I think it's a good sign that the team has raised their game once it became a dogfight to make the playoffs. That, combined with the scoring depth bodes well for playoff hockey I feel as it tends to be the unsung guys that excel in the playoffs.
I hate the writing style of the article though.
__________________
"A pessimist thinks things can't get any worse. An optimist knows they can."
That and a tough tough month/stretch in January. If we are 500 in those segments we are comfortably in a battle for the 1st/2nd Div spots no doubt. As it sits we still have a great shot at home ice in the playoffs, looking forward to the stretch here !
The 5-10-1 start explains a lot about why the Flames are not better positioned, and with better numbers.
It can't be understated how important a good start is to non-elite teams like the Flames. With the three point system in place and loser point it takes a lot of winning to overcome starting the first 1/4 of the season behind the 8-ball. I think you can let Gulutzan off the hook for the most part when it comes to this season's slow start because of the team adjusting to a news system, new goaltenders, and their best player missing pre-season. Next season however I'm really hoping the organization leaves no stone unturned trying to get the team ready to go out of the gates as there are some players on this team that are historically slow starters and eventually you have to get that corrected.
I think the article reads like it was written by someone who is trying to evaluate the Flames' season entirely through statistics.
In fairness, everything he says is very accurate.
What it is missing, IMO, is an awareness that the Flames were a team that was pretty well built, and pretty laden with talent, going into the season.
But for multiple reasons, got off to a terrible start. 5-10-1 and we all know all the reasons why.
Then, they slowly started to get things in order. The special teams got better. The goaltending improved from putrid to decent (or at least ok). Giordano and Hamilton got better, even if Gaudreau, Monahan and Brodie weren't yet firing on all cylinders.
But they still had consistency problems, and still had a few issues.
Then the coach had a little chat with the leadership group.
Since then, the team has really started to 'get' the system. Goaltending has moved from okay to good, if not very good. Brodie has a partner that works and he is now playing like Brodie. Gaudreau and Monahan have a winger and are now playing like Gaudreau and Monahan.
In other words, the team is now looking like the team that many people thought would finish 2nd in the Pacific this year before the season started.
To me, it isn't a case of an okay team that has had an okay season. It is a very good team that had some very serious issues for part the season.
I see three parts to the year:
at the start, they were horrible
for the next 30 or 40 games, they started to fix some things and were okay, though inconsistent
then they put it all together and have been great for the last while
If you look at all three parts in total, you get an average team, which, over the year, is exactly what they've been and is exactly what the author has described.
But if you look a little deeper, you see a tale of three teams. And this third team is a very solid hockey club. And it is the club that people thought it was, or should be.
I don't think the author sees that.
The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Enoch Root For This Useful Post:
^ We all knew who was starting the season in Calgary, minus a couple guys.
If Gulutzan learned one thing, it best be to be ready out of the gate.
As much as I hate Micheal Therrien, the Habs (by contrast) had 3 cuts to make going into their final 3 exhibition games, and roared out to a 9-0-1 start.
No team can afford to start as poorly as the Flames did.
The Following User Says Thank You to EldrickOnIce For This Useful Post:
Nothing of substance with rarely an independent thought other than to bash the Hartley Flames from a few years ago. He literally just regurgitated stats and didn't actually talk about the Flames turnaround at all.
I have no idea why that article was given that title. It wasn't remotely about how the flames turned their season around.
The Following 11 Users Say Thank You to Cecil Terwilliger For This Useful Post:
if they had a decent start they would have an "elite" record...add 5 or 6 wins to their totals
Forget January every team has a slump
Problem with that is a lot of other teams could say the same thing. 5 or 6 wins is not minor. It's usually the difference between playoffs and no playoffs for average to bad teams.
Last edited by calgaryblood; 03-08-2017 at 12:17 PM.
Problem with that is a lot of other teams could say the same thing. 5 or 6 wins is not minor. It's usually the difference between playoffs and no playoffs.
I don't think there are many teams that had as many things go wrong as the Flames did in the first 15 games...I am not even saying a hot start, .500 in their first 15 games would have this team looking pretty good right now.
Next season if they get the goal tending all year, should know the systems, no Wideman...there is really no excuse for this not to be a 100+ point team
Problem with that is a lot of other teams could say the same thing. 5 or 6 wins is not minor. It's usually the difference between playoffs and no playoffs for average to bad teams.
Except the point is that they aren't an average to bad team. They are a good team that got off to a terrible start. So the comment is valid because if they didn't get off to a bad start, they would be chasing SJ for the division lead, just like many people thought they would before the season started.
Nothing of substance with rarely an independent thought other than to bash the Hartley Flames from a few years ago. He literally just regurgitated stats and didn't actually talk about the Flames turnaround at all.
I have no idea why that article was given that title. It wasn't remotely about how the flames turned their season around.
Bang on.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by snipetype
k im just not going to respond to your #### anymore because i have better things to do like #### my model girlfriend rather then try to convince people like you of commonly held hockey knowledge.
...I hate the writing style of the article though.
It is honestly difficult to read. I had to stop at several points and re-read sentences and questions a few times just to be sure I understood what the author was trying to get to. The article is not very good at all.
__________________
Dealing with Everything from Dead Sea Scrolls to Red C Trolls
Quote:
Originally Posted by woob
"...harem warfare? like all your wives dressup and go paintballing?"
VICE Sports - How the Red Hot Calgary Flames Turned Their Season Around
