I'm becoming a fair weather Flames fan. Am I alone?

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

I think you hit the nail on the head. They are 5-5 and our expectations are so low that's considered a good start. An expansion team can start 7-1 yet the Flames seem incapable of ever having a truly good start to a season. That's frustrating and I'm not feeling too good about the fact that they are on pace to miss the playoffs. Now it's only 1/8 of the season but what if they don't go on the long winning streaks this season to balance out their .500 play?

But this fact (that Vegas is 7-1) doesn't give you pause about making early assumptions based on the mediocre start?

Talent usually wins out in the end, and there's nothing about this team that tells me they will do worse than last year. There's also nothing about the competition that tells me more teams in the conference will improve than those that will regress a bit. Leaving Calgary in a pretty good spot.

Calgary has virtually the same record as Anaheim, Minnesota and SJ. I see all of those teams making the POs. Calgary has a worse record right now than LA, Vegas and Vancouver, at least two of which are not PO bound (I suppose LA could make it with spit and duct tape).

[Erick Estrada]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

But this fact (that Vegas is 7-1) doesn't give you pause about making early assumptions based on the mediocre start?

Talent usually wins out in the end, and there's nothing about this team that tells me they will do worse than last year. There's also nothing about the competition that tells me more teams in the conference will improve than those that will regress a bit. Leaving Calgary in a pretty good spot.

Calgary has virtually the same record as Anaheim, Minnesota and SJ. I see all of those teams making the POs. Calgary has a worse record right now than LA, Vegas and Vancouver, at least two of which are not PO bound (I suppose LA could make it with spit and duct tape).

I don't worry about other teams as I feel it's up to your team to taken care of business. Bubble teams overly focus on what other teams are doing. I'm not saying the Flames will miss the playoffs but my hopes was that this team could eventually elevate themselves above the Sharks, Blues, Sharks, etc but so far we have seen no indication of them being any better than last year's team that needed a couple of long winning streaks to make the playoffs.

[Hot_Flatus]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

I think you hit the nail on the head. They are 5-5 and our expectations are so low that's considered a good start. An expansion team can start 7-1 yet the Flames seem incapable of ever having a truly good start to a season. That's frustrating and I'm not feeling too good about the fact that they are on pace to miss the playoffs. Now it's only 1/8 of the season but what if they don't go on the long winning streaks this season to balance out their .500 play?

Nobody plays .600 hockey for the entire season, there are so many ups and downs. I'd be more concerned if the team was winning heaps of games on the back of an unsustainable 30% PP then being .500 after 10 games with mediocre special teams. In April if this is considered to be one of the low points, this Flames team will be one of the conference heavyweights this year. This team has shown an innate ability to gather steam the more it plays over the last 12 months. There is no reason to think they will not do the same thing again.

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

I don't worry about other teams as I feel it's up to your team to taken care of business. Bubble teams overly focus on what other teams are doing. I'm not saying the Flames will miss the playoffs but my hopes was that this team could eventually elevate themselves above the Sharks, Blues, Sharks, etc but so far we have seen no indication of them being any better than last year's team that needed a couple of long winning streaks to make the playoffs.

Good lord. I think this is the third or fourth obituary on the Flames season that I have seen from you in the past two days. You are a relatively level-headed long time poster here, and yet it sounds from this and a few other of your recent posts like the first 10 games of the season are your first with NHL hockey. I only know from the fact of your long-time membership here that you are aware the season is actually 82 games, and a team's record can never be reduced to 10-game microcosms. Surely you know as well as anyone that what has happened through this first sliver of the schedule is probably not a great indicator of how the entire year will unfold. The Vancouver Canucks just beat the Washington Capitals for god's sake!

The good news here for you and everyone else who is distraught by the Flames' 0.500 record is that there are 72 more games, and I can absolutely guarantee that there will be stretches in this time in which the Flames appear unbeatable. Of course, the bad news is that players and coaches are not machines; poor performances will still occur and losses will happen. My advice is to cheer up: celebrate the good, and don't let the bad stuff colour your outlook prematurely.

[the2bears]

In the interest of countering negativity, this thread is a great example:

https://forum.calgarypuck.com/showthread.php?t=164636

At the end of the day it's about friends, family, and people.

