[PGT] Flames fall 3-0. Ducks lead series 2-0

[polak]

If the Ducks score first tomorrow I think it's over.

Crowd will instantly deflate and expect the worse, it'll get in their heads that it's happening again... Yeah no.

We NEED to score first tomorrow.

[Fire of the Phoenix]

Originally Posted by polak

If the Ducks score first tomorrow I think it's over.

Crowd will instantly deflate and expect the worse, it'll get in their heads that it's happening again... Yeah no.

We NEED to score first tomorrow.

Not the Flames from this year. 1-0 is nothing at home, even against the Ducks. I'm not counting them out unless the final buzzer goes and they are down 3-0 in the series.

[united]

Originally Posted by Fire of the Phoenix

There's two sets of odds (going down 2-0 as the lower seed vs higher seed). I don't have the data, but I'm sure that 87% is an average number between both scenarios. There must be a HUGE difference between dropping the first two at home vs dropping them on the road.

Losing the first two in Anaheim is not the end of the world for the Flames. It's hardly ideal, but it's too soon to write them off, they just need to win the games at the dome and it's a best of 3. At least we're not Montreal who dropped the first two at home. They are done like dinner.

It's all here: http://www.whowins.com/tables/up20.html

87.8% is for the team who wins the first two games at home.
84.9% in the average
75% is winning the first two games on the road.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by polak

If the Ducks score first tomorrow I think it's over.

Crowd will instantly deflate and expect the worse, it'll get in their heads that it's happening again... Yeah no.

We NEED to score first tomorrow.

I can only speak for 1 (well, 2 I guess) of the 19,289 in attendance tomorrow night, but the Ducks scoring first will not cause me to quit.

[jar_e]

Originally Posted by polak

If the Ducks score first tomorrow I think it's over.

Crowd will instantly deflate and expect the worse, it'll get in their heads that it's happening again... Yeah no.

We NEED to score first tomorrow.

I think a lot of the crowd in game 6 in round 1 expected the worst 10 minutes in when we were down 3-0.

Obviously ideal to score first but I wouldn't doubt the crowd team if the Ducks score first.

[polak]

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

I don't think so.

Look at Anaheim's core contributors, especially on the defense.

3 guys playing 20 minutes a night 23 years old or younger.

Individually, Brodie may be the best player of the 3, but they have 3 to Calgary's 1.

This series is exposing a lot of the weaknesses of this Flames roster. I don't want to sound doom and gloom, because I think Calgary has a puncher's chance to get to the conference final and beyond, but when you see that monster that is the Ducks team clogging up every passing lane and every inch along the boards, it is impressive and humbling.

Big high coming off the Vancouver win, but the Ducks are a real contender, not a pretender and it is showing.

I agree but that doesn't change what I said?

We need some help on D and some help on the offense. Offensively we only need maybe one bonafide top 6 winger to help give us two real scoring lines that are always a threat. On D we need significantly more help but if we can get a top 4 guy we would have a pretty decent looking defense while some of the guys on the farm mature and hopefully one or two of them can make the jump.

Not everyone we bring in is going to be a rookie that lights it up for us. We will need some help from players in their late 20's who can still be a part of this team for a long time. Those are the types of players we should be looking for.

I don't see what your strategy is? Hope we suck next year so we can pick a d-man early?

Realistically, there's a good chance that this core will keep us from picking in the top 10 for the foreseeable future.

[polak]

Originally Posted by jar_e

I think a lot of the crowd in game 6 in round 1 expected the worst 10 minutes in when we were down 3-0.

Obviously ideal to score first but I wouldn't doubt the crowd if the Ducks score first.

I was at the game and dome was pretty quiet until Ferland scored.

[jar_e]

Originally Posted by polak

I was at the game and dome was pretty quiet until Ferland scored.

That's exactly my point. Even with the crowd silenced, the team still found a way.

I misspoke though, I meant I wouldn't doubt the team if the Ducks scored first. My bad.

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by Cleveland Steam Whistle

Two things. One, people shouldn't need to "temper expectations" in a season when any playoff success........scratch that "the playoffs" were simply gravy to begin with.

Two, they showed they could compete for the last 40mins of hockey we saw.

We beat them twice this year on home ice as well. People should have some faith that the team is still in a battle, counting them out before they've even had a chance to hold serve in their own barn is silliness. People need to enjoy the ride instead of walking around like sad donkey's. This is likely the only year we will get to enjoy playoffs with no expectations so lets just have some faith and see what tomorrow brings. Next year, people are going to expect wins, so it's going to be unbearable enough then, why fast forward.

