[PGT] Sharks 3 @ Flames 2

[Yrebmi]

Hiller plays a lot deeper in his net. He is good up close, but gets beat by perimeter and deflection shots.

Ramo challenges a lot more and has a great glove, but can get rattled and scrambly in close.

I also think Hiller is a bit better at playing the puck behind the net.

They have definite different strengths and weakness, but both are pretty good. I like that Hartley continues to go with the hot hand. That said, hopefully it's Hiller next game.

[squiggs96]

I was at the game and you could see all the Sharks' goals coming as soon as Calgary couldn't clear the zone. The 5 on 3 kill was outstanding by Bouma and Jooris.

I hate blaming refs after a loss. That's a Vancouver thing to do. Flames lost because they weren't great in their own zone a few times and San Jose took advantage of those errors. The team will benefit and suffer from calls/non-calls all year. That's hockey.

[Puppet Guy]

We had seats in the front row last night, and it really gives you an appreciation for how fast the game is and how big the players really are.

[kyuss275]

Originally Posted by KootenayFlamesFan

Yeah, Ramo was just ok, didn't look as good as he has recently. Got some bad bounces against though, too.

I'd be really surprised if Hiller isn't starting on Tuesday. Ramo had a great run, but it's time to change it up again.

I guess I saw it different. I thought Ramo was outstanding in the 3rd and the only reason the flames had a chance to tie it up near the end of game.

[Gaskal]

Originally Posted by kyuss275

I guess I saw it different. I thought Ramo was outstanding in the 3rd and the only reason the flames had a chance to tie it up near the end of game.

Ramo was good in the 3rd, but both 2nd period backhander goals were entirely stoppable.

[CaptainCrunch]

At the end of the game, Calgary played with the Sharks, they competed with the Sharks. If we were asked if they could do that at the start of the year we'd all respond with a resounded no.

There are areas of concerns. Defensively they were pretty sloppy and their clearing and passing was pretty poor all night.

Now we get to see if the Flames can keep bouncing back like they have all season.

[Resolute 14]

Three brutal and completely unnecessary mistakes clearing the zone end up in the back of our net. Disappointing, as the Flames were the better team virtually all night. San Jose had five incredibly strong minutes at the end of the first and start of the second, and the referees felt they needed to be the stars of the game in the final five minutes. Other than that, the Flames largely controlled the play. Sharks turned the tables on us a little by blocking a lot of shots and passes.

[Fire]

Originally Posted by OzSome

seriously...blaming the size difference again? The lost has nothing to do with the size. Inability to move the puck out of their zone has nothing to do with the size. They were sloppy and weren't skating like they usually do.

Size was definitely a factor in this game. The Flames couldn't handle the forecheck of the bigger Shark players causing them to hemmed in their own zone for lot of the game. They need more big and skilled guys like Ferland on this team or the Flames stand little chance against a big physical team in the playoffs.

Like it or not, having size is still important in the NHL.

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by Fire

Size was definitely a factor in this game. The Flames couldn't handle the forecheck of the bigger Shark players causing them to hemmed in their own zone for lot of the game. They need more big and skilled guys like Ferland on this team or the Flames stand little chance against a big physical team in the playoffs.

Like it or not, having size is still important in the NHL.

I can't say that I saw the Flames get hemmed into their own zone on more than a few occasions at even strength, and it is not like they did not do precisely the same thing to the Sharks at several points in last night's game. I agree that the Sharks' offensive pressure was generally sustained on those moments by their size and strength on the walls, but I also saw a Sharks team struggle mightily with the Flames speed and forecheck.

It is something that the Flames could improve with added size, but by the same token, I disagree that having size is as important to this team as you are suggesting. Their lack of size certainly is not killing them.

[DOOM]

Lets win the next one!

[Flames Fan, Ph.D.]

Disappointing game for me in hindsight. I didn't have an issue with the effort, but simply thought the goals were avoidable.

- I agree with the game takes that McGrattan isn't helping the team on the ice. The 4th line has basically averaged one clear scoring chance going back to the game in San Jose, and last night they were nearly invisible for me.

- Ferland is getting better. We need a player like him.

- Granlund needs a goal to help him surge again. He's had a bit of a stall, but I think it's more offensively as his defensive side remains intact.

- I thought last night's game was the first time I've explicitly seen a team make a point of taking Gaudreau down. He was brought down a couple of times in scrums, and Sharks players were feeding him plenty of stick whenever they could. Get used to it Johnny.

[chedder]

Colbourne, Backlund, Raymond. When back that's 6'5 and two 6 footers up front. That helps with team size

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by Flames Fan, Ph.D.

Disappointing game for me in hindsight. I didn't have an issue with the effort, but simply thought the goals were avoidable.

