Bieksa's comments on the Flames

[taxbuster]

https://twitter.com/user/status/1354557542668640262

Bieksa (I know, ugh), on the Flames. But he's not wrong.


(sorry about the giant size...)

[Textcritic]

I question the opinion if anyone who is bemoaning the loss of Travis Haminic and ...

... Dalton Prout?!

Sent from my SM-G960W using Tapatalk

[Vinny01]

Bieksa forgot we have Rinaldo on the taxi squad who serves as much purpose as Prout did on the team.

He is not really wrong about our blueline being on the softer side but I don’t think it is worth replacing Nesterov with a face puncher. Tanev is leaps and bounds better than Hamonic who was always solid for stepping in and fighting but I prefer having the better hockey player.

Interesting Burke called the Flames the toughest team in the division last night during the broadcast.

[Wastedyouth]

The blue line may be softer, but they move the puck much much better.

Correct me if I am wrong, but the Flames are actually doing quite well this season on chances against, etc?

I haven't dug into the advanced metrics yet.

[greyshep]

Not sure how many teams currently are really built like the ones he was referring to. Bit of a different era I think. I have a hard time imagining we would be better off with Hamonic in the lineup right now.

Suggesting our top forwards are soft isnt much of a revelation either.

[BigBrodieFan]

I wouldn’t take criticism from someone who I wouldn’t take advice from in the first place. Bieksa ranks just behind Francis in the credence department. Both Flames/Leafs games could have gone either way.

[ignite09]

Don't agree with Bieksa on a lot, but if you asked me what this teams identity was, I couldn't tell you.

[Erick Estrada]

All those tougher Flames teams he talked about accomplished no more than this group and at least this group finished atop the conference a few years back.

[Boreal]

He’s so full of himself. He’s completely trolling. Jeff Weimer? He never played against Oliwa & Commadore when they were Flames because he wasn’t in the league.

The Flames aren’t a hard team to play against because they let Toronto skate around the net?

What does that even mean?

Sure, ok, another word for not letting someone skate around the net is interference/tripping/obstruction etc & taking a penalty, against a power play that is clicking at 40%.

Hmmm... seems like a great idea Kevin.

He’s an egotistical blowhard. I’ve listened to 3 or 4 of his podcasts with Kesler. It’s done now because they couldn’t find a sponsor⌨️... .shocking. I can’t believe people wouldn’t want their product or service associated with egoistical blowhards who love to talk about how awesome they are.

The podcasts have some interesting stories and tidbits, but they’re unbearable to listen to at least 60% of the time.

It’s an embarrassment to Canadian hockey broadcasting that Bieksa is given praise for his analysis of the game. There are tons of guys who could do a better job, like Kris Versteeg.

For anyone’s who can watch Ranger games with Steve Valliquette’s in game analysis on MSG... It’s not even close.

Valliquette has an exponentially better grasp on explaining the game. He also owns an an analytics company that provides services to professional hockey teams. Bieksa coaches his kids team. That sums up the difference.

His analysis is off the charts better than anything in Canada. He uses simple explanations and easily understandable analytics to give the viewer insight into how the game is actually being played.

The nuances of what is a difficult team to play against require someone other than a simpleton like Bieksa to explain. He explains the emotion of the game, that’s about it.

But this is what people eat up, oversimplified takes of the complexity of the modern game. It’s why Don’t Cherry was still on air until 2019.

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by ignite09

Don't agree with Bieksa on a lot, but if you asked me what this teams identity was, I couldn't tell you.

I think the idea of "team identity" is enough.ously overrated. Most often the teams regarded to have one are also the teams who catch lightning in a bottle for a short spell and have a surprise, underdog run in the playoffs. I don't think tbat is a coincidence.

Sent from my SM-G960W using Tapatalk

[Boreal]

Originally Posted by Vinny01

Bieksa forgot we have Rinaldo on the taxi squad who serves as much purpose as Prout did on the team.

He is not really wrong about our blueline being on the softer side but I don’t think it is worth replacing Nesterov with a face puncher. Tanev is leaps and bounds better than Hamonic who was always solid for stepping in and fighting but I prefer having the better hockey player.

