[PGT] Caps 4 Flames 3 OT loss

[ForeverFlameFan]

Originally Posted by buyakasha

How was Bennet today on the top line?? Didn't get a chance to watch the game ��

I think Bennett has been great all year. Gaudreau and Monahan together just has not been working out imo. It's mainly Monahan that has hit a wall. Gaudreau has put up points, but I can't say that he has been playing his best hockey.

[calgaryboy]

Much better effort than the game against the Pens of course. But......Still a lot, a loooot work to do. Hope it is the step in the right direction. Would like us to be more consistent. No need for a rollercoaster ride......

[heep223]

Originally Posted by buyakasha

How was Bennet today on the top line?? Didn't get a chance to watch the game ��

I didn’t think he looked very good. Still horrible at using his line mates and needs to work on his reads.

[3rd liner]

Should have won that one after an unfortunate 2-0 start. Caps were ripe for the picking as the game went on. If this didn’t happen right after the 9-1 debacle we’d be more happy. Will take the point. Strange reffing again, seem to be saying that a lot lately. Numerous stick infractions called, yet no call on Dowd hit from behind, knee to smith’s head and a couple other Cap interference calls (backstrom on Neal, Eller knee on harmonic). Take the positives and beat the hell out of Mathews-less TO on Monday.

[soulchoice]

Originally Posted by djsFlames

.920 from Smith and I'd wager the team is 8-3.

Although in fairness, he has only had a save percentage .920 or higher once in his NHL career.

[Itse]

Originally Posted by DropIt

CP is too enamoured with winning the Hamilton trade that everyone seems to excuse the defensive deficiencies. Sure, Smith hasn't been at his best, but the overall team defense is a far bigger concern for me than the individual in net.

This defense is a major problem outside of Gio and to a lesser extent Hamonic. Everyone else is a tire fire who may skate well but cant defend or clear a crease for ####.

Defense is the area of play most affected by coaching.

Under Hartley our D was at one point highly appreciated, to the point where acquiring Hamilton was called "almost not fair" by a rival GM. I think it's safe to say in retrospect it wasn't about the high quality of players really. Hartley was a competent coach. Not the greatest coach ever, but experienced and competent.

Gulutzan was flat out incompetent in creating a working defensive structure, and, Peters so far has looked almost as bad. The only difference seems to be that Peters can at least do the bare minimum basic head coach stuff like shuffle lines when needed, change things when they don't work, and call a time out.

When a coach always seems to have terrible goalies, it might not actually be simply about the goalies.
Carolina still has two bad goalies. McElhinney and Mrazek are both way under .900, but they manage to keep the GAAs at a decent level because their team defense isn't a poop show.

We suck defensively, and it's not because of lack of player material. We have the players for success.

But at this level, coaching makes a massive difference. Now, I'm not quite ready to give up on Peters because this is a very young season. Maybe he gets this thing together. I really hope he does.

But I can't help but wonder why are we rolling the dice on an unproven coach, when Darryl Sutter was available. His WORST stretch as a head coach was when he made the playoffs with the Sharks 4/4 times and won a round twice....makint that one "weak" stretch better than everything the Flames have done without Darryl since 1990.

[redforever]

It is beyond me why some still think that Smith will work his way into a groove with more ice time.

According to a normal bell curve, Smith would have peaked some time ago and he should now be in the declining and waning 15% of his career. Isn't that what his stats are showing?

On the other hand, Rittich should be starting to rise. Does he have the tool box to be a true #1 goalie? I don't know...the sample size is not large enough. All I know is Rittich has given the Flames a better chance at winning and he deserves more starts.

Team defense can be 50% attributed to the coach and his system. If we are going to play a faster, looser system, then expect more turnovers. With the right horses, that can be turned around...or the ststem can be tweaked to produce better team results.

[Itse]

Originally Posted by redforever

It is beyond me why some still think that Smith will work his way into a groove with more ice time.

According to a normal bell curve, Smith would have peaked some time ago and he should now be in the declining and waning 15% of his career. Isn't that what his stats are showing?

On the other hand, Rittich should be starting to rise. Does he have the tool box to be a true #1 goalie? I don't know...the sample size is not large enough. All I know is Rittich has given the Flames a better chance at winning and he deserves more starts.

Team defense can be 50% attributed to the coach and his system. If we are going to play a faster, looser system, then expect more turnovers. With the right horses, that can be turned around...or the ststem can be tweaked to produce better team results.

Pretty much this.

It's unlikely Smith will be quite this bad, but it's even more unlikely he'll bounce back to league average starter at this point.

Rittichs ability to handle starter duty is a total question mark, but we don't have to go there right now. Split the starts for now and see how things develop.

Besides, Rittich has earned his chance.

[Lanny_McDonald]

Originally Posted by Cali Panthers Fan

lol

OK, we get it, you hate Smith. It's just about the only thing you bother to post anymore. You seem so sure, but what happens if you're wrong?

What a stupid question. If I'm wrong, then Smith will become a great goaltender and the Flames will go on and become a juggernaut in the playoffs like you suggested. See, the problem is there is nothing to indicate that Mike Smith has that potential. One season in his career, from seven years ago, is all that has anyone believe Mike Smith can be a goaltender to lead a team anywhere.

And it isn't a matter of hating Smith. I just can't stand the mediocrity and the acceptance of being middle of the pack by this hockey team. This club never aims high and tries to bring in anything of proven value. It's always the same thing. Look for someone with potential, or a high performer from a ####ty team, and hope they can come in and perform better on this team. Mike Smith? Mediocre goaltender on ####ty teams. Were there better options available? Hell yes, but our GM went with the guy he knew. When it came to bringing in a coach, has Treliving bothered to look at guys who have some success and gravitas to their resume? Nope. He instead aims low and brings in guys that play a certain (failed) system from teams that were junk with these same coaches behind the bench. Why the hell was a coach with a winning pedigree not a target? Because this team doesn't shoot high, it just aims for middle of the pack. That is what I don't like.

