[PGT] Ne pas joyeux, 2-0 Canadiens

[direwolf]

Originally Posted by Bingo

Is that an NHL wide phenomenon though? Parity and a cap certainly levels the playing field, and maybe each fan base has to be less myopic in how they view their teams.

I think this has a lot to do with it. Even the crap teams can beat the deeper, more skilled teams if they put in a 60 minute effort. Flames had just won 5 straight before this, capped off by a highly emotional win against their biggest rivals. They were due for a let-down game, and this one happened to be it. Habs have been garbage lately and are trying to claw their way back to respectability. They just wanted it more, plain and simple.

The Flames know they laid an egg in this game, and I predict they'll be much better against the Leafs.

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by 868904

The rest of the Pacific playoff contenders are not falling off. Vegas is Vegas, a real good team. Coyotes have been consistently good for a good year now. Oilers and Canucks are not falling off like past years.



With how inconsistent the Flames have been this year, it’s a real possibility that they miss.

The other side of this observation is that none of the Pacific contenders have been consistently good either. Vegas may look like a real good team on paper, but their performance has completely mirrored Calgary's this year, and they are presently out of a playoff spot.

I agree with Bingo, though. Something feels off for this group. Perhaps the chaos surrounding Peters in November was a bigger hurdle for them to get past than we thought.

Sent from my SM-G920W8 using Tapatalk

[Toonage]

I think them believing they were a cup contender and then getting #### canned in April left a huge mental scar.

[868904]

Originally Posted by Steve Bozek

I suspect Gio and Iginla have/had similar approaches to being a captain. Sometimes the followers need more than a quiet demonstration of how to do it.

God bless Jarome Iginla, but i've always maintained that the true leader of the 2004 Flames was Darryl Sutter.

When things were bad, Darryl told them there was nothing to worry about and put them at ease, when things were good, Darryl made sure they didn't get over confident.

Iggy and Kipper led by example on the ice, but it was always Darryl who set the mood and guided the team mentally. That's what a great coach has to be, a beacon of stabilization. The players have to believe in that coach and trust him. That trust comes from how he treats them but also on experience.

Last year Peters got the team rolling and implemented an effective system, but when things went bad, he had no answers and you could see it in the players.

From what i've seen so far, I don't think Ward is that stabilizer that this team needs. The inconsistency is a sign of the leadership group (players and coaches) lacking stability.

[djsFlames]

Originally Posted by 868904

They may have won 5 in a row but they weren’t playing particularly well. This team still isn’t very good. It feels like the Second year of Gulutzan. Play poorly all year, get on a hot streak and makes everything look fine but then continue to be inconsistent and end up missing the playoffs.

The rest of the Pacific playoff contenders are not falling off. Vegas is Vegas, a real good team. Coyotes have been consistently good for a good year now. Oilers and Canucks are not falling off like past years.

With how inconsistent the Flames have been this year, it’s a real possibility that they miss.

Well aren't you just a ray of sunshine.

So coming off 1st in the west doesnt instill a little faith in their ability? Yet you place more faith in three teams that didn't even qualify last season as being a shoo in? Alright. I saw the first third of this season as them licking their wounds mentally from being shown up in a big way, while dealing with a coach that wasn't helping them feel better about themselves and their game, even possibly holding them down. Since Ward has stepped in they've inched closer to form. No it's not every night, but they're showing flashes of dominance and its trending in the right direction. 15-6-1 speaks for itself. And why apologize for having goalies that bailed you out a couple times? Good teams need that and get that too.

It's looking more cup half full than empty with Peters gone and they've had two lengthy streaks now, so the first wasn't just a one hit wonder.

Being the best team in the league in one goal contests also is highly encouraging I think.

[djsFlames]

But I will say that the leadership group needs to take a new approach or needs to be replaced with new guys, because time and time again we've seen a step drop off in play when the games have been against less relevant opponents, and part of being a good team is being more systematic in their output from night to night. Can't just get up for a specific handful of teams. And its not about playing incredible every game, but it's about not allowing full periods like that one in the 1st to happen without a response/pulse from the team. That's when the leaders have to step up.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by Bingo

Yeah I just don't like this team.

I don't feel that they play all that well even when they win (emotional games aside like Saturday). Something is just missing.

They have the skill to come back, and the skill to win some games that they shouldn't, but they just don't seem to have the mettle to bring consistent results game in and game out (realizing that no team can be "on" every evening).

Is that an NHL wide phenomenon though? Parity and a cap certainly levels the playing field, and maybe each fan base has to be less myopic in how they view their teams.

