Quote:
Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina
The negativity after a bad loss is expected and I don't take issue with. What I appreciate more is those that offer constructive thoughts instead of doomsday negativity. Which isn't to say that you can't post doomsday stuff, but expect it to be challenged.
I don't see a lot of blind homerism. Within the more positive group I don't see a lot of people predicting this team will win a cup. But there is recognition that a single loss is still just a single loss and a more balanced view taken.
I don't think this team is going to win a cup this year. I think the chances of that are probably around 4%.
But I also don't see the value in letting a single Flames loss define what is going to happen or not happen going forward.
|
I don't know who predicted doom and gloom but losing to Chicago when this is supposed to be a soft spot in the schedule and we have a chance to go on a streak should be unacceptable.
But moving on I think the point highmanlife brought up is really interesting.
Why do Darryl Sutter coached teams have bad shooting %? Everything else they are doing seems to be right in terms of putting on shots creating high danger shots. He has had some talented players but a sample size that big is pretty interesting.
Looks like the LA teams overcame the poor shooting % because they had a goalie who shut the door most nights, and that's why save % matters when you are a team that allows a low volume of shots.
Some people have said save % is irrelevant, but I think on a team coached to play the way we are it might be one of the most important stats.