[PGT] Flames 2 @ Blues 3

[blankall]

Originally Posted by Burner

we are 12th in the league in Goals for and 29th in goals against. Pretty easy to see we need to get better at preventing goals.

We're a rebuilding team that had a questionable defence to begin with. Then, we lost our best defenceman and captain. Meanwhile, we've had a revolving door of #1 goalies.

To be expected.....although a Vancouver collapse right now would really raise my spirits.

[Fire in the disco]

Not sure if mentioned, but Colborne is getting a ton of playing time. Is he really playing well enough/ producing enough to warrant it?

I wonder I'd Knight wouldn't be playing just as well if not better if he were brought up. Colborne hasn't been terrible, but I dong get why he's getting the minutes he is (other than the fact that we can't really send him down)

[hayduke's dad]

Starting to see a Similar pattern to last year.

Weak defensive coverage

PP is PPATHETIC

Can't win a game when you don't play the whole 60 minutes

Really weak defence couldn't hit way out of wet paper bag

Poor goalie

[Redrum]

Originally Posted by hayduke's dad

Starting to see a Similar pattern to last year.

Weak defensive coverage

PP is PPATHETIC

Can't win a game when you don't play the whole 60 minutes

Really weak defence couldn't hit way out of wet paper bag

Poor goalie

Still pretty happy with Berra. With this goaltending we probably would've taken a couple more wins earlier in the season. But an already thin team dealing with all these injuries, it's impressive that we can even stay in a game with a team like the Blues.

[Igster]

Thought this was Galliardi's best game. Something always happening when he was on the ice.

[djsFlames]

Pleasantly surprised to turn on the third period and see us not blown out and fighting to get back in it. The efforts are starting to sag at points now, though. Doesnt help were getting extended roas trips against contending clubs... But that's the sobering reality of november hockey. October is always a honeymoon period, giving us some extent of foolish hope while teams are still settling in to their respective systems. I'm really TOd about Sven. Not just because I think he doesn't deserve the treatment and he gives this team a boost of talent, but because it affects Monahan!s game, too. The two have had proven chemistry and it needs to be allowed to continue developing. But now Monahan's offense is drying up, likely doing a Number on his confidence. And pulling Sven only made it harder for him.

[DT77]

So much CP angst. I get it, but I also see why the Flames themselves don't care.

Get this: The Flames have no hope for the playoffs this season. They didn't from Game 1. They know that. Essentially, this year can be called a "teaching season" and this game is a prime example of that. In the team's (coach's) eyes, Baertschi needs to learn some skill set, presumably something defensive. To the team, that was best served by observing the game (again) from the press box. So be it. Jackman, Reinhart... whomever, gets the nod in his place. Whatever. The kicker here is, the Flames don't need to win this hockey game. They need to win this exact same hockey game two or three years from now. THAT is what we as fans need to realize. If sending Baertschi or Backlund or (oh no!) Monahan to the press box for random games throughout the season and playing "plugs" like Jackman, Grats, etc. in their place means the team's future core learns what it takes to win these games when it truly matters - well, I'm ALL for it.

I take a lot of pride in the fact that while the Flames were outplayed by a far superior Blues team for much of this game they still stuck with it. A close game with under 5 minutes left... way better than I expected. The fact that Baertschi might well have helped out on a late PP or even a 2nd period PP that might have possibly won this game is entirely beside the point. Winning this game did not truly matter to the Flames. Learning lessons from each game (win or lose) most certainly does.

/my 2 cents...

[MrMastodonFarm]

Originally Posted by Igster

Thought this was Galliardi's best game. Something rarely happening when he was on the ice.

fixed

[Street Pharmacist]

Originally Posted by DT77

So much CP angst. I get it, but I also see why the Flames themselves don't care.

Get this: The Flames have no hope for the playoffs this season. They didn't from Game 1. They know that. Essentially, this year can be called a "teaching season" and this game is a prime example of that. In the team's (coach's) eyes, Baertschi needs to learn some skill set, presumably something defensive. To the team, that was best served by observing the game (again) from the press box. So be it. Jackman, Reinhart... whomever, gets the nod in his place. Whatever. The kicker here is, the Flames don't need to win this hockey game. They need to win this exact same hockey game two or three years from now. THAT is what we as fans need to realize. If sending Baertschi or Backlund or (oh no!) Monahan to the press box for random games throughout the season and playing "plugs" like Jackman, Grats, etc. in their place means the team's future core learns what it takes to win these games when it truly matters - well, I'm ALL for it.

I take a lot of pride in the fact that while the Flames were outplayed by a far superior Blues team for much of this game they still stuck with it. A close game with under 5 minutes left... way better than I expected. The fact that Baertschi might well have helped out on a late PP or even a 2nd period PP that might have possibly won this game is entirely beside the point. Winning this game did not truly matter to the Flames. Learning lessons from each game (win or lose) most certainly does.

