[GDT] Jets at Flames - Preseason Game 6 - 7pmMDT - Flames.com/SN960

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by Mr.Coffee

I feel like goaltending in the NHL is primarily mentality and confidence though, so I mean it isn’t a good sign at all. We need a goalie in Markstrom that starts to believe in himself again because when he does he is lights out but when he doesn’t he looks like last year and his candle is close to getting snuffed out.

It is presumptuous of you to conclude that Markstrom is struggling with his confidence on the basis of one very good, and one fairly poor performance in meaningless preseason games.

[Mr.Coffee]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

It is presumptuous of you to conclude that Markstrom is struggling with his confidence on the basis of one very good, and one fairly poor performance in meaningless preseason games.

Oh it’s not, don’t worry. I’m including last year’s data set too.

[Mr.Coffee]

Originally Posted by D as in David

^Optimist

Flames play good = it’s preseason, doesn’t mean anything.
Flames play bad = sign of things to come! Disappointing!

^Pessimist

Nah, it’s not that black and white for the large majority of posters. People don’t just fall into camps of “optimist” and “pessimist”. I’m pointing out that people will just create a narrative without thinking about their own biases. It’s what we heckle Oiler fans about but then do the same thing here and then also look down our nose at their fanbase so it’s intellectually dishonest (this is what I meant yesterday Textcritic).

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

It is presumptuous of you to conclude that Markstrom is struggling with his confidence on the basis of one very good, and one fairly poor performance in meaningless preseason games.

I thought (based on my one period of viewing) that Markstrom sucked it up and played well in the 3rd, inlcuding the brief pushes by the Jets. Not many chances but he didn't have any adventures and caused no rebounds on what he faced. His position was good and he wasn't sliding out of the crease.

Looking at the goals, I only thought the Gustaffson one was bad, and it was a bad giveaway right after the Flames scored. Markstrom probably wasn't focused enough there. The others - whatever.

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by Mr.Coffee

Oh it’s not, don’t worry. I’m including last year’s data set too.

Given that last season happened so long ago I don't see how it is relevant to gauging Markstrom's confidence in this training camp. It just seems completely futile to watch a preseason game and then make judgments from it about a veteran NHL goalie's level of confidence.

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by Mr.Coffee

...I’m pointing out that people will just create a narrative without thinking about their own biases. It’s what we heckle Oiler fans about but then do the same thing here and then also look down our nose at their fanbase so it’s intellectually dishonest (this is what I meant yesterday Textcritic).

Ah, thanks. That makes sense.

[DazzlinDino]

Originally Posted by Mr.Coffee

I feel like goaltending in the NHL is primarily mentality and confidence though, so I mean it isn’t a good sign at all. We need a goalie in Markstrom that starts to believe in himself again because when he does he is lights out but when he doesn’t he looks like last year and his candle is close to getting snuffed out.

I agree with you that confidence is important. but in preseason we have to take into consideration that some of the guys, young and old are learning new systems. Markstrom is probably dealing with some adjustments too.

I take a big part of it is having the guys in front play well; Plus last season lots of guys we're not getting key goals at key times. The poor morale, ice time being mismanaged. All those things played a role. I agree with you he needs to feel confident out there and winning obviously breeds more confidence. I think if we can get some guys going and playing better as a team Markstorm is going to benefit.

Nothing wrong with being concerned about Markstrom's confidence. I think there is enough positives and potential there that is is going to get better.

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by Mr.Coffee

Nah, it’s not that black and white for the large majority of posters. People don’t just fall into camps of “optimist” and “pessimist”. I’m pointing out that people will just create a narrative without thinking about their own biases. It’s what we heckle Oiler fans about but then do the same thing here and then also look down our nose at their fanbase so it’s intellectually dishonest (this is what I meant yesterday Textcritic).

It's not a narrative to be a little more patient than some when it comes to a goaltender that has had 100 total minutes of preseason action.

I don't mind it being a concern, that's well founded. But to just assume his season is lost and should be traded with a 1st round pick is certainly premature.

[Monahammer]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

Given that last season happened so long ago I don't see how it is relevant to gauging Markstrom's confidence in this training camp. It just seems completely futile to watch a preseason game and then make judgments from it about a veteran NHL goalie's level of confidence.

Last season has no bearing on this?
Well, stop the presses. We have to alert everyone that sample size is irrelevant according to TC. Too much time has elapsed to accurate judge performance for the coming season based on the last. Anyone think that Lafreniere is going to pot 100 points this season?

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by Mr.Coffee

Oh it’s not, don’t worry. I’m including last year’s data set too.

Then why not include the year before as well.

[Mr.Coffee]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

Then why not include the year before as well.

I actually agree here and that’s why obviously as Bingo says leaving a wide berth and giving lots of patience to regain that confidence is prudent here. Is a game or two of poor play concerning? Yea but should we give up on him? Absolutely not. Also further, the tail end of last season he was looking actually pretty good again so for sure we should give his good play the benefit of the doubt too.

But if posters are reticent / expressing concern I think that’s totally reasonable and my only point is we can’t look to Coronato and say this guy should make opening roster and he’s going to be an impact player and then say for Markstrom oh none of this matters. Like just stay consistent I guess.

