[PGT] Flames 1 @ Golden Knights 6

[Enoch Root]

Some people are clamoring to see more Gridin, Parekh, and any other kids under 25. But frankly, I don't want the kids anywhere near this. I would rather see them all playing together with the Wranglers, gaining chemistry, and starting to have success there, while the veterans face the music with this #### show.

And I wish we could get Parekh out of there too. But the CHL is useless, so here we are.

Losing breads losing. Keep the kids away, and in positive environments. Let the current group suffer through this.

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by kehatch

Everybody else isn't on game 90 of playing that way. Plus, Bieksa wasn't talking about effective play, he was talking about effort. Most of the Flames have been working hard, just not getting results.

He will never be a perimeter player.

But he played the last 41 games last season as the Flames 2nd most productive five on five player.

Those are the facts.

Sorry to wreck a dogpile.

[saillias]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

<5 guys who post the same thing 20 times a day>: "we need to trade all the vets so we can tank to the bottom!"

<same 5 guys, now that the team is in last>: "the vets are terrible - we need to trade them all!"

Some of us knew they were going to be ass regardless of whether they traded the vets or not, because the thing about 34+ year old athletes giving strong performances is it tends to stop. hence trading the vets would be good while they were performing better.

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

Some people are clamoring to see more Gridin, Parekh, and any other kids under 25. But frankly, I don't want the kids anywhere near this. I would rather see them all playing together with the Wranglers, gaining chemistry, and starting to have success there, while the veterans face the music with this #### show.

And I wish we could get Parekh out of there too. But the CHL is useless, so here we are.

Losing breads losing. Keep the kids away, and in positive environments. Let the current group suffer through this.

The one thing I would disagree with is Parekh. I don’t know this so time will tell, but he seems like a player who elevates with a chip on his shoulder and something to prove. Letting him experience a tough, losing season might actually light a bigger fire under him for next year, especially if he really settles into his game this year and is less focused on figuring out how to just be an NHLer.

[SuperMatt18]

Sharangovich is an easy scapegoat but honestly he's been no better or no worse than the other forwards that have played this season.

It's the whole group at this point and IMO the coaching isn't helping

[Badgers Nose]

Originally Posted by Royle9

We don’t know what the score would be because we’ve never seen it.
Johnny, Sean and Elias were turned loose for career seasons when they focused on pure offence and just that line played loose within the system.

I’d argue you could do the same, at the very least you could try it.
Are you saying VGK stopped trying? I certainly don’t see it that way, they were going hard right to the final buzzer.

We keep this narrative that we have to be uber defensively structured because we don’t have the firepower to keep up and we’ll get smashed into the ground, but we’ve never tried so how do we know?

I’m not saying ignore it all game for all lines, you have 3 other lines that can focus on that when they’re on the ice. But when you’re taking offensive zone starts and need to score goals… you won’t convince me that playing aggressively offensive and creative could be any worse than what we’re watching, I’m sorry it’s just not true.

I’d rather lose 7-4 than 6-1, but truth be told if some how our guys can get creative and score goals and wolf starts playing his vezina calibre keep the team alive style he played all last year, heck maybe we’d even win a few games.

I agree!

$400 for crappy beer, so-so food and a few hours of some high paced exciting hockey would be an OK deal for me. But subtract the good hockey part, and I am not too keen on heading to the Dome.

I want to see the kids play. Just like last time we rebuilt and I was down there 20+ games per season. This should be the best part of the cycle - get to know the future.

[united]

Originally Posted by Bingo

You slam the player daily though.

I'm not suggesting he's bowling players over on a nightly basis, in fact he never will ... but last night he was one of the least deserving players for an individual attack, and the stats, which have little (and arguably no) utility in single-game sample sizes, support that.

Important context added. I use and support analytics as much as anyone, provided they are used appropriately. In proper sample sizes, they are extremely telling however a 14-minute sample size is not relevant.

If using Natural Stat Trick's 5-on-5 score-and-venue-adjusted numbers, Sharangovich was on the ice for 0.35 xGF and 0.26 xGA however to illustrate the fragility of single-game sample sizes, Mark Stone's goal - shown below at the moment of release - is graded as 0.09 xG. I reckon the nine time 20-goal scorer finishes that at a much higher rate than 9%. Because Sharangovich's night was so low event, his xG is prone to extremely high variance. Give Stone an arbitrary finishing percentage of 25 and all of sudden Sharangovich is no longer a standout - by stats. 50% and he's even further down.

