[PGT] Bolts 7 Flames 4. Flames blow a third-period lead and lose for the 6th straight game - Page 24 - Calgarypuck Forums - The Unofficial Calgary Flames Fan Community

colbym72 · 02-02-2018, 01:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

I don't blame you for being so concerned about Bennett's development, I"m worried too.

Everyone has to be at least a little concerned. He MIGHT get 30 points

SportsJunky · 02-02-2018, 01:20 PM

My problem with the posters that are saying Glen should have pulled Smith with the lead is that it's easy to say with hindsight. I was in the GT last night and I don't remember people calling for GG to pull Smith while Calgary had the lead. Apologies if I missed it but I don't remember seeing a demand to pull Smith at that moment.

Those who say "the results of the game back up my opinion" are saying that in retrospect. That's not hard to do.

The Boy Wonder · 02-02-2018, 01:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by colbym72

Everyone has to be at least a little concerned. He MIGHT get 30 points

I mean GG isn't really giving him good chances to succeed... should've moved him up once frolik went down and 3rd line stopped producing. Likely would've been better than Brouwer upthere 4 of last 6

Flash Walken · 02-02-2018, 01:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SportsJunky

My problem with the posters that are saying Glen should have pulled Smith with the lead is that it's easy to say with hindsight. I was in the GT last night and I don't remember people calling for GG to pull Smith while Calgary had the lead. Apologies if I missed it but I don't remember seeing a demand to pull Smith at that moment.

Those who say "the results of the game back up my opinion" are saying that in retrospect. That's not hard to do.

when you 'predict' something that's already come to pass though you look extra smart.

Everyone knows that the secret to pulling a goalie is when you are still in the lead in the game.

Roof-Daddy · 02-02-2018, 02:12 PM

Good lord imagine what the anti-GG posters would say if he pulled Smith while the Flames still had the lead and Rittich came in cold and let a couple softies in on the way to a loss.

Hoo-boy the mob would be even more riled up than usual.

The Cobra · 02-02-2018, 02:27 PM

IMO, Smith should never have started the game.

And the results clearly back up my opinion.

So there.

monkeyman · 02-02-2018, 02:38 PM

I think GG needs to do a Costanza. Just think about what his instinct is telling him to do and then do the exact opposite.

cannon7 · 02-02-2018, 02:40 PM

Something the Lightning did that the Flames did not that doesn't show up in fancy stats: getting a ton of bodies in front of the net when a shot comes in from the point/perimeter. Actually I take that back, the Flames are good at this, but only in front of their own net. At least three of the Lightning goals were a result of Smith being screened, by his own team.

Bingo · 02-02-2018, 02:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by zamler

Nothing complicated at all, about the easiest and simple call Gulutzan should have made. You don't think the results of the game back that up?

Do you honestly think you have a laboratory that can prove that cause and effect to that detail?

Path A : Calls time out = what? Win? Less of a loss?
Path B : Doesn't call time out = 7-4 loss

Head shaking ...

Bingo · 02-02-2018, 02:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Igottago

Do you think a boxer who throws a lot of in close punches but often gets knocked out is a good fighter?

That isn't a great comparison ... either is the one about hitting on chicks a page back.

Teams that get more shots from the slot than their opposition tend to win hockey games.

This isn't a big reach people ...

Bingo · 02-02-2018, 02:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hot_Flatus

I would question your own take on the situation if I was you.

You certainly pull your goalie when 3 of 4 goals against him have been horrendous, 1 minute into the third period with an eggshell fragile team on the verge of their 6th straight epic collapse. What difference does it make if it's your number 1 or number 4 goalie? Doing nothing whatsoever is most definitely the coaches fault, he is there to make decisions like this.

Gulutzan's presence behind the bench last night was that of someone watching a bunch of kids electrocute themselves in a pool only to after put his hands in the air and claim "I didn't do anything...."

Seriously?

Work horse
Leader
Most intense guy on the team

And you pull him after a sketchy goal and you think this does zero damage to the team.

And this from a group that would have flamebroiled Gulutzan if he did just that and Rittich got lit up in the third.

oldschoolcalgary · 02-02-2018, 03:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SportsJunky

My problem with the posters that are saying Glen should have pulled Smith with the lead is that it's easy to say with hindsight. I was in the GT last night and I don't remember people calling for GG to pull Smith while Calgary had the lead. Apologies if I missed it but I don't remember seeing a demand to pull Smith at that moment.

Those who say "the results of the game back up my opinion" are saying that in retrospect. That's not hard to do.

interestingly, the person who said it best was Kelly Hrudey, just after the tying goal...

he noticed the way that Smith was looking at the bench, saying that when a veteran goalie is looking at the bench that way, after that kind of goal, its because he is expecting to get pulled.

just a few minutes later, TB scored to get the lead and it was effectively game over

Igottago · 02-02-2018, 03:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bingo

That isn't a great comparison ... either is the one about hitting on chicks a page back.

Teams that get more shots from the slot than their opposition tend to win hockey games.

This isn't a big reach people ...

Except for teams called the Flames? How do you just throw around the idea that they have been this dominant team for 3 months and ignore the actual standings?

SuperMatt18 · 02-02-2018, 03:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Igottago

Do you think a boxer who throws a lot of in close punches but often gets knocked out is a good fighter?

If he wins 11/12 rounds each fight then gets knocked out the the 12th he's still a good fighter...he just needs to fight smarter.

Bingo · 02-02-2018, 03:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Igottago

Except for teams called the Flames? How do you just throw around the idea that they have been this dominant team for 3 months and ignore the actual standings?

When have I ever ignored the standings? Seriously man, when?

Igottago · 02-02-2018, 03:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bingo

When have I ever ignored the standings? Seriously man, when?

Didn't you just ignore them by saying teams doing what the Flames have been doing for 3 months win games? I'm not seeing the winning part of the equation -- at least not enough of it as evidence they've been playing great this entire time.

Bingo · 02-02-2018, 03:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Igottago

Didn't you just ignore them by saying teams doing what the Flames have been doing for 3 months win games? I'm not seeing the winning part of the equation -- at least not enough of it as evidence they've been playing great this entire time.

Oh man ...

So you would run a team based on the standings? You wouldn't look at how they're actually playing to determine where you think they might end up? That would be a great plan.

I hope you don't have keys to the building.

Stanley · 02-02-2018, 03:16 PM

I can understand the blame on GG's in-game management at times but good god how can you blame the coach for our goalies completely sh***ing the bed in the 3rd?? a handful of players (specifically wingers/D getting beat on the boards repeatedly) certainly didn't help either...

CliffFletcher · 02-02-2018, 03:16 PM

I don't get why we have to praise Hartley in order to criticize Gulutzan (and vice versa). It seem likely that neither will coach again in the NHL after their stint here.

Igottago · 02-02-2018, 03:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bingo

Oh man ...

So you would run a team based on the standings? You wouldn't look at how they're actually playing to determine where you think they might end up? That would be a great plan.

I hope you don't have keys to the building.

What I'm saying is they haven't been playing as well as you think they are..which is why the standings reflect what they do. Otherwise logic would dictate they would be up there with Vegas instead of where they are.

If you think the trend of play has been so convincingly good, how long do you think it takes for it to yield high end results in the standings -- like challenging for a division, or a conference -- something that would indicate the potential for being a serious contender?