Interesting Burke called the Flames the toughest team in the division last night during the broadcast.

Team identity is a talking point for tv & radio, that’s it.

Another description of a team identity is that they’re one dimensional.

What does Burke say? You want to win the cup, you need to play the game anyway you want.

To win you have to beat a tough team / a skilled team / a fast team & a team that is a hybrid of all three. Play like a tough team against a skill team like Toronto and their powerplay will have fun.

The talk of “team identity” is complete nonsense to me most of the time. Successful team work hard. Gio sets the standard for hard work. Their problem is psychological. They need to work smarter and with mental fortitude.

[Calgary4LIfe]

He is right - this team is soft. Rinaldo, Ritchie and Robinson, while technically on the team, are not guys that have been playing and that you can count on to play regularly. Sure, if certain games get really physical, the Flame can insert those guys into the lineup and there isn't a team in the NHL that I think could match that toughness, but this is and has been a very soft team for a number of years now.


So what do you do about it? Flames have tried to address this organizationally for a very long time now. I don't believe that the Flames wanted to part with Ferland, but had to as Carolina was also looking for toughness. Tough guys that can play are expensive. Sure, you can get the Haleys of the league, but they aren't going to factor into games unless there is an expectation that the next game is going to be rough, and you insert that player for that purposes, while fully understanding that he might end up costing you the game anyway.


These are the prospects that the Flames drafted that fill that 'hard to play against' hole (excluding Tkachuk and Bennett, who are those types and who are on the team).



Martin Pospisil - still in the system

Zach Fischer - gone

Riley Bruce - "" ""

Eetu Tuulola - In the system
Hunter Smith - gone
Austin Carroll - gone
Keegan Kanzig - gone
Tim Harrison - gone
Rushan Rafikov - Flames still own his rights - plays with an edge
Patrick Sieloff - gone


There really isn't much in the pipeline.



Oilers have Kassian and Nurse to stick up for them. While I think they are both playing way over their heads, they are playable.


However, it isn't so bad. Flames aren't a tough team. They are a skilled team. That's the way they were trending under Hartley, and it was Hartley that started not playing guys like McGrattan. He wanted a fast and disciplined team.


When we talk about identities, how about giving us some labels first. Sure, the Flames aren't that 'rough team that is hard to play against physically', but what other labels are there when we talk about identities?


"Tough Team"
"Offensive Team"
"Defensive Team (trap team)"
"Speed team"??
"Slow Team"??


I mean, how else do you break down teams into identities? This is when I feel this talk about identities is overblown. Know what identity I want the Flames to be? That Stanley Cup winning team - it could beat you with skill, or it could beat you physically. When it felt like it, it beat you both ways. That's what I want the Flames to be like. Whatever you call that identity.


It is difficult to get skilled players who can skate and who are tough. Look how much Montreal spent on acquiring one, and look how much they had to sign him for. There aren't many players around the NHL that are both. That's why Lucic isn't going to be benched. That's why they bring guys like Rinaldo and Ritchie into the organization - because otherwise, this team would get manhandled when games got chippy. That's why Brad went out and picked up Ritchie just in case these 10 game battles get really nasty with some teams.


Right now, there isn't a team that the Flames will lose against on the 'toughness' stage, as long as all their size dresses that game. Makes it tougher for them to win games, however.


The only label I can give the Flames is stuff like: "Skilled but inconsistent". I will be happy with "Skilled and consistent". How do you get there, I don't know, but I don't think you need to turn your team into a 'tough team' to do it. That's just one of the ways. There are a lot of teams that are fairly physically weak. That's ok too, as long as they play well and don't succumb to the intimidation and physicality that other teams bring.



Bieksa brings up an interesting observation that I think most people have paid attention to as Flames fans. However, is it really important? Are teams really able to be grouped together under 4 or 5 real labels? I don't think so really. Was Pittsburgh a 'tough team' when they won? Nope. Were they a skilled team? With the exception of Crosby, Malkin and Letang, not really... the rest of their players didn't have too much skill IMO to be labelled that. Or maybe that is enough for them to be labelled as such - I don't know.


All I know is that big, physical tough players who are fast and who can skate are about as difficult to acquire now as first line centres it seems, and when you can acquire them, they are usually at the end of their 'window' (which are usually shorter because of how hard the game is on their bodies).