I agree. I wouldn't go as far as to say I don't like the team, but there is definitely something missing. For me, it's about being tough to play against - not big, or physical, or anything like that, just tough to play against: Good defensively, strong effort, strong on pucks, win board battles, go to the front of the net. Those kinds of things.

Parity is definitely a part of it. Pretty much every team struggles with consistency, because there is so little to choose between teams. Hell, I think most of us agreed that Vegas has one of the best work ethics in the league, on a nightly basis. And yet, they just canned their coach too - presumably over consistency issues.

I have always been a big supporter of the cap and of parity. But is there too much parity?

[Psytic]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

I agree. I wouldn't go as far as to say I don't like the team, but there is definitely something missing. For me, it's about being tough to play against - not big, or physical, or anything like that, just tough to play against: Good defensively, strong effort, strong on pucks, win board battles, go to the front of the net. Those kinds of things.

Parity is definitely a part of it. Pretty much every team struggles with consistency, because there is so little to choose between teams. Hell, I think most of us agreed that Vegas has one of the best work ethics in the league, on a nightly basis. And yet, they just canned their coach too - presumably over consistency issues.

I have always been a big supporter of the cap and of parity. But is there too much parity?

I hate parity. I know the Flames haven't really been much more than middle of the pack in 30 years and I still love them but I dont think the NHL should be pressing for everyone becoming ho hum like the Flames, Coyotes, Jets and Wild have been.

Outside of the Flames lunch pail teams my favourite seasons were when the Pens, Hawks, Bruins and Kings were all titans and the Canucks were the heels of the league. That was fun to watch. I know a lot of people will disagree but the narratives that come out of star packed "super teams" facing off is more exciting then everyone being "kind of sort of okay". The NBA has this down to a science.

[EldrickOnIce]

Originally Posted by Bingo

Yeah I just don't like this team.

I don't feel that they play all that well even when they win (emotional games aside like Saturday). Something is just missing.

They have the skill to come back, and the skill to win some games that they shouldn't, but they just don't seem to have the mettle to bring consistent results game in and game out (realizing that no team can be "on" every evening).

Is that an NHL wide phenomenon though? Parity and a cap certainly levels the playing field, and maybe each fan base has to be less myopic in how they view their teams.

Yeah. I don't like something... but I guess that's it. Almost every team's fans won't like some thing.

[SeanCharles]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

The other side of this observation is that none of the Pacific contenders have been consistently good either. Vegas may look like a real good team on paper, but their performance has completely mirrored Calgary's this year, and they are presently out of a playoff spot.

I agree with Bingo, though. Something feels off for this group. Perhaps the chaos surrounding Peters in November was a bigger hurdle for them to get past than we thought.

Sent from my SM-G920W8 using Tapatalk

That’s my biggest takeaway, in that there is one elite team in the West and they just win the Cup.

After them it’s a cluster of teams that are all missing pieces that hinder them from elevating to the top tier of the conference.

Last season proves we have pieces that can push us to that level but we need more depth to sustain it.

St. Louis got some gifts along the way that helped speed things up for them that hasn’t been the case for us (O’Reilly, Schenn).

How those two got had for negative value roster players, B prospects and picks is beyond me.

[djsFlames]

Originally Posted by SeanCharles

That’s my biggest takeaway, in that there is one elite team in the West and they just win the Cup.

After them it’s a cluster of teams that are all missing pieces that hinder them from elevating to the top tier of the conference.

Last season proves we have pieces that can push us to that level but we need more depth to sustain it.

St. Louis got some gifts along the way that helped speed things up for them that hasn’t been the case for us (O’Reilly, Schenn).

How those two got had for negative value roster players, B prospects and picks is beyond me.

That's why we have to jump on big time players, especially centers, like that when they become available. Can't let other western teams load up on guys like stone and ROR while you stand pat. Theyre big moves to make with some risk but sometimes you have to take it, particularly if you believe you're in a window. Glowing example of course being the Blues with two huge acquisitions up the middle that got them over the hump.

[Strange Brew]

Originally Posted by Bingo

Or skilled, not that mentally tough, and when the chips were down they just didn't have it in them to stick to their structure and play the game the way they did all year.

They panicked.

All relate back to skills that maybe these guys can still develop. Or maybe some different guys are needed.

[BigRed]

Originally Posted by djsFlames

Can't let other western teams load up on guys like stone and ROR while you stand pat.

If only we had a GM at some point willing to stick his neck out and shoot for ROR, whatever the cost ...

[SeanCharles]

Originally Posted by BigRed

If only we had a GM at some point willing to stick his neck out and shoot for ROR, whatever the cost ...

The league would have bailed Feaster out on that one me thinks.

