[PGT] Flames lose 3-2 to San Jose

[Ashasx]

Originally Posted by IamNotKenKing

Watch the video if you haven’t, as it gives a better flow than just reading a quote. It was a specific answer to a specific question. And yes, at that point in the game, it is more important to not lose than it is to win. Again, at that point in the game.

I don't know what else to say besides I watched it, I read it, and I disagree. That is what GG literally said and that is what the Flames literally did.



The Flames didn't get a single scoring chance for the last 6:52 of the game, despite completely dominating possession prior, and being down a goal late. The turnover by Gaudreau which resulted in a goal (which he should have have forward support on, which refs should have called a penalty, which Smith should have saved), didn't even register as a scoring chance.

It is truly fine to disagree with each other. I think the Flames beat themselves tonight, and it's not because of what Gaudreau did. If GG thinks it right to single out this play, I think he's flat out wrong, but I'm not surprised that's how he views it.

[dino7c]

Originally Posted by IamNotKenKing

To continue your analogy: Not a prevent defence, but more run the ball, run the clock, and if you can bust one, great, but don’t throw into double coverage...

Exactly

[nemanja2306]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

I don't buy that at all unless you want players like Johnny to just dump the puck deep and sit back in the 3rd period and play for the tie. We all know fans hate it when teams play for a tie so I'm certainly not going to accept that as a basis to support Gulutzan calling out one player for a team loss. This wasn't a defenseman taking a risky pinch to try and create a rush. It was a forward at the middle of the ice trying to skate the puck up ice. There were two forwards and two defensemen between the puck and the net when he lost the puck and the resulting turnover should have never resulted in a goal in the first place so blaming him is just silly.

It's easier to blame a player for a turnover than yourself for your coaching failures.

For me, it's not about the play by Gaudreau and the comment from GG itself that bothers me, it's the fact that it seems to me that it is GG's motto - play not to lose and don't take ANY risks.

When you're consistently thinking about not making mistakes and playing it safe, you're going to make mistakes.

The guy is absolutely clueless when it comes to managing his players.

[IamNotKenKing]

Originally Posted by Ashasx

I don't know what else to say besides I watched it, I read it, and I disagree. That is what GG literally said and that is what the Flames literally did.



The Flames didn't get a single scoring chance for the last 6:52 of the game, despite completely dominating possession prior, and being down a goal late. The turnover by Gaudreau which resulted in a goal (which he should have have forward support on, which refs should have called a penalty, which Smith should have saved), didn't even register as a scoring chance.

It is truly fine to disagree with each other. I think the Flames beat themselves tonight, and it's not because of what Gaudreau did. If GG thinks it right to single out this play, I think he's flat out wrong, but I'm not surprised that's how he views it.

Thanks for that chart. I don’t disagree at all that the Flames generated no offence the last few minutes (apparently almost 7!), but interestingly enough, apparently the Sharks generated none for even longer (over 10!).

To me, that shows both teams playing safe once it gets close(ish) to OT, to ensure at least one point.

Still, Johnny has to be smarter than turning the puck over at our blue line late in a tie game. All of these points can be true at the same time.

[Calgary4LIfe]

I don't really see it as much of a bad play by Johnny. He does that 10x a game. I think Braun just played him really well and forced that turnover. Call it a penalty or not (borderline for me, but at that stage in the game I don't expect it getting called), Braun made an excellent play there and kept up with Gaudreau, anticipated Gaudreau's turn, and trapped Gaudreau.

I don't think Gaudreau was deserving of getting called out. He ran out of options I thought. Smith should have had it, but it also wasn't an ugly goal either. Puck was laying at his feet and the Flames were unable to clear.

Game over.

The Flames didn't lose because of the above. They lost because they weren't able to generate enough offence last night (especially on the PP), had a disinterested looking 2nd period, and seemed disinterested in pushing back to try and even it up after that. It was a defeated team. The Flames are often 'defeated' before the horn blows down by one, and I find that disappointing.

Too many defensive breakdowns for my liking, not enough offence being generated (especially by the backend - just watch how Nashville does it compared to the Flames) and a group of players that look rattled half the time they are playing. The PP needs fixing - and given that Brouwer is still a mainstay on it while being so offensively inept is bewildering at this point. Try something else.

[Huntingwhale]

Originally Posted by Robbob

I don't think you are giving the Sharks enough credit. They played a good road game.

Very few posters ever gives the opposing team credit. It's not just CP, but every fanbase when they analyse a win/loss almost always looks at what their team did right/wrong. Very few posts about the opposing team, who happen to be composed of human beings who are also the best in the world at this job.

