Hartley very impressed with Joe Colborne

[Flames Fan, Ph.D.]

Originally Posted by Cleveland Steam Whistle

I agree with most of what you post, with this key exception. I don't think the "reprecussions" are different for players. Coach seems to stick you up in the press box for everyone if he's not happy or feels you need to learn. That seems to be consistent, at least for the younger players.

What is clearly different IMO is "what" earns you that ticket to press box is clearly different for each rookie / bubble player. And as long as the coach or staff is clear with each player as to what they are looking for, then there should be no issue with that.

[strombad]

Originally Posted by Flames Fan, Ph.D.

I don't think it's unreasonable to point out that Colborne has been poor in some games but has yet to be benched. I watched him on the ice in the Minnesota game shift after shift and he was very disappointing. It doesn't need to be a distaste for some players and/or blatant favoritism, but I think it fair to say that the repercussions are different for different rookies / bubble players.

All of this with the obvious caveat that I'm not a coach and don't know what they're looking for.

This goes right along with what I was saying. There are different expectations of each player, but it's not personal, it's just hockey. Backlund should have much higher expectations to meet than Colborne, so if the two are playing similar then really, Backlund should see some repercussions of that.

Colborne is a third liner, even management said so, so why should it be acceptable for Backlund and Baertschi to play at the same level as Colborne? They need to be a step or two above at least.

[Street Pharmacist]

Originally Posted by strombad

They are both young players with not only a lot to learn, but a lot of unmet potential. This does not speak to personal distaste at all, but if you're into the conspiracy theory mumbo jumbo then go for it.

Backlund needs to be able to produce offence despite his linemates, and Baertschi needs to be putting in an effort above and beyond everyone else to prove he should be regarded above and beyond everyone else, it's simple stuff.

Plus, you'd notice that Backlund was rewarded last game by being thrown back on the first line with Cammi and (I think Hudler) and the 3 were lights out offensively, had an awesome game. It goes to show, if you work hard at something, Hartley will reward you. Colborne saw his minutes drop because his effort was questionable.

All young players are being treated equally, but the expectations of each of them are much different, as they should be. So enough of this victimising junk. You don't see those two complaining about personal vendettas, so no reason you need to be.

The absence of derision from the two rookies means nothing. If they felt that way and told the media, I'd be much more concerned about them telling the media.

I'm not against sitting a rookie or young player, but I'm certainly not the only one who can't figure out why. Bingo mentioned it in his write up, numerous media on twitter were dumbfounded and many knowledgeable fans on here were too.

Did Horak not just make some comment hinting at it?

[Travis Munroe]

Colborne should have sat in the press box following that Minnesota game.
Regarding TOI, take away the first 5 games of the season and his avg time on ice is WAYYY higher. If he is projected to be a solid 3 line C why is he being given so much more opportunity to shine

Don't get me wrong, I believe Colborne is a solid piece moving forward but I do sense favoritism and it was evident when he received his recent avg 18 minutes of ice following a poor game in Minnesota.

[moon]

Originally Posted by Realtor 1

Colborne should have sat in the press box following that Minnesota game.
Regarding TOI, take away the first 5 games of the season and his avg time on ice is WAYYY higher. If he is projected to be a solid 3 line C why is he being given so much more opportunity to shine

Don't get me wrong, I believe Colborne is a solid piece moving forward but I do sense favoritism and it was evident when he received his recent avg 18 minutes of ice following a poor game in Minnesota.

Take out Mikael Backlund's 5 lowest ice time games and his avg time on ice is WAYYY higher as well.

Not sure why we have to take out 5 games (especially when the season is 17 games in) to try and cook the books to make arguments. Colborne had 4-5 games where he had a high number of minutes why not take those games out since they are the out of place games?

[Cleveland Steam Whistle]

Originally Posted by Flames Fan, Ph.D.

Here is the dictionary definition of the word repeercussions:

an effect or result, often indirect or remote, of some event or action

Does that clear up your confusion? Your post claimed that coach has offers up different "results or effects" for different players. I'm pointing out that indeed he does not, he offers up the same "result or effect" for everyone. Case and point, Backlund and Sven both end up in the press box watching. The difference being what earned them that "result" was different. Backlund sits because he's not providing enough offence, Sven sits because they want him competing in all three zones. Same reprecussion, different customized trigger.

[Flames Fan, Ph.D.]

Originally Posted by Street Pharmacist

Did Horak not just make some comment hinting at it?

He felt the 4 minutes he got in his lone game this season (anaheim?) wasn't enough to show what he can do.

[Flames Fan, Ph.D.]

