[PGT] Flames lose in OT: Season Over

[Roof-Daddy]

Originally Posted by Mr.Coffee

Use of the word “conspiracy” is an intentional descriptor to side step what is obvious to pretty much everyone except those uncomfortable with certain obvious reality. The league wanted one team to advance and not the other team. It’s clear as day actually and to head in the sands this one and pretend there something isn’t at play here is as equally stupid as those claiming there is bias against the Flames.

If you watch those videos of the other goals that counted and then the Coleman goal and come to different conclusions about what should or shouldn’t count you are a liar, full stop. Nothing differentiates the valid goals vs. the Coleman disallowed goal in fact if anything the Coleman goal is less obvious than the other ones. So to sit there and cat call fans as “conspiracy theorists” in a disallowed goal in one of the most intense biggest moments in the franchise in 31 years for the Battle of Alberta is stupidity of the highest order, sorry.

League’s rigged. For financial reasons it wanted McDavid and Mackinnon. Not really much to argue here honestly so your post comes across as that contrarian guy who’s being contrarian for the sake of being a contrarian or collecting likes because nobody wants to admit the product they’re watching is more like the WWE and sports cosplay than real authentic sports where teams are officiated equally. To be honest at this point the deniers that there’s an issue are almost more of the conspiracy theorists based in another reality than those that are calling out the league for the insanely obvious bias.

I did expect some fans to try and pretend there isn’t a problem though, there always are those folks that simply refuse to admit there is a problem when there is one because it’s a safe comfortable position that will inevitably collect a few likes.

Yeah, I'm not much of a tinfoil hat guy but it's obvious the league wanted McDavid vs Mackinnon.

League issues a warning saying they're watching closely to make sure the Flames aren't targeting poor little Draisaitl's ankle, meanwhile Draisaitl skates around hacking any player that comes within 10 feet of him. Guys like Hyman hammering on Tanev's injured shoulder with crosschecks nowhere near the play. Don't hear anything about that though.

Traditionally playoff hockey is rough, and refs put away the whistles and only call the obvious easy stuff, yet the whole series is a penalty parade with lots of 4 on 4 to make sure there is lots of room out there for McDavid to fly around, and the Flames struggle to get in a groove 5 on 5 when they were proven to be a much better 5 on 5 team over the course of an 82 game regular season.

Then that bull#### no-goal call at an absolute crucial moment.

Be careful Avs.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by KootenayFlamesFan

Columbus writer. Calling it like it is.

https://twitter.com/user/status/1530054366073348096

it's gone now - what did it say?

[DeluxeMoustache]

Originally Posted by combustiblefuel

For Mackinnon vs McDavid. The NHL as been billing the next round like a boxing fight between the 2 since Aves moved on. Edmonton vs Avalanche is in very small writing on any advertisement.

Undercard Kadri vs Kane

Two really likeable guys

[JohnnyB]

Originally Posted by Mr.Coffee

Correct but you delicately try to side step the obvious question. Why did they do this?

It's plausible to me that a bias towards the Oilers and their stars had an influence on the call. The idea of a conspiracy against the Flames is much less plausible. The reffing in the league generally is wildly inconsistent and unreliable. Maybe there's something more behind this being a terrible call, and I wouldn't be shocked by that being the case, but maybe not.

Either way, a conspiracy/bias isn't necessary to recognize that the officiating directly changed the outcome. People may debate the bias of the league and whether the call was a result of that, but nobody should debate whether or not that was a bad call that directly changed the outcome of a game and potentially the outcome of a series.

[Enoch Root]

Regarding the whole, Flames didn't deserve to win, the Oilers were better argument, I think there were two things that happened in the first two games that changed the series and ultimately led to the Oilers winning it:

1) Markstrom was horrific in game 1, which can destroy a team's confidence. if he had bounced back and been great in game 2, no problem. But he was bad again in game 2. Devastating for the team's confidence and a GIANT boost to the Oilers' confidence.

2) The officiating in game 2. Every time the Flames tried to play physically, they got a penalty. It changed the way they played, and they were never really physical again after that.

The Flames dominated game 1. And they dominated again early in game 2. The 21 penalty calls in game 2, along with Markstrom's play, changed the series and gave the Oilers confidence, while eroding the Fames' confidence.

Now, you have to overcome those tings. In game 3, they were bad. Ga5e 4 was better - not great, but a close game. By game 5, they had adjusted and were containing McDavid. They should have won game 5 and then who knows.

But even as poorly as they played, if Markstrom plays decently, they are probably up 3-2 in the series.

[Roof-Daddy]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

Regarding the whole, Flames didn't deserve to win, the Oilers were better argument, I think there were two things that happened in the first two games that changed the series and ultimately led to the Oilers winning it:

1) Markstrom was horrific in game 1, which can destroy a team's confidence. if he had bounced back and been great in game 2, no problem. But he was bad again in game 2. Devastating for the team's confidence and a GIANT boost to the Oilers' confidence.

