[PGT] Leafs 4 Flames 2 - Page 9 - Calgarypuck Forums - The Unofficial Calgary Flames Fan Community

Ashasx · 10-30-2013, 11:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dion

Hartley said his benching wasn't a punishment or to send a message. He wanted more size in the lineup to match the Leafs and thus Jackman was inserted.

Jackman played 3 useless minutes... he served no purpose.

Roof-Daddy · 10-30-2013, 11:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ashasx

There are only 2 "kids" on the team, 4 if you include Backlund and Brodie.

Baertschi-21, Monahan-19, Backlund-24, Brodie-23.

Just a little nit pick, but Bouma and Colborne qualify as "kids" as well IMO.

timbit · 10-30-2013, 11:04 PM

Colborne is also a kid. He played very well and got rewarded with 23 min.

Or does he not count? He is 23.

Street Pharmacist · 10-30-2013, 11:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dion

Hartley said his benching wasn't a punishment or to send a message. He wanted more size in the lineup to match the Leafs and thus Jackman was inserted.

He said if Backlund had been playing better or getting points he wouldn't have been in the press box

Ashasx · 10-30-2013, 11:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Roof-Daddy

Just a little nit pick, but Bouma and Colborne qualify as "kids" as well IMO.

Yes, they would count, but I was moreso referring to players with top 6/4 potential.

TurnedTheCorner · 10-30-2013, 11:06 PM

Hartley on scratching Backlund: "I'm a big fan of this young man...he came a long way since last year...It's not a message or anything...it's not a punishment or anything."

See how selective quoting works?

Dion · 10-30-2013, 11:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ashasx

There's a difference between being a team of rookies (Edmonton) with a couple of crappy veterans being sprinkled in, and a team of veterans (Calgary) with a handful of rookies sprinkled in. We are on opposite sides of the spectrum... both extremes are bad.

But can we at least move a little closer to the middle?

I'm willing to bet we'll see that towards the end of the season. We could see a few vets moved at the deadline when we get a better read on some of our players in Abby.

nik- · 10-30-2013, 11:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TurnedTheCorner

Hartley on scratching Backlund: "I'm a big fan of this young man...he came a long since last year...It's not a message or anything...it's not a punishment or anything."

See how selective quoting works?

The quote being negative or positive doesn't really matter. In the end he chose to play Jackman, who's been useless for two seasons now, over Backlund who plays significantly better.

Ashasx · 10-30-2013, 11:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TurnedTheCorner

Hartley on scratching Backlund: "I'm a big fan of this young man...he came a long since last year...It's not a message or anything...it's not a punishment or anything."

See how selective quoting works?

The quote still was not taken out of context. I fail to see how this was not a punishment, regardless of what Hartley says.

He's an old-fashioned coach for a team that needs to get younger.

Table 5 · 10-30-2013, 11:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TurnedTheCorner

Let's watch Hartley's post game comments for some info on the Backlund scratch. Around the 3:05 mark.

Or, let's all flip the #### out over tweets. CP tradition! Everyone take a drink!

There's never a valid reason to put in Jackman over Backlund. When exactly does Jackman do anything of value? It's not like the guy fights anymore, and he definitely doesn't push hard like he did his first year. The guy is a pylon out there.

Dion · 10-30-2013, 11:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ashasx

Jackman played 3 useless minutes... he served no purpose.

As I said earlier, a pylon is not a replacement for Backlund. I get that Hartley wanted to inject more size but a pylon was not the right choice.

timbit · 10-30-2013, 11:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ashasx

Yes, they would count, but I was moreso referring to players with top 6/4 potential.

Just my opinion but from what I have seen of Colborne, he has more top 6 upside than Backlund.

Table 5 · 10-30-2013, 11:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dion

Hartley said his benching wasn't a punishment or to send a message. He wanted more size in the lineup to match the Leafs and thus Jackman was inserted.

Jackmans "size" hasn't be beneficial in a game in 3 years.