Originally Posted by Cleveland Steam Whistle

Here is the dictionary definition of the word repeercussions:

an effect or result, often indirect or remote, of some event or action

Does that clear up your confusion? Your post claimed that coach has offers up different "results or effects" for different players. I'm pointing out that indeed he does not, he offers up the same "result or effect" for everyone. Case and point, Backlund and Sven both end up in the press box watching. The difference being what earned them that "result" was different. Backlund sits because he's not providing enough offence, Sven sits because they want him competing in all three zones. Same reprecussion, different customized trigger.

I can't do it. You win.

[1stLand]

Originally Posted by Realtor 1

Colborne should have sat in the press box following that Minnesota game.
Regarding TOI, take away the first 5 games of the season and his avg time on ice is WAYYY higher. If he is projected to be a solid 3 line C why is he being given so much more opportunity to shine

Don't get me wrong, I believe Colborne is a solid piece moving forward but I do sense favoritism and it was evident when he received his recent avg 18 minutes of ice following a poor game in Minnesota.

Exactly. Colborne's minutes at the start of the year were very modest which is why his average minutes played is on par with Backlund and Sven.

He has 1 Goal and he isnt exactly racking up the assists either.

He is 23 years old. Older than Sven too. Not sure why everyone thinks he has all this potential. I think he is what he is. I hope he proves me wrong.

I think Hartley has definitely shown favoritism towards Colborne compared to Sven and to a lesser extent Backlund.

Just my opinion

I would rather have Colborne than Stajan though. This team does need to get younger.

[Travis Munroe]

Originally Posted by moon

Take out Mikael Backlund's 5 lowest ice time games and his avg time on ice is WAYYY higher as well.

Not sure why we have to take out 5 games (especially when the season is 17 games in) to try and cook the books to make arguments. Colborne had 4-5 games where he had a high number of minutes why not take those games out since they are the out of place games?

Simple - He missed camp so I consider his first 5 games to be more of a training camp as he knew little to nothing about the system.
I believe you are the one who cooked books taking out 5 games from Backs lowest ice time while I was taking away Joe's first 5 games.

[transplant99]

Originally Posted by Street Pharmacist

The absence of derision from the two rookies means nothing. If they felt that way and told the media, I'd be much more concerned about them telling the media.

I'm not against sitting a rookie or young player, but I'm certainly not the only one who can't figure out why. Bingo mentioned it in his write up, numerous media on twitter were dumbfounded and many knowledgeable fans on here were too.

Did Horak not just make some comment hinting at it?

OK...IF it is true...and it likely is...that Hartley plays certain guys over cetain other guys (the B&B VS Colborne thing notwithstanding) then you have to ask youself a simple question.

Why?

Why does Hartley do this if this is the case? If you believe that he is sitting some guys over others based on play, then there is little problem. If it appears otherwise then there has to be another reason. That's where we as non-insiders, have nothing but speculation to go by, even though there is a likely simple and easy answer. It means that the guys he is sitting are not doing what is asked in practice, or have attitudes that need a tweak etc...as that is where a LOT of the evaluation of who plays where and when is done. It only makes sense too.

Bob Hartley, like all coaches, has one job and one job only...try and win games. Thats the way it is that profession, regardless of the development angle teams like the Flames are on. Thats not to say that he cannot develop young guys WHILE trying to win, because it can be done...and i believe thats what we are seeing here in this city.

Self-preservation is a powerful motivation when it comes to a HC in any sport. So when he is sitting guys at times that make little sense to the fans, there are reasons beyond what we see/know. This thing is into what amounts to its first month of a very long process, and as such patience must be applied. Sitting a couple young guys a game here and there is very much a part of that...everyone just needs to relax.

[djsFlames]

Originally Posted by moon

Telling it like it is?

He paints a message board with 100's if not 1000's of posters with the same brush.

If I say one thing and MMF says another is CP bi-polar or is it two guys with different opinions?

He then insults the forum he posts at saying it is "brutal and crazy."

He then pats himself on the back for some sort of prediction about Colborne out working other guys. A. Patting yourself on the back like that is pathetic and b. who really cares about that stupid prediction anyways?

Finally ends of the post with the always great if you don't like it go somewhere else. Not lets have a debate or talk about it but just leave if you don't agree. Always a solid way to add to a message board which largely relies on debates, discussions and diagreements.

I don't know what the "typical CP response" BS means but if it means that when a person makes a crazy rant like that they will be met with equally inane posts pointing out how crazy/funny it was then I am glad that is the typical CP response.

Bro, I just don't really care that much. Whatever the circumstances of his post, I am sure he wasn't painting everyone with the same brush, but more likely the same bunch who tend to make some of these threads insufferable with their inability to allow opinions to be given and respected for what they are. Not everyone is here to get into big debates which usually end in personal pissing matches, despite neither side having any inside source or credibility to the issue because nobody here actually follows the team around day by day to actually proclaim any thing to be true or false . If the guy wants to feel like he was proven right about Colborne, then great. From what Hartley says, it sounds like he Has outworked some players on the team. So, big whoop.