[Strange Brew]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

Good lord. I think this is the third or fourth obituary on the Flames season that I have seen from you in the past two days. You are a relatively level-headed long time poster here, and yet it sounds from this and a few other of your recent posts like the first 10 games of the season are your first with NHL hockey. I only know from the fact of your long-time membership here that you are aware the season is actually 82 games, and a team's record can never be reduced to 10-game microcosms. Surely you know as well as anyone that what has happened through this first sliver of the schedule is probably not a great indicator of how the entire year will unfold. The Vancouver Canucks just beat the Washington Capitals for god's sake!

The good news here for you and everyone else who is distraught by the Flames' 0.500 record is that there are 72 more games, and I can absolutely guarantee that there will be stretches in this time in which the Flames appear unbeatable. Of course, the bad news is that players and coaches are not machines; poor performances will still occur and losses will happen. My advice is to cheer up: celebrate the good, and don't let the bad stuff colour your outlook prematurely.

TC I don't see it as an obituary. I see a poster who is still looking for evidence that the Flames have improved beyond what their record has indicated (and not just this year's record). I haven't seen that yet either. Doesn't mean it's not coming but I see EE as a poster who watches every game looking for said improvement.

[robaur]

I watch almost every Tampa game. Kinda easy to watch when Stamkos/Kucherov are playing. The Flames don't have anyone in their stratosphere.

Watching penguins games with Crosby/Malkin are pretty much the same. Hell I bet Oilers fans have fun watching their games just cuz of McDavid.

The Flames just don't have a superstar of that calibre and that's why some people find it boring to watch or are becoming "fairweather" fans.

As much as it was about the Flames winning from 2004-2009, it was just as much about Iginla being one of the best players in the league and getting to watch him every night.

[bubbsy]

Originally Posted by robaur

I watch almost every Tampa game. Kinda easy to watch when Stamkos/Kucherov are playing. The Flames don't have anyone in their stratosphere.

Watching penguins games with Crosby/Malkin are pretty much the same. Hell I bet Oilers fans have fun watching their games just cuz of McDavid.

The Flames just don't have a superstar of that calibre and that's why some people find it boring to watch or are becoming "fairweather" fans.

As much as it was about the Flames winning from 2004-2009, it was just as much about Iginla being one of the best players in the league and getting to watch him every night.

the flames aren't built in that mold of roster though. They are built, at least the way i see it, as a team with
1) a strong defense that can get the puck back quick, and with the puck moving ability to quickly get the puck up the ice.

2) Not a top line or top 2 lines that have the highest skill level. But rather a team that in theory is 3 lines deep when it comes to scoring prowess and 2 way ability.

That's the way i see the team has been built. The problem is that the team actually hasn't shown the ability to defend, nor do they have depth beyond the first line or two.

If the design of a Cup contending team is to be able to ice a team with the Highest end talent at the top end of the roster, then i guess we need to just go rebuild again, because our "rebuilding years" of picking those guys are already over.

Not stating that there's anything wrong with your opinion. In fact, maybe that's part of the reason that the team isn't where many feel they should be now, or very soon. Perhaps we didn't land the (or enough) impact player(s) during the rebuild years to build around.

Maybe it's that realization that in the cyclical team building exercise that has become common place in the cap era of the NHL, you either draft yourself into a contender, or suffer X rebuilds and hope that eventually something pans out. the challenge is the rebuild cycle is what,
ph1: 2-3 years of trading away players & drafting,
ph2: 2-3 years till that talent hits the peak, and then,
ph3: 2-3 years till that talent has to sign up for their long term big contracts,
ph4: perhaps a few years to give that core a shot at the cup,
then repeat.

