Mike Smith's... woes? He blows? Eating crows? Who knows! (Also David Rittich exists!)

[Inferno]

Originally Posted by David Struch

I'd imagine all those Mike Smith softies this season has damaged the team psyche but as to what extent who knows?

Yet they just recently won five straight with him in net. Trying to excuse their lack of offense on Thursday on Smith is grasping at straws.

[Duffalufagus]

Originally Posted by Inferno

Yet they just recently won five straight with him in net. Trying to excuse their lack of offense on Thursday on Smith is grasping at straws.

Ridiculous, really. Smith was good in that Arizona game. Gave the team every chance to win.

[TheScorpion]

Blaming Smith for the loss against the Coyotes is just willful ignorance. The Flames' biggest inhibitor right now is the fact that they just can't score for anything.

[The Cobra]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

I am an academic working in religion. My entire field comprises ambitious individuals who are convinced that everyone else doesn't know what they are doing and they are wrong about everything.

Ambitious individuals involved in religion?

Why knew there was such a thing LOL.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[VladtheImpaler]

Originally Posted by The Cobra

Ambitious individuals involved in religion?

Why knew there was such a thing LOL.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

One day we will say "Pope Leo XIV used to post on CP"...

[DeluxeMoustache]

Can’t miss the sig, but is there not always room for a humble brag in lieu of answering the question asked?

[Classic_Sniper]

Originally Posted by David Struch

I'd imagine all those Mike Smith softies this season has damaged the team psyche but as to what extent who knows?

I’m not sure it has necessarily damaged their psyche, but it’s definitely damaged the team in the standings. The team really needed to win that game or at least get a point vs Minnesota as the Sharks have no surpassed the Flames in the standings and are in the driver’s seat.

Also, all the points Mike Smith cost the Flames early in the season have caught up with the team. If the Flames had those extra points on San Jose right now, we wouldn’t be in a position of chasing right now. Las Vegas looks extremely poised for another cup run and the likelihood of them bouncing us out of the playoffs is a lot higher than if we played a Minnesota, Arizona or Colorado in round 1.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[The Boy Wonder]

Originally Posted by Classic_Sniper

I’m not sure it has necessarily damaged their psyche, but it’s definitely damaged the team in the standings. The team really needed to win that game or at least get a point vs Minnesota as the Sharks have no surpassed the Flames in the standings and are in the driver’s seat.

Also, all the points Mike Smith cost the Flames early in the season have caught up with the team. If the Flames had those extra points on San Jose right now, we wouldn’t be in a position of chasing right now. Las Vegas looks extremely poised for another cup run and the likelihood of them bouncing us out of the playoffs is a lot higher than if we played a Minnesota, Arizona or Colorado in round 1.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Definitely no worse than frolik blowing the season last year against Vegas

[powderjunkie]

The last team to win the Stanley Cup without a few years of immediate playoff experience were the Carolina Hurricanes (fair to say that was a bit of an unusual year to begin with). The Blackhawks only had one year of playoffs before their first cup, but they won 2 rounds that year.

Before that, it was the '94 New York Rangers, who missed in '93, but had won 2 rds in the prior 4 seasons (they'd actually made playoffs 13/14 years before '93, but of course fewer teams in the league)...

Flames have won 0 out of 4 playoff games in the past 3 seasons. Of course we want to go as far as we can, but it would have been essentially unprecedented for this team to actually win the Cup this year


Sometimes the skaters need to bail out the goalie. Sometimes the goalie needs to bail out the skaters. One or both of these will be lacking when this run ends, but barring a sweep/5 game loss in the first round, this season will be an unequivocal step in the right direction. We can bitch about goaltending if we want, but it's almost certainly not going to be the main thing that costs us a legit 'chance at the cup'.

[1qqaaz]

Originally Posted by powderjunkie

The last team to win the Stanley Cup without a few years of immediate playoff experience were the Carolina Hurricanes (fair to say that was a bit of an unusual year to begin with). The Blackhawks only had one year of playoffs before their first cup, but they won 2 rounds that year.

Before that, it was the '94 New York Rangers, who missed in '93, but had won 2 rds in the prior 4 seasons (they'd actually made playoffs 13/14 years before '93, but of course fewer teams in the league)...

Flames have won 0 out of 4 playoff games in the past 3 seasons. Of course we want to go as far as we can, but it would have been essentially unprecedented for this team to actually win the Cup this year


Sometimes the skaters need to bail out the goalie. Sometimes the goalie needs to bail out the skaters. One or both of these will be lacking when this run ends, but barring a sweep/5 game loss in the first round, this season will be an unequivocal step in the right direction. We can bitch about goaltending if we want, but it's almost certainly not going to be the main thing that costs us a legit 'chance at the cup'.