[Karl]

Originally Posted by irrevocable

I'm sick of this bipolar fanbase. Thank you for the truth! This forum is absolutely brutal and crazy. I said Joe would start outworking ppl, I was right, he's doing what he's told.. if you don't like the point totals go cry on HF forums.. you punks.

NSFW!

[moon]

Originally Posted by Realtor 1

Simple - He missed camp so I consider his first 5 games to be more of a training camp as he knew little to nothing about the system.
I believe you are the one who cooked books taking out 5 games from Backs lowest ice time while I was taking away Joe's first 5 games.

So now that he missed camp his first 5 games don't count? Doesn't make much sense to me plus he still has played 3rd/4th line minutes for most of his time here so what's the problem?

The 5 games from Backlund are in a row when he was playing like crap so I consider those games more of a restart for him when he was trying to learn how not to suck. So no need to count them.

[Travis Munroe]

Originally Posted by moon

So now that he missed camp his first 5 games don't count? Doesn't make much sense to me plus he still has played 3rd/4th line minutes for most of his time here so what's the problem?

The 5 games from Backlund are in a row when he was playing like crap so I consider those games more of a restart for him when he was trying to learn how not to suck. So no need to count them.

Your fishing for anything possible right now.

- Majority of people would agree that Colborne's first 5 games were him learning what every other player got to learn during training camp. The ice time was a reflection of this.
- Most of his minutes are from 3rd/4th line? 3rd/4th line on this team is really 1C,4th with most of his lines being 1C

My point stands - taking out his first 5 games (very logical reason why) puts him around 18 minutes of ice a night. Fact is, he has not been a 18 min a night player.
Again, I do believe he has potential but I feel he is riding a less critical bus than some other players. Hartley has been very selective all year in who gets praised and who gets criticized. I remember numerous comments about how great Joey Mac was doing which we all know wasnt the case.
I do like him as the coach and perhaps he has a sense on who needs praise and who needs to be called out in order to succeed.

[1stLand]

RE: Joe Colborne

"I am really happy for you, and Imma let you finish, but Brett Sutter was the most curious Flames signing / callup of all time....All time!"

[moon]

Originally Posted by Realtor 1

Your fishing for anything possible right now.

- Majority of people would agree that Colborne's first 5 games were him learning what every other player got to learn during training camp. The ice time was a reflection of this.
- Most of his minutes are from 3rd/4th line? 3rd/4th line on this team is really 1C,4th with most of his lines being 1C

My point stands - taking out his first 5 games (very logical reason why) puts him around 18 minutes of ice a night. Fact is, he has not been a 18 min a night player.
Again, I do believe he has potential but I feel he is riding a less critical bus than some other players. Hartley has been very selective all year in who gets praised and who gets criticized. I remember numerous comments about how great Joey Mac was doing which we all know wasnt the case.
I do like him as the coach and perhaps he has a sense on who needs praise and who needs to be called out in order to succeed.

Taking out his first 5 games he has played 4 games out of 12 at more than 18 minutes with two of those 18:16 and 18:20 for an average of ~16:30 and that is cherry picking his first 5 games which is a stupid practice because the guy did have a training camp and was in fine shape but it is the way you want to try and spin your garbage argument. That includes a whopping 8 mins last game and a 4 game period (2 really) that skews the numbers.

He has had a short stint where he was rewarded for soild play in which he played bigger minutes and a majority of the season spent playing 8-12 minutes.

Even with your very cherry picked numbers he still is playing a reasonable amount of time and looks like his numbers are likely to go down now. You are focusing way too much on a 4 game stretch where he earned more ice time and ignoring what has actually happened over the majority of the season.

I hate Hartley as the coach but that doesn't mean I have to go looking for nothing reasons to get upset with him about just because the centers outside of Monahan have been disappointing and/or injured and Colborne took advantage of that to get some more playing time. That is what should happen on a team like this.

[FlameZilla]

Colborne, as a physical specimen, is a coach's dream. You can't teach size etc etc. The guy has done everything that has been asked of him, and that bar has been set fairly low. He's been asked to mould himself into a two-way 3rd line C. He's not expected to carry the team offensively. I personally think that he could have more offensive ability in him, as he demonstrates good hands & vision every so often, however he's not expected to yet.

Backlund, after being benched a couple of games ago, has improved his play. He looked great against the Avs when paired with Cammalleri. He keeps playing like that & he'll be fine.

Sven doesn't seem to be responding well to the adversity... yet. He's being asked to play more responsibly in all zones, but he's expected to create goals as well. It's not happening. He shouldn't get a pass at Colborne's expense.

[Cleveland Steam Whistle]

Originally Posted by Flames Fan, Ph.D.

I can't do it. You win.

Win what?