The Sharks are a well coached, well structured team that year after year always seem to be in the mix. They played a smart road game and capitalized on their chances. I thought for a bit they looked like a team that missed having Marleau and his speed. But they more then make up for it with their depth.

Sharks have been a good team for 15+ years and they are easily the team I have always hoped for the Flames to emulate their success after.

[redforever]

Originally Posted by Tinordi

GG's system is used by half the coaches in the league. It's essentially the Babcockian way. The issue is not the system. It's the horses. Calgary and Toronto play much similar systems. Except Toronto has better, faster forwards and therefore play "exciting" hockey.

Treliving said before the season started that he was concerned about talent and scoring goals. Turns out he was right. He didn't say was that the system needs work.

So if we don't have the same horses, why are we trying to play the same system?

[Igottago]

Originally Posted by nemanja2306

It's easier to blame a player for a turnover than yourself for your coaching failures.

For me, it's not about the play by Gaudreau and the comment from GG itself that bothers me, it's the fact that it seems to me that it is GG's motto - play not to lose and don't take ANY risks.

When you're consistently thinking about not making mistakes and playing it safe, you're going to make mistakes.

The guy is absolutely clueless when it comes to managing his players.

This times 100. This is the wrong approach for sports and pretty much everything in life. As soon as you are playing not to lose you start losing out on the creativity that will get you to yield better results.

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by kukkudo

If you're talking about last nights game it was pretty even. You can out shoot out chance all day but at the end of the day its about the W.

I have to start writing this stuff down. Imagine the time I'll save when I can just check the standings to see how a team is performing and avoid looking deeper into anything.

Thanks man.

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

I don't buy that at all unless you want players like Johnny to just dump the puck deep and sit back in the 3rd period and play for the tie. We all know fans hate it when teams play for a tie so I'm certainly not going to accept that as a basis to support Gulutzan calling out one player for a team loss. This wasn't a defenseman taking a risky pinch to try and create a rush. It was a forward at the middle of the ice trying to skate the puck up ice. There were two forwards and two defensemen between the puck and the net when he lost the puck and the resulting turnover should have never resulted in a goal in the first place so blaming him is just silly.

That's not true.

Gaudreau was one of the deep forwards, he turned himself into the high forward by skating it back up the wall without support. Jankowski took his spot behind him as F2 as he should and the defensemen backed off as they should.

He was tripped. That sucks, but puck management says he has to keep that puck deep in that instance as a turnover is an odd man chance the other way with two minutes left.

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by nemanja2306

It's easier to blame a player for a turnover than yourself for your coaching failures.

For me, it's not about the play by Gaudreau and the comment from GG itself that bothers me, it's the fact that it seems to me that it is GG's motto - play not to lose and don't take ANY risks.

When you're consistently thinking about not making mistakes and playing it safe, you're going to make mistakes.

The guy is absolutely clueless when it comes to managing his players.

Man people are arriving at the silliest conclusions.

The Flames have some of the highest shot and scoring chance events BOTH WAYS of almost any team in the league. Nothing about their game is playing 50/50 or not taking risks.

You would have a better argument that they take too many.

[northcrunk]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

I don't buy that at all unless you want players like Johnny to just dump the puck deep and sit back in the 3rd period and play for the tie. We all know fans hate it when teams play for a tie so I'm certainly not going to accept that as a basis to support Gulutzan calling out one player for a team loss. This wasn't a defenseman taking a risky pinch to try and create a rush. It was a forward at the middle of the ice trying to skate the puck up ice. There were two forwards and two defensemen between the puck and the net when he lost the puck and the resulting turnover should have never resulted in a goal in the first place so blaming him is just silly.

That's my issue with his comments too. It just reeks of playing not to lose instead of playing to win. Calling him out in the media when there were other guys on the ice who could have stopped the goal is not going to go over well. It just shows he is getting desperate and we could see the last of him shortly.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by Tinordi

GG's system is used by half the coaches in the league. It's essentially the Babcockian way. The issue is not the system. It's the horses. Calgary and Toronto play much similar systems. Except Toronto has better, faster forwards and therefore play "exciting" hockey.

Treliving said before the season started that he was concerned about talent and scoring goals. Turns out he was right. He didn't say was that the system needs work.

Originally Posted by Tinordi

Yes but that's on the GM. He's hired a coach to play a system on a roster that can't handle it. Every piece in question is a decision by the GM. GG would have been clear in the interview process on the system he will employ and the players he needs to execute it.

It is completely valid to argue that having a system that doesn't fit the players is the GM's fault more than the coach's fault. But regardless of where you fall on that discussion, the answer is a new coach.