Iginla was the anomaly in the NHL - skilled, tough, fast, and helluva resilient. I am still not convinced he was human.

[Red]

He is not bemoaning the loss of Hamonic, he is just pointing out that the team lost some grit on the D. A team that had little to start with.
And pointed out that the forwards are for most part very soft.
Team is easy to play against.

He is right. Toronto was flying in and out of the slot, both games. Some brought it up after the first Toronto game.

Flame forwards on the other hand stay boxed out.
And we call the Toronto goals luck. But as some say, make your own luck. Go to the net.

Hated Bieksa as a player, but he is a good analyst.

[Red]

People bring up Pitts and Chicago. They were not soft. In fact, the young Chicago team bullied the Flames in what was it, 07?
It's not about the knuckle chuckers. It's about defense that doesn't allow players near the crease and forwards that go to the crease,

What do the Flames have at the top half of the lineup that match that criteria?

[Boreal]

Originally Posted by Red

He is not bemoaning the loss of Hamonic, he is just pointing out that the team lost some grit on the D. A team that had little to start with.
And pointed out that the forwards are for most part very soft.
Team is easy to play against.

He is right. Toronto was flying in and out of the slot, both games. Some brought it up after the first Toronto game.

Flame forwards on the other hand stay boxed out.
And we call the Toronto goals luck. But as some say, make your own luck. Go to the net.

Hated Bieksa as a player, but he is a good analyst.

He isn’t a good analyst.

He isn’t a bad analyst. That’s where he’s at, and how terrible Canadian hockey broadcasting is.

The last good analyst on HNIC was Scotty Bowman.

Pretty much everyone else comments on physicality & emotion so the beer drinking eyeballs can understand and continue to draw ad revenue.

[blender]

Yeah not a big believer in a specific identity, but no doubt in my mind that Backlund not finishing his check led directly to the possession that led to the winning goal against.

[EVERLAST]

I don't give a F

Bieksa IS IRRELEVANT.....and if Recci was ugly Beiksa makes him a beauty queen.

[Boreal]

Originally Posted by Red

People bring up Pitts and Chicago. They were not soft. In fact, the young Chicago team bullied the Flames in what was it, 07?
It's not about the knuckle chuckers. It's about defense that doesn't allow players near the crease and forwards that go to the crease,

What do the Flames have at the top half of the lineup that match that criteria?

Tkachuk, Lindholm, and Dube for starters.

The line between defence that doesn’t allow players near the crease and a penalty is razor thin in the regular season, so it’s isn’t “simple.”.

Ultimately is about players playing cohesively with good sticks to minimize plays that enable shots with a high percentage of scoring and executing on their own high percentage chances at the other end.

This is how the Islanders are playing. They allow shots, but they’re shots with a historically low percentage chance of going in. Shoot away.

The Flames can play like this, but their problem has been between their ears and had been for years.

They can be mentally weak, work their asses off, but lose the cohesiveness in their play because they’re not working smart or they have trouble getting in sync or in a rhythm..

They were consistently in sync a great deal 2 years ago. If they can get the same mojo going in a shorter compressed season they could have actual momentum in the playoffs where the line between hard defensive hockey and a penalty widens a bit.

[dammage79]

Brieksas reasonings are stupid. But I agree with his main point. He knew what he was walking into every game against Calgary in the Iggy/Sutter era. Pain.

Can't honestly say this team has or even had an identity coming out of the post iggy era other than wildly inconsistent. And lacksadaisical.

So yeah, maybe they have an identity. Its just not a very good one.

[Red]

Dube is the muscle? Now we are in trouble :-)

Size and toughness matter. It's simple physics. A tall D can protect more ice with his stick or positioning. A tough D can make a star forward irrelevant (Zadorov vs Johnny and Tkachuk for example).
Flames can't effectively dump the puck in. They lose all those battles. Just watch next time. They have to play fancy tic tac toes. Not enough skill for that.

And you are right about Chucky. He is that player. And thats how he scores his goals. He is a tough guy with terrible skating. But has the size and will to get dirty. Very much much like Ryan Smyth was.