/my 2 cents...

Winning IS the lesson, and should always be. It should not and cannot be something you decide to turn on at some arbitrary point

[dino7c]

Berra has been great...and no he wouldn't clear waivers (besides he doesn't need them)

[DOOM]

Originally Posted by MrMastodonFarm

fixed

Galiardi was fine.

[IgiTang]

Burn it down and rebuild this team !!!! ..... Oh wait...

[Lanny_McDonald]

The bright spot was Berra. Looked great again.

The thing that was most perplexing to me was the ineffectiveness of the Monahan-Hudler line. Hartley believes strongly in the duo philosophy and will rotate the third man through on the line. He's obviously identified Monahan and Hudler as the guys with the chemistry together. I think he's wrong in his assessment. I think the chemistry was between Monahan and Baertschi, and Hudler just fit into that mix very effectively, like he did on several lines in Detroit. Without Baertschi the efficacy of Monahan has slipped and that line has looked lost. I hope Hartley reassesses his thinking and takes another look at his pairs.

[Coach]

Originally Posted by New Era

The bright spot was Berra. Looked great again.

The thing that was most perplexing to me was the ineffectiveness of the Monahan-Hudler line. Hartley believes strongly in the duo philosophy and will rotate the third man through on the line. He's obviously identified Monahan and Hudler as the guys with the chemistry together. I think he's wrong in his assessment. I think the chemistry was between Monahan and Baertschi, and Hudler just fit into that mix very effectively, like he did on several lines in Detroit. Without Baertschi the efficacy of Monahan has slipped and that line has looked lost. I hope Hartley reassesses his thinking and takes another look at his pairs.

Agreed. I like Hudler a lot, but Beartschi and Monahan looked great with Stempniak too. I don't think Hudler is the x-factor for Monahan.

[Frank MetaMusil]

Humorous to me that so many want Hartley canned yet argued up and down the wall with me about how it was the players when Brent was coaching.

[OzSome]

Originally Posted by dino7c

Berra has been great...and no he wouldn't clear waivers (besides he doesn't need them)

Berra is not going anywhere. I think the Flames will stay with Ramo-Berra for the rest of the season to see how they respond.

I agree with someone here that winning is good learning method. I also don't have any problem if they lose as long as it showed that they tried. Lately, we've been seeing some lack of effort at the beginning of the game or there are times that the effort was there but they couldn't finish so by the 3rd period, it's a bit too late for them to come back.

[Ashasx]

Originally Posted by Frank MetaMusil

Humorous to me that so many want Hartley canned yet argued up and down the wall with me about how it was the players when Brent was coaching.

I suppose you could say that people still complain about Glencross quite a bit and want him gone. Other players people complained about all the time (Iginla and Bouwmeester) are gone, so people can't really complain about them.

[strombad]

For what it's worth, on the "where are they now" segment in the first intermission they interviewed Rene Corbet. When asked what he thought about Hartley, without the question even being directed this way, he said that Hartley was an excellent teacher of the game, and was always great about setting a strong course for the young guys and ensuring that they had all the assets at their disposal to have the longest career possible.

I know we all think he doesn't like his young guys, but I've yet to hear anything from an actual player that suggests anything different than the above.

[ThePrince]

Originally Posted by strombad

For what it's worth, on the "where are they now" segment in the first intermission they interviewed Rene Corbet. When asked what he thought about Hartley, without the question even being directed this way, he said that Hartley was an excellent teacher of the game, and was always great about setting a strong course for the young guys and ensuring that they had all the assets at their disposal to have the longest career possible.

I know we all think he doesn't like his young guys, but I've yet to hear anything from an actual player that suggests anything different than the above.

That's really funny. Rene Corbet is at a lot of our work functions, and I've gotten the chance to talk to him on a couple of occasions. I remember when Hartley had just gotten hired last year, I asked him what he thought about Hartley, and he had nothing good to say about him. He said that Hartley was the reason he got traded from Colorado, and generally didn't seem to think much of him.

By the way, I know that there's a lot of arguments on here about Rhett Warrener. Also got the opportunity to meet him, and he's probably one of the biggest ######bags out there.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by New Era

The bright spot was Berra. Looked great again.

The thing that was most perplexing to me was the ineffectiveness of the Monahan-Hudler line. Hartley believes strongly in the duo philosophy and will rotate the third man through on the line. He's obviously identified Monahan and Hudler as the guys with the chemistry together. I think he's wrong in his assessment. I think the chemistry was between Monahan and Baertschi, and Hudler just fit into that mix very effectively, like he did on several lines in Detroit. Without Baertschi the efficacy of Monahan has slipped and that line has looked lost. I hope Hartley reassesses his thinking and takes another look at his pairs.

Agreed - the line was just as effective with Stempniak.

Monahan has 0 pts in the 3 games Baertschi was scratched. And was invisible most of the time.