Dion · 10-30-2013, 11:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ashasx

The quote still was not taken out of context. I fail to see how this was not a punishment, regardless of what Hartley says.

He's an old-fashioned coach for a team that needs to get younger.

Wanting to match size for size is not old fashioned.

Ashasx · 10-30-2013, 11:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by timbit

Just my opinion but from what I have seen of Colborne, he has more top 6 upside than Backlund.

Don't want to get into a long discission, but I don't see the hockey IQ or motor from Colborne. Just too passive. I think he maxes out as a 3rd line C.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dion

Wanting to match size for size is not old fashioned.

Backlund is grittier than Colborne.

browna · 10-30-2013, 11:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Table 5

I'm starting to get the feeling the Flames are trying to "Win" again, as opposed to putting emphasis on focusing and developing the next generation. I think all the early winning got them thinking that we're close to being good again. I really wouldn't be that surprised to see them trade a young guy for a veteran.

Or would I.

Be really interesting to know the dynamic going on, now that it appears Burke said he is settling into his job this week. Is Hartley acting on behalf of Burke in sending theses "messages" , or is he trying to prove to Burke that he has control of the situation and of the dressing room? Maybe neither of the above, but either way, with a new boss going to be around more, and the season almost a month in, is Burke going to start making some moves and some better evaluations off and on the ice?

mrdonkey · 10-30-2013, 11:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ashasx

There's a difference between being a team of rookies (Edmonton) with a couple of crappy veterans being sprinkled in, and a team of veterans (Calgary) with a handful of rookies sprinkled in. We are on opposite sides of the spectrum... both extremes are bad.

But can we at least move a little closer to the middle?

I would tend to err on the side of transitioning young players in slowly as opposed to throwing them in the deep end and asking them to swim, but that's just me. I am scared of becoming the Oilers, where they stunt the development of their young players by immediately handing them roles they clearly aren't ready for. We saw this same process happen under Burke with players like Kadri, Franson, and Reimer, and those guys look no worse off for it.

I certainly don't see this as some kind of portent that Baertschi and Backlund are on the trading block. To me that's just looking for things to worry about that aren't there. I expect the Flames brass are hoping to build on those players just as much as we are.

I'm not saying I agree with everything Hartley does but I don't think some of the panic is warranted just yet. Like I said, I'm more interested to see what happens with some of these veterans on expiring contracts once we start approaching the deadline.

Dion · 10-30-2013, 11:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Table 5

Jackmans "size" hasn't be beneficial in a game in 3 years.

Never said it was.

MrMastodonFarm · 10-30-2013, 11:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Table 5

There's never a valid reason to put in Jackman over Backlund. When exactly does Jackman do anything of value? It's not like the guy fights anymore, and he definitely doesn't push hard like he did his first year. The guy is a pylon out there.

I totally agree with this, if Backlund is struggling is probably isn't from lack of trying. Though I don't see this is a reason to go panicky and worry about going back into "win" mode.

nik- · 10-30-2013, 11:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by browna

Or would I.

Be really interesting to know the dynamic going on, now that it appears Burke said he is settling into his job this week. Is Hartley acting on behalf of Burke in sending theses "messages" , or is he trying to prove to Burke that he has control of the situation and of the dressing room? Maybe neither of the above, but either way, with a new boss going to be around more, and the season almost a month in, is Burke going to start making some moves and some better evaluations off and on the ice?

Well, I think it's pretty safe to bet that Colborne wouldn't be here if Burke wasn't, and he's been not good for the majority of his games. He's had a couple nice ones the last two, so we'll see what happens. Even with a good game tonight, there was zero finish. In my mind, if he had been held to the same Hartley standard that Sven is getting, he wouldn't have even gotten the opportunity to get the opportunity to play better.

Colborne seems to have the blessing of the higher ups because his on ice performance sure as hell didn't warrant more minutes. We'll see how long his play matches their view of him, two or three of 12 games to this point.