No expectations and no disappointment here. Still, what's wrong with expressing what you think will happen instead of what you want to happen? I don't see anyone ragging on the Flames or acting all bitter.

[Fire of the Phoenix]

Originally Posted by united

It's all here: http://www.whowins.com/tables/up20.html

87.8% is for the team who wins the first two games at home.
84.9% in the average
75% is winning the first two games on the road.

Clinked the link, website seems a little confusing... but it looks like you have it backwards. Why would the team winning on the road have worse odds? They would still have 3 home games to play and be up 2-0...

[Flash Walken]

Originally Posted by polak

I agree but that doesn't change what I said?

We need some help on D and some help on the offense. Offensively we only need maybe one bonafide top 6 winger to help give us two real scoring lines that are always a threat. On D we need significantly more help but if we can get a top 4 guy we would have a pretty decent looking defense while some of the guys on the farm mature and hopefully one or two of them can make the jump.

Not everyone we bring in is going to be a rookie that lights it up for us. We will need some help from players in their late 20's who can still be a part of this team for a long time. Those are the types of players we should be looking for.

I don't see what your strategy is? Hope we suck next year so we can pick a d-man early?

Realistically, there's a good chance that this core will keep us from picking in the top 10 for the foreseeable future.

Calgary needs at least 2 more top 6 wingers, they need another top 6 centre (if bennett becomes that guy then they need 3 top 6 wingers).

They need atleast one more top 4 dman, preferably 2. Need at least 1 more bottom pairing d-man, ideally 2.

Need 2 more bottom 6 wingers that can skate and hit.

Lots of needs on this club.

[Righteous1]

Originally Posted by AC

Can't say I'm surprised with the results in the first 2 games.

Would love to see us win at home, but wouldn't be disappointed in the team if they can't get it done after the season we've had.

The rest of the series is a win/win situation regardless IMO.

Haha I just wanted them to beat Vancouver, and if we lose we can stick it to them again with a higher draft pick.

[polak]

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

Calgary needs at least 2 more top 6 wingers, they need another top 6 centre (if bennett becomes that guy then they need 3 top 6 wingers).

They need atleast one more top 4 dman, preferably 2. Need at least 1 more bottom pairing d-man, ideally 2.

Need 2 more bottom 6 wingers that can skate and hit.

Lots of needs on this club.

Wow that's quite the shopping list you have there. Are there any teams that have that kind of depth currently?

So here is what you want:

Top 6:
Gaudreau, Monahan, Hudler, Bennett, + 2 players of equal caliber

Bottom 6:
Ferland, Bouma, Backlund and one of Colborne/Jones/Raymond + 2 more players of equal caliber

Top 4 Defense:
Giordano, Brodie and I guess maybe Russell? But probably 2 more players of Brodie caliber.

Bottom pairing:
2 players of Russells caliber?

That's quite a bit of holes you want to magically plug. I don't know where you're going to pull these players out of.

[TapeToTape]

Originally Posted by Fire of the Phoenix

Clinked the link, website seems a little confusing... but it looks like you have it backwards. Why would the team winning on the road have worse odds? They would still have 3 home games to play and be up 2-0...

It's not backwards. In the second round :

72-10 (.878) (Higher seed)
18-6 (.750) (Lower seed)

The higher seeds have just been able to come back far more often.

PS. Funny that in the conference finals it's better the other way around, but the sample size is probably too small. Overall better to be up 2-0 as the higher placed team.

55-6 (.902) (Higher seed)
18-1 (.947) (Lower seed)

[Fire of the Phoenix]

Originally Posted by TapeToTape

It's not backwards. In the second round :

72-10 (.878) (Higher seed)
18-6 (.750) (Lower seed)

The higher seeds have just been able to come back far more often.

PS. Funny that in the conference finals it's better the other way around, but the sample size is probably too small. Overall better to be up 2-0 as the higher placed team.

55-6 (.902) (Higher seed)
18-1 (.947) (Lower seed)

Some interesting numbers. I'm suprised home ice isn't more of an advantage. I guess it makes sense that the higher seeded team would come back more often, they are typically superior.

[hockey.modern]

If we lose with our chance of home ice tomorrow, we are screwed.

[Igster]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

I can only speak for 1 (well, 2 I guess) of the 19,289 in attendance tomorrow night, but the Ducks scoring first will not cause me to quit.

That's just polak thinking the crowd will be full of polaks.