PGT: Rangers railroad Flames 4-1

[N-E-B]

Originally Posted by flames_fan13

Out of the 10 teams you've listed only 3 have had any type of playoff success (LA, Chicago and Pittsburgh). Washington and Tampa have been good regular season teams but haven't been able that extra push from their high first rounders to get a cup. Edmonton hasn't even had a playoff game in 10 years. The Panthers have only made the playoffs twice in five years. A number of high draft picks helps teams win but it's not the reason teams become contenders. Pittsburgh, Los Angeles, and Chicago provided veteran support with their young stars to win the cup.

You need a good mix between youth and veterans to become a successful team not just high picks. And I think Treliving has done good in getting character veterans to mix with the team the past two off-seasons in Frolik and Brouwer. We need someone to play with Monahan and Gaudreau line and another winger for Bennett-Brouwer's line. Those are supposedly our top two lines but have 2 glaring holes in them. Unfortunately we don't have any players that can fit either of those positions until Tkachuk gets back. It might be worth trying him on Monahan and Gaudreau's line to see how things go when he gets healthy.

Tampa Bay was in the Stanley Cup finals two years ago...

And I don't really care about playoff success right now. You need regular season success to make the playoffs. Let's get that first, and then if we can become a perennial playoff team we can start worrying about playoff success.

[SOMBRI2]

I thought things would be better when we traded away Bourque... this is a new low.

Sent from my SM-N900W8 using Tapatalk

[GirlySports]

is Giordano this year's Girardi?

[The Fonz]

Originally Posted by GirlySports

is Giordano this year's Girardi?

Perhaps you could elaborate on that.

[Samonadreau]

^ probably just refering to going from a 24 minute a night first pairing guy to an 18 minute 2nd pairing guy. Taking a step back.

[PugnaciousIntern]

If Hartley was at the helm, I'd be concerned that he might be. But with this coaching group, very few players actually look good, so I'm not writing anybody off until I see them play in something resembling a professional hockey system

[burn_this_city]

Was at the game, once the score was 2-0 I was under no illusion that the Flames would lose. NY passed like the harlem globetrotters at times and the Flames generated almost nothing.

[Patek23]

I think it's pretty obvious what has happened. A lot of the younger players, our budding stars did not jive well with the hard line take by Hartley. I'd guess Gaudreau and Monahan harboured hard feelings after the benching. After exit interviews a lot of players probably were negative on Hartleys ways. Hence his firing and us bringing in a "players" coach. Unfortunately this was the wrong move as you can't let the young guys feel in control and like they can't be held accountable. Until we have a coaching change I can't see this team playing anything remotely resembling a competitive game.

[killer_carlson]

Originally Posted by Flaming Homer

I think it's pretty obvious what has happened. A lot of the younger players, our budding stars did not jive well with the hard line take by Hartley. After exit interviews a lot of players probably were negative on Hartleys ways. Hence his firing and us bringing in a "players" coach. Unfortunately this was the wrong move as you can't let the young guys feel in control and like they can't be held accountable. Until we have a coaching change I can't see this team playing anything remotely resembling a competitive game.

So you mean guys like:

Gaudreau
Brodie
Hamilton
Monahan
Backlund

who all had career years under Hartley?

I'd guess Gaudreau and Monahan harboured hard feelings after the benching.

I guess those feelings must have been so hard that Gaudreau must have really hated attending Bob Hartley's hockey school summery camp as a guest coach this offeason, eh?

[GirlySports]

Originally Posted by The Fonz

Perhaps you could elaborate on that.

Girardi was blasted last year for making top pair money but playing like a 2nd pair guy.

[calgaryblood]

Originally Posted by GirlySports

Girardi was blasted last year for making top pair money but playing like a 2nd pair guy.

Girardi has been blasted way longer than one year.

[Patek23]

Originally Posted by killer_carlson

So you mean guys like:

Gaudreau
Brodie
Hamilton
Monahan
Backlund

who all had career years under Hartley?



I guess those feelings must have been so hard that Gaudreau must have really hated attending Bob Hartley's hockey school summery camp as a guest coach this offeason, eh?

So than you tell me the reasoning that Hartley was fired.


And my point had nothing to do with Hartley not being able to get results. If anything that's what I'm trying to say. I just feel the players didn't like how he was able to get them to achieve those results. And showing up for a hockey summer camp would have nothing to do with wether or not you wanted someone in a coaching role above you. You can have respect for a man but still not want to have to work for them.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by N-E-B

I admire the way Calgary has tried to rebuild. I think it's honourable. But maybe you have to be shameless for a few years. Look at all the good teams in the NHL right now.

Washington - Ovechkin (1st), Backstrom (4th)
Pittsburgh - Crosby (1st), Malkin (2nd), Fleury (1st)
Chicago - Kane (1st), Toews (3rd)
Edmonton - McDavid (1st), Nugent-Hopkins (1st), Draisaitl (3rd)
Los Angeles - Doughty (2nd)
Tampa Bay - Stamkos (1st), Hedman (2nd), Droun (3rd)
Montreal - Price (5th), Galchenyuk (3rd)
Florida - Barkov (2nd), Ekblad (1st), Huberdeau (3rd)

Even the Leafs look totally different than last year with Matthews. Colorado is a wildcard but they've had a few good years with MacKinnon and Duchene. Same with the Islanders with Tavares. The reality is you don't get franchise players drafting 6th overall every year. You get good pieces, but it never gets you over the hump. Maybe the Flames need a few shameless years.

