Can we, for the love of all things holy, make major changes to our powerplay. Why GG is so against having a big shot from the point is beyond me. We are far too predictable when we rely on a cross crease or cross ice pass in the slot to generate chances.
Give Stone a run at being the big shot from the point and watch some magic happen.
Stone isn't the answer. Misses the net and gets blocked a ton. He takes a long time to wind up. And the Flames rarely try a cross crease pass. I wish they would but they aren't moving to get open for them.
The Following User Says Thank You to GioforPM For This Useful Post:
Look at the scoreless streaks for some of those Hawks. Check out Crosby in November. Monahan is pretty darn consistent production wise this year. The thing about his game yesterday was his engagement level in dogging the puck.
Yup, and that's exactly what I mean. I know from a scoring/production standpoint his numbers are consistent year over year, this year probably being his best. I just mean from watching him, yesterday he was every where, he looked faster and more aggressive. Just don't see that from him too often. I know the eye test isn't the best measuring stick but it was great to see that from him last night.
I assume the reasoning behind that statement is because the Flames can't beat them?
No, I think they actually believe they're a near-elite team, true contenders, but victims of a myriad of excuses. It's never the team with them, it's always something else. They're better, except for something that can't be helped, so next year watch out!
Such an entitled group of imbeciles - from the team management, to the players, to the media and fans. All of them.
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to the2bears For This Useful Post:
I don't get the Lazar hate. Sure he's lacked finish like a lot of players on this team but I actually am starting to like what I am seeing from him. He's not a finished product but his skating is a lot better than I realized. I don't think we are talking about a top 6 forward here but he looks like he has a chance to round into a solid bottom 6 guy. This is just a down year for the bottom six scoring goals this season and this can change from year to year or coach to coach.
Yeah I don't see a top six role for sure.
Third liner is his upside I guess, but that's fine if he reaches that.
His hands don't seem to be able to keep up to the game or his feet, and that may not change.
Lately though he's been a lot better in a fourth line role, and contributing to having the puck up the ice more than getting owned in his own zone.
And calling him soft is silly, he's ranked behind only Garnet Hathaway for hits per 60 minutes at 12.94 (Hathaway is 14.08).
Let's not forget that Lazar also KO'd a guy several games back.
Ya I can't remember who it was, but I recall it being someone with more of a reputation as a tougher guy with more fights under his belt. Might be faulty with the memory though.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by ResAlien
Let us not befoul this glorious day with talk of the anal gland drippings that are HERO charts.
Ya I can't remember who it was, but I recall it being someone with more of a reputation as a tougher guy with more fights under his belt. Might be faulty with the memory though.
Looks like Nathan Beaulieu, in the OT loss to Buffalo.
HockeyFights is your one-stop resource for anything fighting related in the NHL, it's great.
__________________
Until the Flames make the Western Finals again, this signature shall remain frozen.
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Gaskal For This Useful Post:
League will probably just leave it rather than defend the hight of the stick on the review
There's not really anything to defend. There's no way the puck could have entered the net at the angle it did if it had been hit with a stick that was above the crossbar.
__________________
Turn up the good, turn down the suck!
The Following User Says Thank You to getbak For This Useful Post:
I don't get the Lazar hate. Sure he's lacked finish like a lot of players on this team but I actually am starting to like what I am seeing from him. He's not a finished product but his skating is a lot better than I realized. I don't think we are talking about a top 6 forward here but he looks like he has a chance to round into a solid bottom 6 guy. This is just a down year for the bottom six scoring goals this season and this can change from year to year or coach to coach.
Yeah..the last guy that lacked finish had a tribute video made to his ineptitude on breakaways....an off-season later he was o n waivers....man would that guy look good on the 3rd or 4th line now. When it comes to younger players and confidence, the importance of patience cannot be overstated....ditto for Bennett.
__________________
Go Flames Go
The Following User Says Thank You to tkflames For This Useful Post:
Location: Wondering when # became hashtag and not a number sign.
Exp:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bingo
Yeah I don't see a top six role for sure.
Third liner is his upside I guess, but that's fine if he reaches that.
His hands don't seem to be able to keep up to the game or his feet, and that may not change.
Lately though he's been a lot better in a fourth line role, and contributing to having the puck up the ice more than getting owned in his own zone.
And calling him soft is silly, he's ranked behind only Garnet Hathaway for hits per 60 minutes at 12.94 (Hathaway is 14.08).
I really am not a fan of the guy.
I said it a couple weeks ago, the guy is really fast and................what else?
I do agree he has at least looked better of late and has even generated some decent opportunities, but beyond that it's a bit of a tire fire IMO. Maybe there is an upside still that hasn't been obvious, but you have to squint pretty hard to see it IMO.
But my biggest beef is with the bolded. Sure he may throw a hit here and there, though few are of any effectiveness. But he is so easily moved off the puck. A guy with his size and playing style simply should never be gently shouldered away in the corners and around loose pucks, and i have seen that since he was acquired last year. I certainly understand why Ottawa cut bait on him. He is very much a "soft" player in my eyes.
There's not really anything to defend. There's no way the puck could have entered the net at the angle it did if it had been hit with a stick that was above the crossbar.
After recovering from my IgyTang-induced stroke I was teaching last night so did not get a chance to see the game. I ended up watching the condensed game highlights on YouTube, which includes an eye-level view of the crossbar on the second goal @ 06:38. I watched them again this AM, and while I think the right call was made, I do not believe that the puck entered the goal on an upward trajectory as claimed by some.
This was a good goal by the slimmest of margins. It is difficult to see, but it looks to me like Gaudreau's stick contacts the puck right at the height of the crossbar, and redirects it by millimetres straight ahead into the net. But again, "contact" is probably a slight exaggeration for Gudreau's stick rather "grazing" the puck. On several viewings I think he likely tipped it, but even this is not entirely clear, and I can understand why the goal would remain credited to Stone.
__________________
Dealing with Everything from Dead Sea Scrolls to Red C Trolls
Quote:
Originally Posted by woob
"...harem warfare? like all your wives dressup and go paintballing?"
This was a good goal by the slimmest of margins. It is difficult to see, but it looks to me like Gaudreau's stick contacts the puck right at the height of the crossbar, and redirects it by millimetres straight ahead into the net. But again, "contact" is probably a slight exaggeration for Gudreau's stick rather "grazing" the puck. On several viewings I think he likely tipped it, but even this is not entirely clear, and I can understand why the goal would remain credited to Stone.
If you watch the condensed game and change the playback speed to 25%, it looks to me like it hits both Monahan and Gaudreau's stick on the way through.
I still say that there's no way the physics work where it could have hit Gaudreau's stick above the level of the crossbar and still entered the net the way it did. It didn't hit the crossbar on the way in and hit the netting behind the crossbar. Therefore, it had to hit his stick below the crossbar.
__________________
Turn up the good, turn down the suck!
