Overperforming Rookies vs Underperforming Stars - Calgarypuck Forums - The Unofficial Calgary Flames Fan Community

toquester · 04-20-2013, 07:58 AM

Quite a few people appear to be surprised with the turn of events recently, or chalk the youngsters success up to no playoff pressure. It may be true but something that may also be true, is that we let an expensive, relatively talented team in the old Flames, off the hook for underperforming. I think they underperformed and people let it slide because we were too loyal.

A better question might be, where should the old Flames team have been in the standings? Since the owners spent to the cap, and the management was always trying to improve the team through trades, yet this team continually wound up out of the playoffs, the team underperformed for years.

Are we seeing the results of a team where people care, or can it all be explained by the lack of playoff pressure?

Lanny_McDonald · 04-20-2013, 08:05 AM

I think if we had stayed status quo we would be battling for that first overall pick with Florida. The team we had would have spent most of the night in their own end, giving up great scoring opportunities, and not be willing to sacrifice themselves to make up for the mistakes. The kids have brought a new life, a new work ethic, and a new attitude to the team. The pucks stays out of zone more, the opposition is swarmed when they have the puck, and it is leading to frustration for our opponents. Teams used to see the Flames on the schedule and know they were going to have an easy night. That isn't the case now. The old Flames would be 4-6 points worse than they are right now.

really? · 04-20-2013, 08:08 AM

Watching the Flames during the previous three seasons I always felt the squad played with a sense of entitlement. The veteran presence on the squad was catered to, took for granted that management was bound to serve their needs and desires. This is inevitable when priorities beyond team success invade the locker room. A culture change was needed for some time, and Feaster has initiated the process. Hanging onto the past while trying to move forward does not work.

Any roster players who are not open to doing it a new way, and possibly playing different, lesser roles, over the next couple of years need to be provided with an opportunity to play elsewhere.

Textcritic · 04-20-2013, 08:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by toquester

...Are we seeing the results of a team where people care, or can it all be explained by the lack of playoff pressure?

I think it is more likely the result of both, and not either / or. This team is better than it will finish this season, but much of what we are watching right now is almost certainly a product of the kids playing pressure-free hockey.

toquester · 04-20-2013, 08:13 AM

I saw Brent Sutter being quoted as saying this had to happen. I think I am seeing why he would say that.

Ark2 · 04-20-2013, 08:28 AM

I have to laugh at all the people that said we would be the worst team in the league without Bouwmeester, that there was no way you could replace all his minutes, that we would all regret it when he is gone, etc. Well, that last part is true, seeing that the team is winning right now without him, I definitely regret that he is gone. Inject Bouwmeester back into this line-up and he would put a stop to that right away.

Lanny_McDonald · 04-20-2013, 08:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Textcritic

I think it is more likely the result of both, and not either / or. This team is better than it will finish this season, but much of what we are watching right now is almost certainly a product of the kids playing pressure-free hockey.

I actually thought there was plenty of pressure in last night's game. Kipper's final appearance in Calgary and wanting to get him a win in that final game? That was pressure. Maybe not the pressure of a playoff race, but pressure knowing they had a very specific job to do and didn't want to let a guy down. I thought they performed better than expected. The old team would have folder like a cheap lawn chair after Anaheim scored. The kids didn't buckle. Good on them!

Lanny_McDonald · 04-20-2013, 08:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ark2

I have to laugh at all the people that said we would be the worst team in the league without Iginla, that there was no way you could replace all his minutes, that we would all regret it when he is gone, etc. Well, that last part is true, seeing that the team is winning right now without him, I definitely regret that he is gone. Inject Iginla back into this line-up and he would put a stop to that right away.

FYP.

See what I did there?