And 'essentially the Babcockian way' is a bit of a misnomer, because they defend differently. It also ignores player utilization, which is a huge part of coaching, regardless of the system.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by Ashasx

GG literally said he was playing for a tie (despite being the much better team in the 3rd). Obviously I'm being a little obtuse here for effect, but given what we know GG likes to see, I don't think I'm far off to say that GG wanted Gaudreau to get the puck deep.

No he did not say he was playing for a tie. He was saying that, with 3 minutes left, you have to play smart and you have to make sure that you at least get that tie.

[Tinordi]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

It is completely valid to argue that having a system that doesn't fit the players is the GM's fault more than the coach's fault. But regardless of where you fall on that discussion, the answer is a new coach.

And 'essentially the Babcockian way' is a bit of a misnomer, because they defend differently. It also ignores player utilization, which is a huge part of coaching, regardless of the system.

I actually think we should change the coach. I'm just pushing back on this insane narrative that GG is the root of all the Flames problems. Particularly this latest hernia which is that GG somehow cost the Flames the game because he criticized the player who coughed up the GWG because he was playing for the single point.

It's unhinged, demented whining.

[FlamesFanTrev]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

I don't buy that at all unless you want players like Johnny to just dump the puck deep and sit back in the 3rd period and play for the tie. We all know fans hate it when teams play for a tie so I'm certainly not going to accept that as a basis to support Gulutzan calling out one player for a team loss. This wasn't a defenseman taking a risky pinch to try and create a rush. It was a forward at the middle of the ice trying to skate the puck up ice. There were two forwards and two defensemen between the puck and the net when he lost the puck and the resulting turnover should have never resulted in a goal in the first place so blaming him is just silly.

Fans hate it when their team doesn't make the post season. Anybody that is incapable of keeping their eye on that prize in regards to tactics in the last two minutes of any one game is more of a spectator then a fan. These points matter. Anahiem is tied with us in points with 2 less wins because of 4 extra loser points. They have literally lost their way in to contending with the flames for a playoff spot. Can't let teams like this hang in the standings with you, they are too good and will eventually make you pay. A few one point games helps create some separation.

[Enoch Root]

All the usual frustrations aside, this was another game that was lost because of the PP>

Regarding Brouwer on the PP... sure, he screens the goalie, but he does little to nothing else with respect to gaining the zone and maintaining possession. He simply shouldn't be on it. Also, the team doesn't shoot from the point, so the screen is a pretty low priority most of the time.

Speaking of shots from the point. I have no doubt that Gulutzan has run the numbers, and the numbers probably do show that not many PP goals come from the point. However, the conclusion to not bother teeing up a gun there is the completely wrong conclusion. The way to build a better PP is to have as many weapons, and as many looks as possible. Their problem is that, with no threat of a high shot, the D can collapse low and take away the one play that they are looking for.

With respect to zone entries, one big problem IMO, is that Brodie NEVER threatens to enter the zone. Ever. So the D doesn't have to worry about it. It is going to be Johnny every time. So defend against his zone entry by double-teaming him. This is another problem with having a guy like Brouwer on the PP - he is simply not a threat at the blueline.

Too easy to defend.

But keep trying the same thing, over and over and over because... luck will change?

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by Tinordi

I actually think we should change the coach. I'm just pushing back on this insane narrative that GG is the root of all the Flames problems. Particularly this latest hernia which is that GG somehow cost the Flames the game because he criticized the player who coughed up the GWG because he was playing for the single point.

It's unhinged, demented whining.

Yeah, I absolutely agree with that.

[Ashasx]

Originally Posted by Tinordi

I actually think we should change the coach. I'm just pushing back on this insane narrative that GG is the root of all the Flames problems. Particularly this latest hernia which is that GG somehow cost the Flames the game because he criticized the player who coughed up the GWG because he was playing for the single point.

It's unhinged, demented whining.

That's really not why I'm upset with GG, even though I do think he's wrong to do it.

It's a lack of a killer instinct, playing afraid to lose as opposed to a desire to win. The Flames are a timid team that usually plays to the pace of whichever team they are playing and rarely dictate play short of a few individual glimpses of brilliance and the impact of score effects.

[GirlySports]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

Yeah, because that does any good whatsoever.

He's right on what he said, Johnny made two mistakes, one was the comeback and one was sweeping the puck to the middle of the ice, he should know better after all this time in the NHL, you don't put the puck to the middle of the ice blindly, especially when your not supported.

A penalty doesn't get called, bleating to the media about it does nothing, except maybe ensure that you get less calls from the officials.

Every one complains about GG being this un-emotional robot, but in this case he called out Johnny for what was not a selfish play, but a stupid play.

That can be done in private.