This hockey is unacceptable. Something has to happen. I don't care if it's firing Treliving, firing Gulutzan, or if it's trading Giordano (which by the way I'd 100% trade him this year or next, what an awful contract).

I will not spend another dime on Calgary Flames merchandise until this mess is fixed. My family has season tickets so I'm fortunate enough to go to games. I will not spend another dime on food. It's time to start protesting with my wallet. If this team doesn't want to show up, I don't want to give them money.

If we're going to lose, let's at least play entertaining hockey. Do the Flames have any of those events lined up where you can ask Burke questions? I'd love to go. He promised me more entertaining hockey. Instead I'm seeing boring uninspired bullcrap. It took us a month to score a powerplay goal at home for Pete's sake. Time to give Glen "I spend more time on my hair than I do doing my job" Gulutzan and Dave "I'm a total train wreck everywhere I go" Cameron the Barry Melrose treatment.

I presume that your point is that, in order to have success, you have to tank to the bottom? That is a huge stretch at best, and totally ignores the teams that don't fit your narrative.

First of all, including Montreal on that list is flat out wrong, and LA is a stretch (one top 5 pick, which almost every team - including the Flames - have).

Then there is the fact that Edmonton and Florida have been doing it for a decade without success and the only reason that you have Edmonton on here is that they lucked into McDavid.

And what about the tankers that haven't had success (along with Edmonton and Florida) like Colorado, Ottawa, Carolina, Winnipeg, Arizona, Columbus and the Islanders?

Then there are the teams that have had success without tanking: NYR, Boston, Detroit (until very recently), SJ and St Louis. And I would argue LA and Montreal as well.

You're blatantly cherry-picking teams that fit your narrative when, in fact, there is really no correlation between tanking and winning, nor is there only one way to build a successful franchise.

[pylon]

Originally Posted by tfi racing

Post-game Glen Gulutzan: "We're fragile right now."

Ughh. I thought you were coaching NHL players,how have they now seemed to become special snowflakes.Get over it babies,Hillary lost,no more participant ribbons and popsicles for everyone,get to work or GTFO. Fat old white guys are now back in charge,time to bring back some good old time hockey-kick some ass and take some names instead of offering a hankie,some warm milk and a soothing embrace...

Personally I think a cry-in and some therapy animals would help.

[killer_carlson]

Originally Posted by Flaming Homer

So than you tell me the reasoning that Hartley was fired.


And my point had nothing to do with Hartley not being able to get results. If anything that's what I'm trying to say. I just feel the players didn't like how he was able to get them to achieve those results. And showing up for a hockey summer camp would have nothing to do with wether or not you wanted someone in a coaching role above you. You can have respect for a man but still not want to have to work for them.

i've said it a number of times - and got hammered for it - that the firing of Hartley was a scapegoat measure by the GM who was most responsible for the results last season. I say the GM was most responsible because he created the goalie situation and failed to do anything about it for the entire season.

[flamesfever]

Originally Posted by Flaming Homer

I think it's pretty obvious what has happened. A lot of the younger players, our budding stars did not jive well with the hard line take by Hartley. I'd guess Gaudreau and Monahan harboured hard feelings after the benching. After exit interviews a lot of players probably were negative on Hartleys ways. Hence his firing and us bringing in a "players" coach. Unfortunately this was the wrong move as you can't let the young guys feel in control and like they can't be held accountable. Until we have a coaching change I can't see this team playing anything remotely resembling a competitive game.

I can see your reasoning, but fail to see someone like Burke allowing younger players to dictate the choice of coach.

I've always had the feeling it may have had something to do with the "we never give up" mentality which, during their success in their final games, dropped their place in the draft. Although I don't believe it really hurt them.

One of the things I started to disrespect Hartley for, was him not insisting they keep Byron.

[ssjshmo]

Anyone going to Market Mall @2pm to vent at Gaudreau and Monahan?

[DazzlinDino]

Originally Posted by Flaming Homer

I think it's pretty obvious what has happened. A lot of the younger players, our budding stars did not jive well with the hard line take by Hartley. I'd guess Gaudreau and Monahan harboured hard feelings after the benching. After exit interviews a lot of players probably were negative on Hartleys ways. Hence his firing and us bringing in a "players" coach. Unfortunately this was the wrong move as you can't let the young guys feel in control and like they can't be held accountable. Until we have a coaching change I can't see this team playing anything remotely resembling a competitive game.

While all what your saying sounds reasonable it is still speculation, we don't know for sure what the issues were or who had them. My interpretation was that BT wanted a more possession style of play and Hartley didn't, couldn't or wouldn't adjust. Just doesn't jive well or seem like good practice for the GM to fire a coach based on individual players feelings.

[Timbo]

Originally Posted by ssjshmo

Anyone going to Market Mall @2pm to vent at Gaudreau and Monahan?

No it's neither the time or the place.

[Stay Golden]

The best thing about the Flames game was when we decided to watch the UFC card and McGregor make history. Gulutzan's team does not deserve our every minute attention.