[PGT] Chicago beats Calgary in OT

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

You are obsessed with the stats and that's fine and all but I'm not the kind of fan that will feel better about mediocrity and poor play because some underlying statistics may paint a rosier picture. Realize not every fan cares about the how and why their team lost to the worst team in the league. They are simply upset about the result. None of this "I'm right and you are wrong" really matters to me as the standings are all I care about.

Obsessed?

I like understanding the how and why ... you don't have to. Couldn't care less.

But telling me there's a standings is a pretty pissy response. So to was the "do you watch the games bs" yesterday from another poster.

I guess that's what you get when someone arrives with a preconceived narrative and someone has actual stats to get in the way of said narrative.

The stats don't paint a rosier picture ... they paint the best summary of the actual picture we can get our hands on.

They say the Flames aren't a slow, plodding, perimeter team, but they are a team that seems to lack the offensive talent to move into the upper third of the league in high danger chances.

They may stay that way, and middling in the standings. They may improve in he high danger area and move up. They may go on a bit of a PDO ripper to even the scales some what.

We will see.

[MillerTime GFG]

Originally Posted by DazzlinDino

Like I said, I came into the thread and people were cussing and swearing. You only have to go back and re-read to see that some people were going overboard with some of their comments. You dont think that is being a little irrational. I can recall when some trolls used to sit in the pgt and start spewing a bunch of negative stuff trying to get other posters to take the bait and the forum back then was intolerable and made it hard to enjoy reading about the team. The Flames lost a game, so what does being negative accomplish? Does it make the team play better?

This is a forum. People express their opinions. Some of them are negative. Typically happens when the team isn’t playing well. Not sure why that’s hard to understand. You may think they’re being over the top, but you can’t say they’re being irrational when their opinions are actually the opposite.

I challenge you to find any fan forum for any team in any sport that doesn’t have negative posts. Perhaps forums aren’t for you.

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by MillerTime GFG

This is a forum. People express their opinions. Some of them are negative. Typically happens when the team isn’t playing well. Not sure why that’s hard to understand. You may think they’re being over the top, but you can’t say they’re being irrational when their opinions are actually the opposite.

I challenge you to find any fan forum for any team in any sport that doesn’t have negative posts. Perhaps forums aren’t for you.

First off I think you're right ... it is a forum thing and not a CP thing.

And being negative after a loss in Chicago in overtime against the worst team in the league is completely understandable. Expected.

But you must admit there's a line, and when crossed you're going to get push back. Fans that don't see the worst case scenario in every situation are dealing with their own disappointment from a game, and then have to defend some line against a throng that wants to believe all is lost from one game.

Gets tiring.

[dino7c]

Time to move on

[MillerTime GFG]

Originally Posted by Bingo

First off I think you're right ... it is a forum thing and not a CP thing.

And being negative after a loss in Chicago in overtime against the worst team in the league is completely understandable. Expected.

But you must admit there's a line, and when crossed you're going to get push back. Fans that don't see the worst case scenario in every situation are dealing with their own disappointment from a game, and then have to defend some line against a throng that wants to believe all is lost from one game.

Gets tiring.

I think that line has been extended because of how long this franchise has been mediocre. Let’s face it, the Flames are not a good franchise. One cup, and very little playoff success outside of that. That stuff is building up. Fans are tired, and I don’t blame them whatsoever. I’m in that camp for sure. It’s just my opinion, but I don’t believe this team has earned the right to have fans look at them optimistically.

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by MillerTime GFG

I think that line has been extended because of how long this franchise has been mediocre. Let’s face it, the Flames are not a good franchise. One cup, and very little playoff success outside of that. That stuff is building up. Fans are tired, and I don’t blame them whatsoever. I’m in that camp for sure. It’s just my opinion, but I don’t believe this team has earned the right to have fans look at them optimistically.

You don't see the overkill in talking about how bad a franchise has been for 40 years after a single loss?

Who wants to talk about that?

And no one is saying what you can and can't do, but don't be surprised if people that don't want to worry about the 90s after a Chicago loss push back.