Except last time goaltending was the most direct cause that made the Flames go 0-4 against Anaheim.
If the Flames make it to the cup finals, I'm guessing Rittich will have become hot, and no one would be complaining.

Goaltending is just very important in the playoffs in general.
The only real difference for Nashville, between last year and the year before, was Rinne's goaltending.
Last year the Capitals got lucky that Holtby, despite having a mediocre season, suddenly became hot in the playoffs.

Thomas and Quick basically won their teams cups.

The upgrade from Fleury to Murray was a huge factor in what won the Penguins 2 cups. Although Murray seems to have slowed down a bit since then.

I couldn't disagree with this post more. Whether the Flames are successful will depend on goaltending. I doubt they'll be scoring 5+ goals per game in the playoffs.

[DeluxeMoustache]

Originally Posted by powderjunkie

The last team to win the Stanley Cup without a few years of immediate playoff experience were the Carolina Hurricanes (fair to say that was a bit of an unusual year to begin with). The Blackhawks only had one year of playoffs before their first cup, but they won 2 rounds that year.

Before that, it was the '94 New York Rangers, who missed in '93, but had won 2 rds in the prior 4 seasons (they'd actually made playoffs 13/14 years before '93, but of course fewer teams in the league)...

Flames have won 0 out of 4 playoff games in the past 3 seasons. Of course we want to go as far as we can, but it would have been essentially unprecedented for this team to actually win the Cup this year


Sometimes the skaters need to bail out the goalie. Sometimes the goalie needs to bail out the skaters. One or both of these will be lacking when this run ends, but barring a sweep/5 game loss in the first round, this season will be an unequivocal step in the right direction. We can bitch about goaltending if we want, but it's almost certainly not going to be the main thing that costs us a legit 'chance at the cup'.

*2004. It was in.

[powderjunkie]

Originally Posted by 1qqaaz

Except last time goaltending was the most direct cause that made the Flames go 0-4 against Anaheim.
If the Flames make it to the cup finals, I'm guessing Rittich will have become hot, and no one would be complaining.

Goaltending is just very important in the playoffs in general.
The only real difference for Nashville, between last year and the year before, was Rinne's goaltending.
Last year the Capitals got lucky that Holtby, despite having a mediocre season, suddenly became hot in the playoffs.

Thomas and Quick basically won their teams cups.

The upgrade from Fleury to Murray was a huge factor in what won the Penguins 2 cups. Although Murray seems to have slowed down a bit since then.

I couldn't disagree with this post more. Whether the Flames are successful will depend on goaltending. I doubt they'll be scoring 5+ goals per game in the playoffs.

3-2, 3-2, 5-4 (OT), 3-1. Allowing 3+ gaa is obviously a problem, but so is scoring < 3 gpg. With average goaltending, the Flames are out in 5 or 6.


I'm not saying goaltending may not be the biggest reason the Flames are eliminated (at this point it's the most likely culprit), but even with above average goaltending, it is extremely unlikely that we would have gotten into a competitive SCF. It'll suck if we're out in 6 or 7 in the first round, but in the grand scheme, it's still a giant leap forward from where we expected to be by now. If we're out in 4 or 5, then it'll be clear that goaltending isn't the only issue.

Reality check: what would you have done differently for our goaltending situation? Crystal Ball hindsight would say sign Lehner and trade or bury Smith. That would have made zero sense to anybody last summer. Stan Bowman probably should have signed Lehner instead of spending twice as much on Ward. Other GM's thought Khudobin, Bernier, Mrazek, Hutton, Hutchinson, and Johnson were better options than Lehner, too.

I'm just not going to spend my summer irrationally blaming Mike Smith, Rittich, or Treliving for an outcome that makes a lot of sense and was essentially impossible to prevent.


The good news is that we are in a perfect position to hunt for a guy like Lehner or Mrazek of our own this summer. The bad news is that fixing goaltending is a crapshoot.

[The Boy Wonder]

Originally Posted by powderjunkie

3-2, 3-2, 5-4 (OT), 3-1. Allowing 3+ gaa is obviously a problem, but so is scoring < 3 gpg. With average goaltending, the Flames are out in 5 or 6.