[Calgary4LIfe]

Some people are making valid point with regarding to the younger players being benched.

Who has really been benched lately? Baertschi, Backlund and Bouma. Colborne starts with a C, so it can not possibly be him! Ok, back to the serious business...

Summarize some points from this thread:

Hartley is trying to:
1) Force the youth on this team to work harder, plain and simple. Not allow them to get complacent and float out there at any time (much like what the Flames have been for years). The Flames in the last few years were able to regularly beat some top teams in the NHL, but they would have the most difficult problems against the hard-working teams - especially when you saw a young skilled team that worked hard like Chicago.

2) Teaching tool - sitting in the press-box for a game or two now and then is 'standard practice' amongst even blue-chip rookies around the NHL. Happens. It is part of growing into an NHL player, as much as fans don't agree with it.

3) What I haven't seen too much spoken of, is the competition. What did Hartley tell Backlund? "Monahan and Colborne are eating at your minutes. You have to earn them back." or something like that - too lazy to look up the exact quote, but it was something close to that. I really like Backlund, and feel his offensive potential has been a bit 'capped' by Brent's reinforcement of his system into Backlund. It has made Backlund into a wonderful defensive center, but he needs a bit of time to get that offensive game up now. With that being said, even Feaster said that the organization at this time views Backlund as a third line center. So, Backlund and Colborne are in direct competition for that 3rd line center, along with a few other players on the farm.

At the end of the day, I think Hartley is just trying to make the future core of this team 'hungry' for minutes, and get them used to skating as a team for a full 60 minutes. His practices are harder than most in the NHL as he preaches physical fitness (O'Brien said it was the hardest camp he has even been to, and Smid just said he was surprised at how hard Calgary practices). He is trying to build a team that skates hard for a full 60 minutes.

How do you do that?

Well, what about the vets that aren't putting that effort in? Who doesn't? Cammy seems to be going hard on every shift - moreso than Baertschi I would say. Stajan seems to be working hard all the time out there too. Most of the vets ARE doing it. Some aren't... and I will bet that the ones that aren't will eventually be moved out sometime this season.

Now this is a total reach on my part, but what happens when a kid like Baertschi or Backlund asks: "Well, why am I getting benched when some of the vets aren't pulling their weight with every minute you give them?". What does Hartley say? How does (or would, if that question has never arose) rationalize it to the young player? I think it is just common sense to the young player who wouldn't even ask to be honest, but it would probably be something like this: "We are in a rebuild, and those guys are here to just hold the fort. They are developed and were part of a losing culture. I am here to make sure that culture doesn't carry on in the future, so I have to be harder on you guys than on them, who will eventually be moved out and replaced by you."

Now, of course this is all speculation and easily refutable. But for the people that require a 'story' to link what they see happening on this team, it helps to perhaps see it a different way than pointing at Hartley and saying how horrible he is.

When it was announced that Hartley was the new coach, I hated it. I looked at him as one of those washed-up coaches who couldn't even hold down a job in the NHL and had to work in Europe even though he had a Stanley cup on his resume. I have also been on record as disliking Brent last year, disliking Keenan, and being indifferent to Playfair, but loving Darryl.

I think Hartley is the best coach this team has had since Darryl (and I know there will be people who disagree with me). Why do I think that?

Darryl was the very last coach that was able to make this team better than the sum of its' parts. Every other coach has failed to do so. I know Moon has made it clear he hates Hartley, but even Moon would find it difficult to refute that this team has been playing better than the sum of its' parts (especially when you factor in the shaky goaltending since he doesn't think Berra and Ramo are much to write home about, right Moon?). For the Flames to 'hang' with some pretty good teams right up until the last minute without giving up and rolling over and dying... well, that is Hartley.

So benching some players that I am sure we can all agree at this point are the 'core' pieces moving forward, isn't a bad thing to do at this stage when the message being sent is "you have to be better, and there are other guys out there that you are directly competing with that have been better than you. When you get back in the lineup, you have to be better than them or you will keep losing your minutes to those guys. Go and take your minutes back."

Look at the difference between Calgary and Edmonton on how they play, and tell me that isn't a world of difference. I can't wait until next Saturday - Edmonton is going to play us so hard, and I bet we end up out-skating them and out-working them, and out-scoring them. Flames are going to come out hard for that game, I would bet.

As for Colborne, if he doesn't work hard to win some minutes from Backlund et all, he will get benched a game or two as well. I bet Monahan gets benced a few times this season too. The only young guy that doesn't get benched (unless his play turns 180 degrees for more than 3-4 games) is Brodie, as there isn't much there to compete with for a core moving forward.

I can't believe how disappointed I was when Hartley was announced the new coach of the Flames, how last season I was a bit 'won-over' by him in some ways, and how this season I am just thrilled that he is the guy in charge.