2) The officiating in game 2. Every time the Flames tried to play physically, they got a penalty. It changed the way they played, and they were never really physical again after that.

The Flames dominated game 1. And they dominated again early in game 2. The 21 penalty calls in game 2, along with Markstrom's play, changed the series and gave the Oilers confidence, while eroding the Fames' confidence.

Now, you have to overcome those tings. In game 3, they were bad. Ga5e 4 was better - not great, but a close game. By game 5, they had adjusted and were containing McDavid. They should have won game 5 and then who knows.

But even as poorly as they played, if Markstrom plays decently, they are probably up 3-2 in the series.

My god is it frustrating to read this and know you are IMO 100% right.

The series should have gone 180° from the way it went.

Now we have to listen oiler fans blather on and on about it, not to mention the media which are mostly oiler fans anyways.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

The numbers show nothing about the save difficulty. How many 3 on 1s and breakaways? How many freak bounces to wide open guys at the side of the net?

Markstrom didn’t win the series or steal a game. But IMO he was still better than Mike Smith, who just wasn’t worked side to side at all.

Not even close.

At least half a dozen goals went through his glove. At least 2 went under his pad when it should have been on the ice. And he equaled Smith's game 1 mistake when he coughed it up in game 5.

We can debate how much of this loss should rest on his shoulders, but there is no reasonable argument that concludes he was better than Smith, or anywhere near close to it.

Markstrom wasn't good enough. Full stop. And when is the last time you saw a team win a playoff series when their goalie wasn't good enough?

[Iggy599]

I’ve been thinking how the officiating changed as the Oilers built the lead in the series and wondered if it would have been called differently had the Flames been the team ahead. The last 2 games they didn’t call as much. If the Oilers were down, I’m pretty confident there would have been way more calls. This is based on how I saw officiating favour the Oilers late in games or when they were behind in the regular season.

[Roof-Daddy]

It would have taken some major balls for Sutter to switch goalies after Markstrom laid another egg in game 2, but maybe the writing was on the wall?

Markstrom was owned by the oilers this regular season, so the evidence was there. Once it continued in the playoffs....?

Easy to say it hindsight, and maybe Vladar fares no better. Things to ponder though, after the fact.

[Roof-Daddy]

Originally Posted by Iggy599

I’ve been thinking how the officiating changed as the Oilers built the lead in the series and wondered if it would have been called differently had the Flames been the team ahead. The last 2 games they didn’t call as much. If the Oilers were down, I’m pretty confident there would have been way more calls. This is based on how I saw officiating favour the Oilers late in games or when they were behind in the regular season.

The refs clamped down early, it made the Flames alter their style of play, the one that made them cruise to a division title, and once they were off their game the refs lightened up.

You can bet your ass had the Flames won game 5 and got a lead in game 6, the penalty parade would have been back on.

Gotta get that McD vs Mack match up for prime time.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by Kovaz

There's no such thing as a perfectly accurate model. They're based on long-term averages and there's a lot of noise within each bucket. Over a long enough sample, you expect it to average out, but in short samples it's very easy to have more dangerous-than-average chances within each bucket.



McDavid's OT goal was only worth 0.03 expected goals, according to Moneypuck. So based on that, we could give up this shot 30 times and only expect 1 goal against.


I don't know about you, but if I had to be money on that I'd expect a lot more than 1 goal even if we had Dominik Hasek in net.

That picture is showing the opposite of what you want it to, IMO.

1) fairly far out for a wrist shot (medium distance)
2) rushed by the defender
3) therefor 100% certainty that he is going to shoot
4) therefore the goalie can come out to cut off the angle
5) no screen or traffic of any kind

NHL goalies are saving that almost every time, unless the shooter has a perfect, bar-down or post-and-in shot. And McDavid didn't even do that. He shot it at Markstrom's glove. Why? Because Markstrom struggled with his glove the entire series.

That shot is rarely a goal on an NHL goalie who is that set for the shot. He simply muffed it.

[Mathgod]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

2) The officiating in game 2. Every time the Flames tried to play physically, they got a penalty. It changed the way they played, and they were never really physical again after that.

A lot of the Flames' penalty trouble was their own doing, and wasn't simply a result of physical play. A lot of it was either being undisciplined with their sticks and ending up with high sticking penalties at bad times, or just plain being reckless and taking completely unnecessary pointless penalties... at bad times.

It's easy to point the finger at the refs, but a lot of the Flames' wounds in the series were self-inflicted. It's very possible to play physical while staying out of the box - the Flames didn't find that sweet spot.

[JohnnyB]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

That picture is showing the opposite of what you want it to, IMO.

1) fairly far out for a wrist shot (medium distance)
2) rushed by the defender
3) therefor 100% certainty that he is going to shoot
4) therefore the goalie can come out to cut off the angle
5) no screen or traffic of any kind

NHL goalies are saving that almost every time, unless the shooter has a perfect, bar-down or post-and-in shot. And McDavid didn't even do that. He shot it at Markstrom's glove. Why? Because Markstrom struggled with his glove the entire series.