- I agree with the game takes that McGrattan isn't helping the team on the ice. The 4th line has basically averaged one clear scoring chance going back to the game in San Jose, and last night they were nearly invisible for me.

- Ferland is getting better. We need a player like him.

- Granlund needs a goal to help him surge again. He's had a bit of a stall, but I think it's more offensively as his defensive side remains intact.

- I thought last night's game was the first time I've explicitly seen a team make a point of taking Gaudreau down. He was brought down a couple of times in scrums, and Sharks players were feeding him plenty of stick whenever they could. Get used to it Johnny.

Anaheim and New Jersey were doing the exact same thing. It hasn't slowed him down one bit.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by Fire

Size was definitely a factor in this game. The Flames couldn't handle the forecheck of the bigger Shark players causing them to hemmed in their own zone for lot of the game. They need more big and skilled guys like Ferland on this team or the Flames stand little chance against a big physical team in the playoffs.

Like it or not, having size is still important in the NHL.

I am a big believer is size. But I disagree that it was a big factor in this game.

The Flames carried the majority of the 5 on 5 play IMO, other than late in the 1st and early in the 2nd. And their problems stemmed from bad decisions trying to make passes instead of taking the safe play.

The Flames defensive zone coverage is all about collapsing and blocking lanes with their sticks. Every team gets extended zone time against them as a result. But last night, like most nights, the opposition was kept to the outside the vast majority of the time.

Except for two bad clearing attempts and a lucky bounce over the net that Ramo lost sight of and left Marleau alone in front, the Flames played a terrific hockey game.

Any one of those pucks doesn't go in and we are reading a very different PGT here.

[Flames Fan, Ph.D.]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

Anaheim and New Jersey were doing the exact same thing. It hasn't slowed him down one bit.

I guess last night was the first time where it really struck my eye, especially after the play.

Fun to watch this kid navigate the NHL waters.

[Enoch Root]

Reffing was frustrating for sure, but that averages out over the season.

What really got my goat last night was the condition of the ice.

There was a lot of discussion on CP 2 or 3 years ago about it, and apparently the Flames did something about it (turned down the temp in the building maybe?) and it did seem to improve somewhat.

However, this year it seems even worse than a few years ago, and the last few games have been atrocious. That play where Brodie waffled it in the neutral zone and almost gave up a breakaway was just one of countless plays where it was bouncing. At times, it looks like they are playing with a tennis ball.

Both teams are playing under the same conditions of course. But it seems to me that if the Flames want to be a fast paced, finesse team, they would be far better served to have excellent ice than garbage ice.

Please Flames, fix the fricking ice (or build a new arena)

/rant

[stemit14]

Originally Posted by Flames Fan, Ph.D.

I guess last night was the first time where it really struck my eye, especially after the play.



Fun to watch this kid navigate the NHL waters.

Great to see him battle through it. Need the bolligs and mcgrattans to straighten guys out for that though. Thought burns was crossing the line a few times with the skilled guys and I would have liked Grats to be in a scrum with him but Hartley never had him out against him.

[heep223]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

Reffing was frustrating for sure, but that averages out over the season.

What really got my goat last night was the condition of the ice.

There was a lot of discussion on CP 2 or 3 years ago about it, and apparently the Flames did something about it (turned down the temp in the building maybe?) and it did seem to improve somewhat.

However, this year it seems even worse than a few years ago, and the last few games have been atrocious. That play where Brodie waffled it in the neutral zone and almost gave up a breakaway was just one of countless plays where it was bouncing. At times, it looks like they are playing with a tennis ball.

Both teams are playing under the same conditions of course. But it seems to me that if the Flames want to be a fast paced, finesse team, they would be far better served to have excellent ice than garbage ice.

Please Flames, fix the fricking ice (or build a new arena)

/rant

The ice looked horrible on Thursday night also.

[djsFlames]

Aside from the stupid 5 on 3 the reason we didn't tie it up last night was we decided to play on the perimeter on the last few minutes. Visible shots from the outside that SJ didn't have much trouble blocking. Not enough chances taken to get to the middle of the ice and a little too much hesitation with the puck. Maybe it was fatigue but our sharpness and decision making didn't match out determination late in the game, whereas we were able to execute offensive plays more effectively in previous games with hustle and smarts.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by djsFlames

Aside from the stupid 5 on 3 the reason we didn't tie it up last night was we decided to play on the perimeter on the last few minutes. Visible shots from the outside that SJ didn't have much trouble blocking. Not enough chances taken to get to the middle of the ice and a little too much hesitation with the puck. Maybe it was fatigue but our sharpness and decision making didn't match out determination late in the game, whereas we were able to execute offensive plays more effectively in previous games with hustle and smarts.

The Sharks did a really good job of collapsing to the front of the net and tying up sticks, forcing the Flames to the outside. Pretty much exactly how the Flames paly defense.