If you fail to draft enough home runs during ph1, you basically have to play it out till the cycle completes. It's a long ass time, like almost a decade.

maybe my bordering millenial ass (i'm 36, i strongly feel i fit just outside the definition) is too impatient for that type of gratification/satisfaction from my sports team haha

[Yrebmi]

Man I hate seeing this damnable thread constantly near the top of the viewing page.
If everyone was really so fairweather y'all would be absent and this damn thread would die already.

yes yes - the irony of posting here is not lost on me

[VladtheImpaler]

It's also a product of aging and getting some perspective. When I was in my 20's I knew everything about every player in the NHL and NFL, I had season tickets to the Stamps, I listened to BJ games on the radio, I read SI, THN, etc. Hell, I even knew what was going on in the NBA, and I hate basketball. Now, I have a life, so the Flames are well down the chart of things I care about, and the other sports have almost passed completely out of consciousness. Soccer (EPL, specifically, because of availability and superior production) is really the only sport I really watch now - when you have a very limited amount of time, you really have to triage, and while I am very interested in the Flames' trades, drafting, rumours, etc, I would much rather watch Chelsea play Watford. My only truly sustained hockey-watching is the draft - I watch every minute of that.

[Manhattanboy]

Originally Posted by robaur

I watch almost every Tampa game. Kinda easy to watch when Stamkos/Kucherov are playing. The Flames don't have anyone in their stratosphere.

Watching penguins games with Crosby/Malkin are pretty much the same. Hell I bet Oilers fans have fun watching their games just cuz of McDavid.

The Flames just don't have a superstar of that calibre and that's why some people find it boring to watch or are becoming "fairweather" fans.

As much as it was about the Flames winning from 2004-2009, it was just as much about Iginla being one of the best players in the league and getting to watch him every night.

I think many fans were hoping Gaudreau would rise to that level with his natural talent.

[Erick Estrada]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

Good lord. I think this is the third or fourth obituary on the Flames season that I have seen from you in the past two days. You are a relatively level-headed long time poster here, and yet it sounds from this and a few other of your recent posts like the first 10 games of the season are your first with NHL hockey. I only know from the fact of your long-time membership here that you are aware the season is actually 82 games, and a team's record can never be reduced to 10-game microcosms. Surely you know as well as anyone that what has happened through this first sliver of the schedule is probably not a great indicator of how the entire year will unfold. The Vancouver Canucks just beat the Washington Capitals for god's sake!

The good news here for you and everyone else who is distraught by the Flames' 0.500 record is that there are 72 more games, and I can absolutely guarantee that there will be stretches in this time in which the Flames appear unbeatable. Of course, the bad news is that players and coaches are not machines; poor performances will still occur and losses will happen. My advice is to cheer up: celebrate the good, and don't let the bad stuff colour your outlook prematurely.

It's not an obituary. I haven't concluded in my mind that they are going to miss the playoffs or that they can't win the division. I'm just disappointed that they are repeating a lot of the same mistakes as last season. Last season things started to click in January and the team was great over winter leading myself and many others to conclude that the slow start was due to a learning curve to a new system and head coach. That excuse doesn't hold water this season. The roster was improved on paper over last season's October roster but you can argue the record would be worse if Smith wasn't playing lights out. I'm just getting a little impatient that's all.

[VladtheImpaler]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

It's not an obituary. I haven't concluded in my mind that they are going to miss the playoffs or that they can't win the division. I'm just disappointed that they are repeating a lot of the same mistakes as last season. Last season things started to click in January and the team was great over winter leading myself and many others to conclude that the slow start was due to a learning curve to a new system and head coach. That excuse doesn't hold water this season. The roster was improved on paper over last season's October roster but you can argue the record would be worse if Smith wasn't playing lights out. I'm just getting a little impatient that's all.

Yeah, last year the excuse was "learning new system". That should not be an issue this year. In fact, it would seem the team is actually playing much worse this year, given the almost identical record, but factoring in that this year we have had the best goaltending in 10 years, while last year... you know. Early, of course, but it's also the scars of having been a fan of a team that over decades rarely fails to disappoint...

[ForeverFlameFan]

The thread was created around the same time as the mediocre/sucky start to the season last season, so bringing up this thread yet again is a bit premature imo. We need to see how the team is by the end of the year to really evaluate where they're at.

[Manhattanboy]

Originally Posted by ForeverFlameFan

The thread was created around the same time as the mediocre/sucky start to the season last season, so bringing up this thread yet again is a bit premature imo. We need to see how the team is by the end of the year to really evaluate where they're at.

Isn't there something to the effect that by US Thanksgiving most teams know where they stand?