That shot is rarely a goal on an NHL goalie who is that set for the shot. He simply muffed it.

Markstrom's glove side was certainly a weakness in the series. He made a few outstanding saves, but he also let in too many softies. Sad to say, but Markstrom's play let the team down. Really disappointing.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by Mathgod

A lot of the Flames' penalty trouble was their own doing, and wasn't simply a result of physical play. A lot of it was either being undisciplined with their sticks and ending up with high sticking penalties at bad times, or just plain being reckless and taking completely unnecessary pointless penalties... at bad times.

It's easy to point the finger at the refs, but a lot of the Flames' wounds in the series were self-inflicted. It's very possible to play physical while staying out of the box - the Flames didn't find that sweet spot.

I agree with you on a general level. But in that game, they called one penalty, on a Flame, from a scrum, 3 times. When they called Lewis near the end of the first, when he and Hyman (?) were simply battling for space, you could see the entire bench thinking that they were fighting the refs as much as the Oilers.

From that point on in the series, they simply weren't as physical.

And from that point on, until game 5, the Oilers were the better team. Prior to that point, the Flames were.

[djsFlames]

Taking a huge step back from the NHL next season and perhaps from this point on.

That was such a painful playoff run. First goalied, then reffed and war roomed out of what should've been at least a longer series.

This run wasn't even fun or exciting (despite getting out of the first round!), save for OT in game 7.

The product has gone down the kytter.

Sportsnet's coverage is absolute effing fanboy sewage. I despise their broadcasts with every last fibre of my being.

The American station did a better job than them.

Retire and piss off in a care home somewhere Ron Maclean. No one cares for your stupid input any more.

[Roof-Daddy]

Originally Posted by djsFlames

Taking a huge step back from the NHL next season and perhaps from this point on.

That was such a painful playoff run. First goalied, then reffed and war roomed out of what should've been at least a longer series.

This run wasn't even fun or exciting (despite getting out of the first round!), save for OT in game 7.

The product has gone down the kytter.

Sportsnet's coverage is absolute effing fanboy sewage. I despise their broadcasts with every last fibre of my being.

The American station did a better job than them.

Retire and piss off in a care home somewhere Ron Maclean. No one cares for your stupid input any more.

I feel you.

I don't know why I can't pull myself completely away. I've taken huge steps back the last few years but I spend so much time here on CP that I keep getting pulled back in. Faint hope that everything.might go our way for once I guess.

[Scary Eloranta]

Agree 100% with djsFlames, this new reffing mandate to call absolutely everything is garbage. No flow to the games and way too many mystery calls. Having said that, the Flames were also garbage against the coilers, especially Markstrom and Tkachuk.

Bang on about sportsnet - its totally unwatchable. All that combined has killed my enthusiasm for the game.

Also - I could see the Flames taking a big step down next year. They really exceeded expectations during the regular season which got all our hopes up for the playoffs. I don't see Darryl getting that much out of them again next year - and of course if Johnny leaves, we're in for some very lean years ahead.

[Mathgod]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

I agree with you on a general level. But in that game, they called one penalty, on a Flame, from a scrum, 3 times. When they called Lewis near the end of the first, when he and Hyman (?) were simply battling for space, you could see the entire bench thinking that they were fighting the refs as much as the Oilers.

From that point on in the series, they simply weren't as physical.

And from that point on, until game 5, the Oilers were the better team. Prior to that point, the Flames were.

The officials made it very hard to determine what was allowed and what wasn't. At times they were calling every little thing, and at other times letting everything go. It was frustrating to see. Still, I don't think it was the main reason for why the series unfolded the way it did.

[chedder]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

1) Markstrom was horrific in game 1, which can destroy a team's confidence. if he had bounced back and been great in game 2, no problem. But he was bad again in game 2. Devastating for the team's confidence and a GIANT boost to the Oilers' confidence.

I agree with this 100% we were making a statement, taking them behind the woodshed. A pushback was expected but Markstrom absolutely crapped the bed and all of sudden we were tied. I bet most people, myself included, thought we would lose that game after it was tied. It was amazing we stepped up and took game one but the damage was done.

How do you have confidence when you think you have to score 7 to win?

[Hockey_Ninja]

Nah. I’m not gonna get sucked into the blame the refs crowd. The Flames should’ve just played better in games 2,3 and 4 then we likely wouldn’t have been in an elimination game situation in game 5. And before y’all get at me: The goal should’ve counted. It’s BS that it was waived off when there’s been worse kicking motion goals allowed. It’s just we can’t blame the refs for the bad defensive coverage. We can’t blame the refs for Marky playing his worst stretch of goaltending this season. We can’t blame the refs for Chucky not performing well outside of game 1. Stuff like that is on the team. They just need to play better next time