[Roof-Daddy]

This team is missing two top 6 forwards and our D doesn't provide enough offense either. Gio is our only Dman on track to put up more than 30 points, and his 36 point pace is a far cry from the 74 he had last season. And at 36 years old I doubt he ever hits those heights again.

As long as Lindholm remains an actual legit option as a top 2 line C that should help, as top 6 wingers are easier to acquire than top 6 centers. I imagine having more top legit top 6 forwards will help the D with their point totals, but with Gio falling off does the D really have a true offensive driving guy anymore? Can Hanifin or Andersson or Kylington ever be that?

Treliving has his work cut out for him thats for sure.

[BigRed]

Hathaway. He was the special sauce. I'm serious. Get him back at all (reasonable) cost (like Jankowski or Bennett)

[djsFlames]

Originally Posted by Roof-Daddy

This team is missing two top 6 forwards and our D doesn't provide enough offense either. Gio is our only Dman on track to put up more than 30 points, and his 36 point pace is a far cry from the 74 he had last season. And at 36 years old I doubt he ever hits those heights again.

As long as Lindholm remains an actual legit option as a top 2 line C that should help, as top 6 wingers are easier to acquire than top 6 centers. I imagine having more top legit top 6 forwards will help the D with their point totals, but with Gio falling off does the D really have a true offensive driving guy anymore? Can Hanifin or Andersson or Kylington ever be that?

Treliving has his work cut out for him thats for sure.

I hope you realize even good, competitive teams don't have six top 6 caliber forwards typically. We have 4 very solid ones, and even that's more than a number of teams have.

The Flames essentially (since Ward's shuffle) have two pairings of highly skilled players, which is about on par with a lot of playoff caliber teams. Even the top teams also have this: a couple go-to pairings with a middle 6-third line type guy rounding out the line on the wing.

Thing is our two pairings have been inconsistent this year. Hence why it looks like we need more skilled guys of that caliber. We could use another top 6 player though, yes. It would help, especially a shooter. Which IMO is the type of player they need most.

What put the Flames into top 2 team in the league category last season was the defensive production though, much of it coming from Giordano.

If we picked up one second line type winger, and got more contributions from the defence, that's ideal. You don't need two, and most teams wouldn't be able to fit that many skilled guys under the cap and we're no exception.

The defensive production has dried up a bit and our pairings aren't firing at the same time frequently enough, and that's our issue. Some of the answers are in the room, a couple may be outside. But we just need one top 6 winger and a bit of elevation from the back end to get back to last season's territory.

Andersson has offensive tools that he hasn't quite honed at this level yet, which i think he can, and Brodie is capable of 40+ points, and has looked like that kind of guy since his return from the incident. Valimaki and Kylington have offensive upside, absolutely. It's going to take some patience to get there though.

[SeanCharles]

Originally Posted by Roof-Daddy

This team is missing two top 6 forwards and our D doesn't provide enough offense either. Gio is our only Dman on track to put up more than 30 points, and his 36 point pace is a far cry from the 74 he had last season. And at 36 years old I doubt he ever hits those heights again.

As long as Lindholm remains an actual legit option as a top 2 line C that should help, as top 6 wingers are easier to acquire than top 6 centers. I imagine having more top legit top 6 forwards will help the D with their point totals, but with Gio falling off does the D really have a true offensive driving guy anymore? Can Hanifin or Andersson or Kylington ever be that?

Treliving has his work cut out for him thats for sure.

I think our defence will be fine.

Hanifin, Andersson, Valimaki and Kylington all have offensive ability.

Our system just isn’t allowing our defence to get much offence going.

We need 2 more offensive forwards as you mention.

- we have 4 high end forwards
- we have good mobile defensemen
- we have 2 3rd line C’s
- we have a solid goaltending tandem


The problem is we have no top 6 Rwers and young guys like Mangiapane and Dube are still finding their game, Bennett too unfortunately.

We need to give Mangiapane and Dube time to grow into their roles and accept the fact that Backlund is best suited in the bottom 6 as well.

Bennett, Backlund, Mangiapane, Ryan, Lucic and Dube is a good bottom 6 IMO.

We just need a couple players who can push those guys down into those positions.

Signed,

Captain Obvious.

[dino7c]

defence would have more points if the forwards were finishing like last season...I feel like the puck is being moved up to them and they are failing

Another really good forward would make a massive difference though

Stone would be a Flame if he was willing to sign here IMO, hard to put that on the GM...Tre is in one of the toughest markets to GM. That being said Vegas lost in the first round and hasn't been great this season so how much did they improve? tough to say

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by SeanCharles

The league would have bailed Feaster out on that one me thinks.

It was the league that said it would have been offside. Daley, IIRC.