[the2bears]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

It's not an obituary. I haven't concluded in my mind that they are going to miss the playoffs or that they can't win the division. I'm just disappointed that they are repeating a lot of the same mistakes as last season. Last season things started to click in January and the team was great over winter leading myself and many others to conclude that the slow start was due to a learning curve to a new system and head coach. That excuse doesn't hold water this season. The roster was improved on paper over last season's October roster but you can argue the record would be worse if Smith wasn't playing lights out. I'm just getting a little impatient that's all.

But why would you want to argue that? Smith is one of the improvements you just mentioned. It seems a dead-end to imagine what might be under different circumstances. The Flames look to me improved, slightly in the standings and a little more in the eye test.

[Hemi-Cuda]

Originally Posted by the2bears

But why would you want to argue that? Smith is one of the improvements you just mentioned. It seems a dead-end to imagine what might be under different circumstances. The Flames look to me improved, slightly in the standings and a little more in the eye test.

That's like saying the Flames are a much older team than last year simply because Jagr is in the lineup, averaging things out helps to hide the actual numbers. Yes goaltending is leagues better than it was to start last year, but that's hiding the fact that the defense is allowing more shots against per game (339) than last year after 10 games (300). And the offense is worse too, 5 fewer goals scored over the first 10 games this year than last

Smith is the only area where this team is better than last year's, how much longer will he be able to carry the team on his back?

[the2bears]

Originally Posted by Hemi-Cuda

That's like saying the Flames are a much older team than last year simply because Jagr is in the lineup, averaging things out helps to hide the actual numbers. Yes goaltending is leagues better than it was to start last year, but that's hiding the fact that the defense is allowing more shots against per game (339) than last year after 10 games (300). And the offense is worse too, 5 fewer goals scored over the first 10 games this year than last

Smith is the only area where this team is better than last year's, how much longer will he be able to carry the team on his back?

The shots per game argument I don't see. Could be statistical noise, could be due to increased shot counts (there was talk about this earlier in the season).

Given that, it's not the same as raising the average age with Jagr. I've already said I think the Flames are improved by the eye test, so I disagree that Smith is the sole reason.

I do agree that he's relied on more than is comfortable and I don't see his numbers staying as high as they are.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by Hot_Flatus

Nobody plays .600 hockey for the entire season, there are so many ups and downs. I'd be more concerned if the team was winning heaps of games on the back of an unsustainable 30% PP then being .500 after 10 games with mediocre special teams. In April if this is considered to be one of the low points, this Flames team will be one of the conference heavyweights this year. This team has shown an innate ability to gather steam the more it plays over the last 12 months. There is no reason to think they will not do the same thing again.

I agree with everything you said except that lots of teams can go over .600 for the year. Last year 11 teams did, and Calgary was .573 (this is off of points and not W/L because that's all NHL.com gives me).

ETA: Just going on W/L, 4 teams were over .600.

[drewtastic]

To add to my lengthy post from a few pages back (whilst also replying to comments about people pining for older eras), I would clarify that I agree with posters here who say that 80s era hockey was slow and clutchy/grabby. My nostalgia for that era rests solely with the passion displayed via the BOA. Never again will that intensity, ferocity and outright hatred be matched.

The truth about the game is that it IS better now, mainly because it’s faster and the players are more skilled (especially goalies). My frustration, however, is that its playing dimensions have not evolved along with these changes.

The game has become so “North/South” that zone-play and cycling dominate coaching and strategy(as many other posters have also mentioned). What makes hockey exciting is east/west play, puck movement and end to end rushes.

Perhaps if there had been someway the league could have mandated somewhat wider surfaces as new arenas were constructed in the 90s, we would have the benefits of faster players and more room. (Ironically, because it was built for the Olympics, the “crappy-old Saddledome” is likely the only NHL arena with the capacity to accommodate this).

This is simply a personal preference, nothing more. The game just seems so formulaic now, everything is analyzed to death, teams’ systems and styles are not that much different from one another, on average. Star performances are even more special now as a result-creativity is at a premium.

As I alluded to in my previous post, I think some of my tedium comes from the 82 game schedule. I think 70-75 games is about perfect, because games would matter so much more, right from the start. (The only reason early season games matter so much now is because of the loser-point, which is another turnoff about the league for me.)

Because the Flames exist, I have a team to follow, and I do find that fun still. But if they didn’t, I can’t say that I’d follow the league with more than a passing interest.