[Cali Panthers Fan]

Originally Posted by New Era

What a stupid question. If I'm wrong, then Smith will become a great goaltender and the Flames will go on and become a juggernaut in the playoffs like you suggested. See, the problem is there is nothing to indicate that Mike Smith has that potential. One season in his career, from seven years ago, is all that has anyone believe Mike Smith can be a goaltender to lead a team anywhere.

And it isn't a matter of hating Smith. I just can't stand the mediocrity and the acceptance of being middle of the pack by this hockey team. This club never aims high and tries to bring in anything of proven value. It's always the same thing. Look for someone with potential, or a high performer from a ####ty team, and hope they can come in and perform better on this team. Mike Smith? Mediocre goaltender on ####ty teams. Were there better options available? Hell yes, but our GM went with the guy he knew. When it came to bringing in a coach, has Treliving bothered to look at guys who have some success and gravitas to their resume? Nope. He instead aims low and brings in guys that play a certain (failed) system from teams that were junk with these same coaches behind the bench. Why the hell was a coach with a winning pedigree not a target? Because this team doesn't shoot high, it just aims for middle of the pack. That is what I don't like.

Ok, so I'm just going to suggest this once. Improve your tone. It's unnecessary.

I meant, what happens to your certain rhetoric on this subject if Smith proves you wrong? Will you eat crow? No, because all you do is say things with 100% certainty and then fail to be accountable when your statements are proven wrong, or not entirely true.

I think at this point you assume far too much about how Treliving operates, and it blinds you to the reality of the situation. He is all about asset management, and while I agree that he hasn't adequately addressed goaltending to date, I think his plan is to create a deep and balanced team that doesn't overpay any one position. Maybe that's a fault to build a team that way. Time will tell. I think he's been banking on one of the goaltending prospects to emerge as a legitimate NHL starter and hasn't gone after the big fish on a long term deal because he doesn't want to block the path to the NHL for a cheaper option.

Also, if you are certain that he doesn't want to go for proven veteran options who have some gravitas to their career, then why did he sign James Neal?

[Shazam]

Originally Posted by Cali Panthers Fan

I meant, what happens to your certain rhetoric on this subject if Smith proves you wrong? Will you eat crow? No, because all you do is say things with 100% certainty and then fail to be accountable when your statements are proven wrong, or not entirely true.

Gee tough crowd. If he's wrong he should, what, be sent to Edmonton?

* shudder *

Perspective, man, perspective. It's a game. I don't blame New Era for being so cynical. Have you seen the Flames' teams?

[jayswin]

Bingo mentioned that New Era is the infamous poster Lanny MacDonald. If that's the case you won't get anything more than what you've seen for years in terms of tone.

[442scotty]

Flames played better but at the same time Washington didn’t bring their A game and they still won. The one thing I see, imho, when watching the flames is that their game always seems choppy and lacking chemistry. Maybe it’s all the new players with a new coach but this team has played like this for years with few exceptions. When you watch Winnipeg for one example there is a smoothness/flow to their game and they come at you in waves, same with Vegas, Colorado etc etc

[Shazam]

Originally Posted by jayswin

Bingo mentioned that New Era is the infamous poster Lanny MacDonald. If that's the case you won't get anything more than what you've seen for years in terms of tone.

I dunno, he doesn't seem nearly as patronizing as Lanny MacDonald was. He was bad at math, his points were mostly irrelevant.

[Geeoff]

I haven't really been standings watching but I just noticed that pretty much everyone in the Pacific Division is basically 0.500. So, maybe we're not out of it LOL

Like the Sharks are in 1st and they are 5-3-2.

[direwolf]

Originally Posted by Geeoff

I haven't really been standings watching but I just noticed that pretty much everyone in the Pacific Division is basically 0.500. So, maybe we're not out of it LOL

Like the Sharks are in 1st and they are 5-3-2.

Also, I just noticed the Ducks are currently on a 4 game losing streak, and the Kings have lost 6 straight. Of course it's still very early in the season, but are we perhaps finally seeing the end of California's reign?

[PlayfulGenius]

The team has looked brutal for 4 straight games ... true... but, on the other hand, every team will have 1-2-1 stretches throughout the season, so hopefully this isn’t too bad and they’ll right it quickly.

[Erick Estrada]

Originally Posted by direwolf

Also, I just noticed the Ducks are currently on a 4 game losing streak, and the Kings have lost 6 straight. Of course it's still very early in the season, but are we perhaps finally seeing the end of California's reign?

Probably a little early but all things considered the Kings and Ducks are on the edge of having too many of their best players being post apex. That said it's not like the Flames have taken advantage of their slow starts as once again a non-winning October from this constantly mediocre franchise.

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by PlayfulGenius

The team has looked brutal for 4 straight games ... true... but, on the other hand, every team will have 1-2-1 stretches throughout the season, so hopefully this isn’t too bad and they’ll right it quickly.

This is a quibbling point but do you actually think the Flames looked “brutal” yesterday? I thought they looked monumentally better than they did in the past three. Otherwise, you are right. Teams will hit rough patches, and that is what this past week looks like to me. It’s way too premature to be talking about how awful this team is, or to resign this season (after 11 games!) as a failure.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[jonkaupp]

Sounds like Smith is getting the start Monday. This team is run by sycophants