I'm not saying goaltending may not be the biggest reason the Flames are eliminated (at this point it's the most likely culprit), but even with above average goaltending, it is extremely unlikely that we would have gotten into a competitive SCF. It'll suck if we're out in 6 or 7 in the first round, but in the grand scheme, it's still a giant leap forward from where we expected to be by now. If we're out in 4 or 5, then it'll be clear that goaltending isn't the only issue.

Reality check: what would you have done differently for our goaltending situation? Crystal Ball hindsight would say sign Lehner and trade or bury Smith. That would have made zero sense to anybody last summer. Stan Bowman probably should have signed Lehner instead of spending twice as much on Ward. Other GM's thought Khudobin, Bernier, Mrazek, Hutton, Hutchinson, and Johnson were better options than Lehner, too.

I'm just not going to spend my summer irrationally blaming Mike Smith, Rittich, or Treliving for an outcome that makes a lot of sense and was essentially impossible to prevent.


The good news is that we are in a perfect position to hunt for a guy like Lehner or Mrazek of our own this summer. The bad news is that fixing goaltending is a crapshoot.

I was saying this in the summer....

[1qqaaz]

Originally Posted by The Boy Wonder

I was saying this in the summer....

So was I. Old goalies just aren't long term options.
Always better to handle these things proactively rather than re-actively.

[powderjunkie]

Who did you want as a replacement?


I still don't think there was an obvious move to be made in the summer. You're planning to give more time to your young(ish) backup. On a young, rebuilding team who just changed a few big pieces, new coach, and whose veterans were Giordano, Frolik, and a couple new UFAs, it made all the sense in the world to keep a steady, older goaltender play out the last year of his deal. .916 and 2.65 gaa in the last season. Only Raanta had a better sv % among starting goalies on non-playoff teams.

Ward, Khudobin, Bernier, Mrazek, Hutton, Hutchinson, Chad Johnson, Halak, and Lehner. None of these guys seemed like significant upgrades on Smith in the summer, and only 2-3 of them really panned out.

Even if BT had targeted one of them, there's no guarantee they would have wanted to come here. All 9 of those guys signed with American teams on July 1 (Lehner was July 3). So, BT would have needed to trade Smith before July 1 (zero leverage with so many UFA goalies avail.) and risk being all alone when they turn the ugly lights on, or sign a guy, then try to trade Smith (zero leverage).

So, UFA was basically impossible. Who did you want to trade for?

[TheScorpion]

I know some wanted Grubauer (I was one of them) but he's been pretty bad for Colorado this year. 11-8-3 with a .901 SV%.

I'd take a long, hard look at Robin Lehner this summer, but I wonder if he'll want to stick with Mitch Korn.

[Cecil Terwilliger]

Can we hire Mitch KoRn?

Sigalet replacement, he has a good pedigree and it opens the door to numerous numetal references.

[TheScorpion]

Korn appears to be tied at the hip to Barry Trotz, à la Jacques Cloutier with Hartley. He's been coaching Trotz's teams since 1998.

[stone hands]

I wish i had the lack of ambivalence that many of you have towards who the goaltender is on a given night

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by powderjunkie

Who did you want as a replacement?


I still don't think there was an obvious move to be made in the summer. You're planning to give more time to your young(ish) backup. On a young, rebuilding team who just changed a few big pieces, new coach, and whose veterans were Giordano, Frolik, and a couple new UFAs, it made all the sense in the world to keep a steady, older goaltender play out the last year of his deal. .916 and 2.65 gaa in the last season. Only Raanta had a better sv % among starting goalies on non-playoff teams.

Ward, Khudobin, Bernier, Mrazek, Hutton, Hutchinson, Chad Johnson, Halak, and Lehner. None of these guys seemed like significant upgrades on Smith in the summer, and only 2-3 of them really panned out.

Even if BT had targeted one of them, there's no guarantee they would have wanted to come here. All 9 of those guys signed with American teams on July 1 (Lehner was July 3). So, BT would have needed to trade Smith before July 1 (zero leverage with so many UFA goalies avail.) and risk being all alone when they turn the ugly lights on, or sign a guy, then try to trade Smith (zero leverage).

So, UFA was basically impossible. Who did you want to trade for?

The other thing is that I'm not sure Treliving thought this was a contendership year. I think he figured on being a solid PO team but not a front runner, that the core needing another year to gel and for the young D to get going for a long PO run to be in the offing. Who could have predicted the play of Andersson and Valimaki/Kylington? So I think he figured on continuing to build and just using up the last year of Smith's contract (and perhaps having Gillies, Rittich and Parsons continue to percolate).