Especially if said person has had literally nothing to say after say a every game in a 5 game win streak.

[Yeah_Baby]

Originally Posted by Bingo

You don't see the overkill in talking about how bad a franchise has been for 40 years after a single loss?

Who wants to talk about that?

And no one is saying what you can and can't do, but don't be surprised if people that don't want to worry about the 90s after a Chicago loss push back.

Especially if said person has had literally nothing to say after say a every game in a 5 game win streak.

Yeah, this is pretty much where I'm at. It's fun at times to joke about the past and how it informs our perspectives now (ie me being cautious about Wolf because Flames and hot goalie prospects) but the fact of the matter is there have been so many eras of this them that really what happen in 1996, 2006, and 2023 really doesn't have THAT much (or any) bearing for me.

The only constants are the fan, and in the Flames case mostly ownership. Which sure you can have a conversation there about the way they do business. But that's another vector of analysis imo.

[topfiverecords]

Originally Posted by Burning Beard

Before the season started it seemed like most fans were saying this team wouldn't have as good of a regular season as last year but is better built for Sutter hockey and the playoffs. Now this exact thing is happening but fans are upset.

No matter how many times it’s explained it’s just not comprehended.

I wish some of them would be honest though about how much of the game they pay actual attention to and how much of it they spend reading the GT on their phone.

If they want an exciting run and gun team to cheer for that capitalizes on record number high danger chances, yet continually loses and won’t make the playoffs, there’s one of those teams just up the road.

I’m 100% content with a 3rd/Wildcard playoff team that has played consistent well rounded hockey the last 1/3rd of the season. We’ve finished in first and we’ve seen how that went. We’ve had forwards with high point seasons and we’ve seen how that went. We’ve had teams with young, low experienced players and we’ve seen how that went.

Sutter hockey is all about April and he knows if the team does what he asks they’ll be there in April.

[sonq]

17 pages in and the drama is beyond Hollywood doomsday

[Yamer]

Originally Posted by Yikes

Funny dude with a very definitive view of how the game is to be played, very skilled at snuffing offence in favour of defence every where he ends up. Like Tortorella I find it amazing that these guys somehow find a landing spot. With Sutter...when the Flames hired him I thought to myself "only the Flames would hire this guy, he has been sitting for a bit and no one else calls except for the Flames" I mean if he is this amazing coach then how come no one else wants him...Flames have a long history of this with GM's and Head Coaches...decent list of ex Flame employees that never found work at that level again, why? Cuz they suck at it. Coach of the Year? True and as mentioned a few times in my opinion he rode a hot goalie and a hot line to win it. Can't wait to see him gone.

The reason he sat and only wound up in Calgary is because he wasn't coming back to coach for anyone but Calgary. Darryl was entirely comfortable in semi-retirement on the ranch doing couch-consulting.

Unfinished business. He's said as much.

[Yeah_Baby]

Originally Posted by sonq

17 pages in and the drama is beyond Hollywood doomsday

I listened to the Flames Talk Post Game Call in when I was doing chores yesterday and it was even worse lmao.

[MillerTime GFG]

Originally Posted by Bingo

You don't see the overkill in talking about how bad a franchise has been for 40 years after a single loss?

Who wants to talk about that?

And no one is saying what you can and can't do, but don't be surprised if people that don't want to worry about the 90s after a Chicago loss push back.

Especially if said person has had literally nothing to say after say a every game in a 5 game win streak.

Fans aren’t going to ignore the fact that we’ve been poor for decades. Players on todays team of course have nothing to do with the past, but ownership does. Management to a certain degree as well.

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by MillerTime GFG

Fans aren’t going to ignore the fact that we’ve been poor for decades. Players on todays team of course have nothing to do with the past, but ownership does. Management to a certain degree as well.

And a string started talking about the worst franchises with some details would probably be a good debate.

Not sure how it's needed after a loss in Chicago when the team is 6-2-2 in their last 10.

[sonq]

Originally Posted by Bingo

And a string started talking about the worst franchises with some details would probably be a good debate.

Not sure how it's needed after a loss in Chicago when the team is 6-2-2 in their last 10.

