up to 2LW and have Stajan play with those vets at 3C. But when we ended up with Tkachuk and the 3M line took off, that option was lost. I personally had mentioned at the time that having Stajan as Bennett's C could be an option (RW specifically IIRC). But Stajan was doing well anchoring the 4th line and our roster was so full of excessive "warm body vets" and our team was so "healthy" under Gulutzan+ eras/attempting to compete that the appropriate opportunities for these experiments and attempts to develop didn't arise for Bennett.
Add in the bad communication and decision making, Bennett felt like he was supposed to be a plug and played that way. Emulating what Stajan was doing going up and down the roster and playing combinations of grinder, shutdown and skill wasn't a bad backup plan if Backlund wasn't able to mentor him. Alas... as much as one wants to point solely at one thing, IMO it's a domino effect.
Putting Tkachuk in a position to succeed only to say no to long term contract and not attempting to sort out an opportunity for it... not good. Young guys doing well, only to overly penny pinch them on certain contract negotiations... not good. Overplaying Monahan (this honestly has to be willful ignorance vs actually not knowing after learning from the Backlund saga...) not good. Monahan over Bennett and developing more roster options to aim higher... not good. LW logjam, not good. LD logjam, not good. Rentals over prospects... not good. Losing certain guys like Hathaway, Lomberg, Kulak etc. Not good. Breaking certain prospects like Jankowski... again not good.
In all honestly and fairness though, the ethos that was used was relatively consistent. It was what Treliving did in the beginning and found success. But something that needed to be tweaked slightly as time went on. Some of them we consider good moves. Others, not good, even if the reasoning was similar. I actually still think Treliving won more battles than expected by a large margin and did good in many things. I stand by my original assessment. But in hindsight, though I feel like we won more battles than expected, some of this caused us to lose the war.
That being said, I do still thank him for making huge leaps in solving many issues that plagued this organization for decades. The development is significantly improved now since 2015 to the point we aren't as worried about losing draft picks for silly reasons and every draft pick from the first round to the 7th there is a chance for all of them. He broke the retention and buyout restrictions that had plagued us for decades. He and Burke broke the league wide reputation that we were basically easy fodder for being ripped off on trades by other GM. He saw that Button and Co were hitting some insane homeruns in the last decade when given the chance prior to his arrival and he let those guys cook. This honestly kinda pissed us off the most when we were trading late rounder. Unlike eras of the past where we weren't consistently getting NHL games out of those late picks due to development and luck or otherwise, we realized we could have trust in our scouting. 3rd round to 7th rounders were yielding major surprises.
Oddly enough, that many posters complained about not having the right pieces to build an appropriate contender with. In hindsight now, with minor tweaks, I think a few of us realize we could have put together a solid contender Boston/Dallas style of long term contender that we would still have to this date. Even though Tre started off with a horribly restrictive ownership mandate that typically makes it harder to build a long term contender. I think if ownership had not continued to pressure Tre to continue with a playoff mandate after looking at the results 2-3 years in, Tre might not have continued in a certain way. Treliving in the beginning did say he felt you couldn't over marinate a prospect, yet giving prospects a chance to shine was specifically one of the reasons why we overachieved in his first 1-3 years as GM.
Sometimes I wonder if he tried to over marinate prospects to avoid situations like Klimchuk, Poirier, Bouma etc. situations of players flaming out... but I do feel like I understand why he did what he did and the logic did make sense. I also do think that many off ice incidents molded the way he approached certain things. It wasn't fair that he had the Wideman incident, the Peters one was a sudden shift in the way the NHL and its players/fans approached certain topics (how it started with Babcock and Peters taking all the flack and how Babcock almost got another NHL opportunity before being kicked out again is strange). I also think the way our ownership operates also warped how Treliving operated. He stopped taking certain risks and swinging for the fences and basically did things in a safe ish manner to appease his bosses. I truly do think that the rebuild and retool rumor for the Tkachuk trade are legitimately huge insight into what could have been.
I also do think that Treliving has made both amazingly great and amazingly bad moves based on hindsight. Based on what I've seen, Conroy is lucky to have sat behind someone like Tre all these years. Someone willing to focus so heavily on developing young guys and setting up a program to be patient with them. Someone so willing to aim at RFAs and put in the contract efforts to add value to those contracts so that our org doesn't keep bleeding assets to the state we were at when Treliving showed up in 2014. Someone who showed there might be paths to success with the ownership restrictions placed upon the GM and management via the hard work and non-stop poking around and collection of data on any potential player available. Someone who even if was the also ran on some high profile names (ie: Hall, Stone, Eichel, Murray etc.) at least surprised many when we discovered that he was a finalist.
I think Conroy had an amazing front row seat of successes and failures to learn upon. I don't think Conroy would have learned as much if he was behind an older school GM that wasn't the same type of workaholic as Treliving. Honestly speaking, as much as I didn't want to tune into the games this season (and TBH a lot of that had to do with personal reasons for the last few years), I am super optimistic of what Conroy might build over the next 2-3 seasons, even if I'm still unsure what the overall mandate or plan is.
Treliving helped to loosen a ton of ownerships restrictive mandate. I think that those mandates taking the roster into a few dead ends can be used by Conroy to tell ownership to give him the flexibility to not go in that direction that might end up as a dead end again.
If history repeats as it has for a while for Calgary vs Edmonton, I look forward to seeing what type of result arises for the 2025-2026 season in terms of a surprise contention. Flame and Edmonton inexplicably emulate certain things for each others org every 2 seasons. We might not have bottomed out standings wise to draft high.
But let's see if Conroy builds upon this inexplicable off ice bottoming out and rebuilds the org in a way that makes our current players succeed. I'm still holding out for an amazing goalie coach upgrade... That alone with Huska's defensive player development might put together a strong base going forward. One that Treliving said was part of his blueprint. But a method that is completely different than what Treliving attempted. I've been saying Treliving/Burke's blueprint is not wrong. Florida is proving that right now. But the restrictions on how it was built by ownership and Tre stopped it from reaching the potential that it could have.
joescores
Registered User
- Mar 21, 2011
- 2,185
- 1,467
Conroy's so far trading issues have been his high risk high reward bets on conditional picks rather than negotiating it directly via a straight deal but I am sure he has learned a good lesson this year.
I still think we lost Tanev and Hanifin trades, there were more chips to gain from these two.
I still think we lost Tanev and Hanifin trades, there were more chips to gain from these two.
Felidae
Registered User
- Sep 30, 2016
- 11,315
- 13,723
Tbh Tkachuk has been a bit quiet most of these playoffs other than the Tampa series, where he got half his points.
Not to say he's been bad, he's still their 2nd leading scorer after all. But not quite the presence he was last postseason.
Even Bennett's been more noticeable for half of these POs imo, and you'll find quite a few Panthers fans agreeing with that.
Ace Rimmer
Stoke me a clipper.
Ace Rimmer
Stoke me a clipper.
Mobiandi
Registered User
- Jan 17, 2015
- 21,250
- 17,816
Bounces R Way
Registered User
Ad
Latest posts
-
Confirmed with Link: PLD TRADED TO WASHINGTON for Darcy Kuemper- Latest: Peter James Bond III
-
Player Discussion: Patrik Laine IVever: a new hope? (CBJ, Laine agree to seek trade)- Latest: Iron Balls McGinty
-
Canucks & NHL News, Rumours, and & Fantasy GM | League Wide Chaos- Latest: strattonius
-
Hawks, Bulls, & Sox new channel is Chicago Sports Network (CHSN)
- Latest: MarotteMarauder