Red_Baron · 04-20-2013, 08:40 AM

We've seen these anomalies before. Remember the Oilers start this year? Remember the Wild being first place overall into December last season, flames in first place in the west after 13 games in 2000, or whenever that was.
There is still a long way for this team to go and this is a very small sample size compared to an 82 game season.

toquester · 04-20-2013, 08:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Red_Baron

We've seen these anomalies before. Remember the Oilers start this year? Remember the Wild being first place overall into December last season, flames in first place in the west after 13 games in 2000, or whenever that was.
There is still a long way for this team to go and this is a very small sample size compared to an 82 game season.

True, but it does begin to demonstrate what the team is capable of under the right circumstances. Complacency had set in, standards were lowered, and excuses have been made for poor performances. The Flames culture has been complacent for some time.

I do expect a measure of complacency to creep in, but nothing like what we have endured here for years. And if management cannot keep the ball rolling to an acceptable level, then perhaps they need to go next.

Roof-Daddy · 04-20-2013, 08:55 AM

The Flames veteran group from the start of this season had become quick to break when things weren't going well.

First 10-12 games of the season, they played great in Hartley's system and should have won more games then they did, but some defensive break downs, combined with shoddy goaltending and questionable puck luck had them behind the 8 ball once again.

It was like they just mentally gave up, sort of a "oh man, here we go again" type thing and stopped playing well because they weren't getting the results from good play, and could see they were headed down the same path as the previous three seasons.

That's to me is why they had to finally tear it down and start rebuilding not just the physical make up of the team, but also the mental make up of the team.

Vulcan · 04-20-2013, 09:28 AM

I don't know if the team performance with these rookies means much in the long run but it's fun to watch. They are playing like a team and they are playing hungry.

So it has been mentioned when Iginla was on the block that maybe we could re-sign him this summer. Do we still want to?

StrykerSteve · 04-20-2013, 09:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vulcan

I don't know if the team performance with these rookies means much in the long run but it's fun to watch. They are playing like a team and they are playing hungry.

So it has been mentioned when Iginla was on the block that maybe we could re-sign him this summer. Do we still want to?

Absolutely not.

blankall · 04-20-2013, 09:32 AM

Hockey is a sport where attitude, effort, and team identity can trump talent. Building a team around 30+ vets on guaranteed long term contracts was just a bad idea.

Currently the team is really a score by committee type of situation. If a couple of these young guys can elevate their game and emerge as leaders, the Flames could really surprise next year.

Of all the vets we had, I think Cammy and Glencross are two solid choices for mentoring roles next year. Glencross for obvious reasons. As for Cammy, some people called him out for his comments in Montreal. To me that just showed he needed to win. He was already on a large multi year contract at that point and could easily have sat back and done nothing.

blankall · 04-20-2013, 09:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by StrykerSteve

Absolutely not.

If Iggy comes back, things will be different. Management won't be sacrificing everything to build a team around him. It'll be an Iggy in a decreased role. I don't see the harm.

keratosis · 04-20-2013, 09:40 AM

That ship has sailed. Iggy is not coming back to play hockey for the Flames.

toquester · 04-20-2013, 09:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by blankall

Currently the team is really a score by committee type of situation. If a couple of these young guys can elevate their game and emerge as leaders, the Flames could really surprise next year.

Imagine that, a team where the ice time is earned.

PantherExtreme · 04-20-2013, 10:00 AM

Our overperforming rookies Mcgrattan, Begin, and Kiprusoff have really made a difference in these couple of no pressure, statistical outlier, wins.

PeterJMoss · 04-20-2013, 10:03 AM

There's pressure on a lot of these guys. They aren't top guys guaranteed a spot going forward. They are playing for jobs for next year.

Roof-Daddy · 04-20-2013, 10:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PantherExtreme

Our overperforming rookies Mcgrattan, Begin, and Kiprusoff have really made a difference in these couple of no pressure, statistical outlier, wins.

Have you been watching the games?

I have, and what I've seen is Brodie, Backlund, Horak and Sven playing plenty of minutes, and performing well in those minutes. They've been key contributors in this 5-2 run.

Even Reinhart and to a small extent Hanowski have helped in their games as well.