You just don't get it. Their last 10-record doesn't matter cause some of the opponents have been inferior teams. Therefore, winning against bad teams doesn't mean anything. Though if the team loses one against a bad team, that makes your team also a bad one

[HighLifeMan]

Originally Posted by topfiverecords

No matter how many times it’s explained it’s just not comprehended.

I wish some of them would be honest though about how much of the game they pay actual attention to and how much of it they spend reading the GT on their phone.

If they want an exciting run and gun team to cheer for that capitalizes on record number high danger chances, yet continually loses and won’t make the playoffs, there’s one of those teams just up the road.

I’m 100% content with a 3rd/Wildcard playoff team that has played consistent well rounded hockey the last 1/3rd of the season. We’ve finished in first and we’ve seen how that went. We’ve had forwards with high point seasons and we’ve seen how that went. We’ve had teams with young, low experienced players and we’ve seen how that went.

Sutter hockey is all about April and he knows if the team does what he asks they’ll be there in April.

That is no guarantee as evidence by his last three seasons in LA where he had the team at the top of nearly every analytical category yet missed the playoffs twice. His system creates razor thin margins for winning and losing and while I agree that it better prepares a team for the playoffs - you have to get there first, and with the parity in the league today - that's no easy task.

There is no denying that he is a fantastic all around coach - but he's also not perfect, and can at times get in his own way. He much like anyone else in the organization should not be immune to criticism, and there is some very obvious decisions that some here take issue with.

Winning just 19 of 41 games to begin the year doesn't exactly inspire confidence, but the season certainly isn't lost, and there is some encouraging signs as of late (besides last game). At some point we need to string together more than 2 or 3 wins in a row.

It's not all roses and rainbows as we sit here today - but I would agree it's also not nearly as bad as some here would suggest.

[Shazam]

Blah. That's the league in general. Hell the Avs might not make the playoffs this year.

[zamler]

I'd trade success places with the Avs for some reason.

[Yeah_Baby]

Originally Posted by sonq

You just don't get it. Their last 10-record doesn't matter cause some of the opponents have been inferior teams. Therefore, winning against bad teams doesn't mean anything. Though if the team loses one against a bad team, that makes your team also a bad one

For what it's worth Seattle and LA who are both head of us in the standings have lost to the Blackhawks

[Paulie Walnuts]

Originally Posted by HighLifeMan

That is no guarantee as evidence by his last three seasons in LA where he had the team at the top of nearly every analytical category yet missed the playoffs twice. His system creates razor thin margins for winning and losing and while I agree that it better prepares a team for the playoffs - you have to get there first, and with the parity in the league today - that's no easy task.

There is no denying that he is a fantastic all around coach - but he's also not perfect, and can at times get in his own way. He much like anyone else in the organization should not be immune to criticism, and there is some very obvious decisions that some here take issue with.

Winning just 19 of 41 games to begin the year doesn't exactly inspire confidence, but the season certainly isn't lost, and there is some encouraging signs as of late (besides last game). At some point we need to string together more than 2 or 3 wins in a row.

It's not all roses and rainbows as we sit here today - but I would agree it's also not nearly as bad as some here would suggest.

The point you brought up about his teams from LA and now Calgary control shot shares to a large extent but the finishing lacks with poor shooting %. Its's not like those LA teams and Calgary now is built of a team of grinders so what gives?

If we are in the bottom of the league in high danger chances that is one thing but neither of those are so why such a low shooting %?

[Jiri Hrdina]

The negativity after a bad loss is expected and I don't take issue with. What I appreciate more is those that offer constructive thoughts instead of doomsday negativity. Which isn't to say that you can't post doomsday stuff, but expect it to be challenged.

I don't see a lot of blind homerism. Within the more positive group I don't see a lot of people predicting this team will win a cup. But there is recognition that a single loss is still just a single loss and a more balanced view taken.

I don't think this team is going to win a cup this year. I think the chances of that are probably around 4%.

But I also don't see the value in letting a single Flames loss define what is going to happen or not happen going forward.