[Hot_Flatus]

Originally Posted by _Q_

Coronato looked awesome last night with Backlund. Even though those two look like they have chemistry, I wonder if they try Coronato on the top line at some point before the preseason is over.

As with the good and bad, I wouldn't read too much into any of these pre-season games for any player. It's an entirely different animal for a rookie like Coronato to be doing what he's doing once the games mean something.

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by Monahammer

Last season has no bearing on this?

Well, stop the presses. We have to alert everyone that sample size is irrelevant according to TC. Too much time has elapsed to accurate judge performance for the coming season based on the last. Anyone think that Lafreniere is going to pot 100 points this season?

You are misconstruing what I said. (How shocking!) Of course, last year's performance is part of the equation when evaluating any player, but I am speaking specifically about gauging a veteran player's confidence from his on-ice performance in a meaningless preseason game. And, yes—we are speaking of pronouncing conclusions on the basis of ONE game, since that is precisely how many poor preseason performances that Markstrom has had.

Or, are you prepared to say, "Yes, Markstrom is clearly in the same head-space today that he was at the end of last season in April?"

Sent from my moto g stylus 5G (2022) using Tapatalk

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by Mr.Coffee

I actually agree here and that’s why obviously as Bingo says leaving a wide berth and giving lots of patience to regain that confidence is prudent here. Is a game or two of poor play concerning? Yea but should we give up on him? Absolutely not. Also further, the tail end of last season he was looking actually pretty good again so for sure we should give his good play the benefit of the doubt too.

But if posters are reticent / expressing concern I think that’s totally reasonable and my only point is we can’t look to Coronato and say this guy should make opening roster and he’s going to be an impact player and then say for Markstrom oh none of this matters. Like just stay consistent I guess.

Absolutely ...

But some are rushing to judgement with a very small sample size this fall. Goalies are voodoo, up and down all the time. Not enough data to judge it a problem this season already.

[Monahammer]

If you're going 2 seasons you're including the epic collapse in the playoffs, and that is seemingly what many people here seem to be the genesis of his problems in red.

I disagree though. I think we should look at all three seasons in Calgary. Frankly, Markstrom has only ever been as good as the team in front of him. His good season with the flames came in the same season where we had historic production up front and looked like a juggernaut. First season was impeccably mediocre, last season straight up bad. One good season out of three is not much to base confidence on. IMO the small sample size people are actually the ones focused on his vezina nominated season. Looking at his flames career paints a disappointing picture.

Could he still turn around? Maybe, but IMO it will be increasingly difficult to do that while still with the flames if the issue is consistency and confidence as many have been saying here. If that is the case, then continued mediocre performance is likely to exacerbate the confidence issues. A clean slate probably provides the best opportunity for confidence rebuilding if that's really what needs to happen.

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by Mr.Coffee

...But if posters are reticent / expressing concern I think that’s totally reasonable and my only point is we can’t look to Coronato and say this guy should make opening roster and he’s going to be an impact player and then say for Markstrom oh none of this matters. Like just stay consistent I guess.

Whether or not you think you are "just being consistent" is beside the point when it does not line up with reality. The fact of the matter is that a veteran like Markstrom—or Lindholm, or Coleman, or Andersson—is not going to play the same way that a rookie like Coronato—or, a bubble-player like Ruzicka, or Hunt, or Duehr—is going to play in preseason games. So, no. "Being consistent" in this respect doesn't really work.

[Monahammer]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

You are misconstruing what I said. (How shocking!) Of course, last year's performance is part of the equation when evaluating any player, but I am speaking specifically about gauging a veteran player's confidence from his on-ice performance in a meaningless preseason game. And, yes—we are speaking of pronouncing conclusions on the basis of ONE game, since that is precisely how many poor preseason performances that Markstrom has had.

Or, are you prepared to say, "Yes, Markstrom is clearly in the same head-space today that he was at the end of last season in April?"

Sent from my moto g stylus 5G (2022) using Tapatalk

No, and that's a fair counter statement. I think it's difficult to assess Markstrom's mental state given we have limited interview content to start the season and as you said, limited playing time. The limited playing time has been worrisome though.

I was just having fun with your statement about recency- sorry to have struck a nerve. Sample size gets brought up a lot around here, so I thought it extremely funny for it to be flipped on its head like that.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by Mr.Coffee

I actually agree here and that’s why obviously as Bingo says leaving a wide berth and giving lots of patience to regain that confidence is prudent here. Is a game or two of poor play concerning? Yea but should we give up on him? Absolutely not. Also further, the tail end of last season he was looking actually pretty good again so for sure we should give his good play the benefit of the doubt too.

But if posters are reticent / expressing concern I think that’s totally reasonable and my only point is we can’t look to Coronato and say this guy should make opening roster and he’s going to be an impact player and then say for Markstrom oh none of this matters. Like just stay consistent I guess.

Sure. But first, you're taking the extreme views here (and they're probably not from the same posters), and second, one player needs to be viewed through the lens of a rookie, trying to make the team, and the other with the lends of a 10 year vet, trying to get himself ready for the season.

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by Monahammer

No, and that's a fair counter statement. I think it's difficult to assess Markstrom's mental state given we have limited interview content to start the season and as you said, limited playing time. The limited playing time has been worrisome though...

All the limited playing time? Or just last night's game?

[Redrum]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

Then why not include the year before as well.

The year with the all-time collapse against our rivals?