That is just one play for sure, which is why proper samples are compulsory: allow outlier events to be offset on both ends of the spectrum for all players.

[kehatch]

Originally Posted by Bingo

He will never be a perimeter player.

But he played the last 41 games last season as the Flames 2nd most productive five on five player.

Those are the facts.

Sorry to wreck a dogpile.

Bieksa uses Sharangovich as an example of a player that needs to work harder and care more. Most fans agree, but a few rush to his defend him. The defense appears to be:

• He isn't the only one
• His possession numbers weren't even the worst on that particular night
• Let's have an unrelated talk about Farabee and Zary
• If you isolate the data to a specific 41 game 5v5 sample using points ....

Its not a dogpile. It is fans agreeing with the HNC panel that Sharangovich needs to put in more effort. And frankly I am surprised that anyone who has watched the Flames for the past two seasons wouldn't agree with that.

[Royle9]

Can we all agree that Sharky pre-injury and post-injury are two different players?
I think that's the start of what we're seeing, the highlight tapes show the comparison so glaringly obvious.

1 was more effective than the other, you can paint it any which way.

[Rhett44]

Originally Posted by Royle9

Can we all agree that Sharky pre-injury and post-injury are two different players?
I think that's the start of what we're seeing, the highlight tapes show the comparison so glaringly obvious.

1 was more effective than the other, its you can paint it any which way.

I honestly think it was just a fluke unsustainable shooting% year when he had all those goals.

There is a reason he was healthy scratched on the Devils. He is not good. And not a starting roster player on a good team.

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by kehatch

Bieksa uses Sharangovich as an example of a player that needs to work harder and care more. Most fans agree, but a few rush to his defend him. The defense appears to be:

• He isn't the only one
• His possession numbers weren't even the worst on that particular night
• Let's have an unrelated talk about Farabee and Zary
• If you isolate the data to a specific 41 game 5v5 sample using points ....

Its not a dogpile. It is fans agreeing with the HNC panel that Sharangovich needs to put in more effort. And frankly I am surprised that anyone who has watched the Flames for the past two seasons wouldn't agree with that.

Yeah, fans are disagreeing with him being singled out for the reasons stated.

When people single him out but then say things like he’s been bad for 90 games or argue that worse players should get promotions and better ones should get the same demotions, it shouldn’t be surprising when people point out the inconsistencies and false information being used to support singling him out.

Like when people say “Player X isn’t producing!” and it turns out he’s the third most productive player on the team, maybe it might be smart to consider the context before levelling that particular criticism if the intent is to have it taken seriously?

[TheScorpion]

Since being acquired from the Flyers, Morgan Frost has five points in 38 games at 5v5 to go along with some of the worst underlying metrics on the team. But he's a centre, Canadian, a "young player," and plays on the top PP. Didn't get singled out on Hockey Night.

[dissentowner]

Originally Posted by Bingo

He will never be a perimeter player.

But he played the last 41 games last season as the Flames 2nd most productive five on five player.

Those are the facts.

Sorry to wreck a dogpile.

In Huska's system they are all perimeter players regardless of their strengths and abilities.

[Badgers Nose]

Originally Posted by TheScorpion

Since being acquired from the Flyers, Morgan Frost has five points in 38 games at 5v5 to go along with some of the worst underlying metrics on the team. But he's a centre, Canadian, a "young player," and plays on the top PP. Didn't get singled out on Hockey Night.

What aboutism doesn't work with this team because you could legitimately crap on so many players. How much time did CBC post game have to discuss Flames disappointments? Not enough.

So, I think Sharky was fair game.

That doesn't excuse other guys. I'm sure the panel will have plenty of time to get to them as the season wears on.

I disagree with the implied bigotry too.

[TheScorpion]

Eh I don't think it's bigotry as much as just a trope to single out certain players for being soft. You're absolutely right that it's whataboutism but by the same token it's not that Frost has been as bad at 5v5, he's actually been demonstrably much, much worse. And yet over in the underperformers thread, he hasn't been mentioned once. What is shaping that perception?

[Gaskal]

Gonna be a long season!

[Rhett44]

Originally Posted by TheScorpion

Eh I don't think it's bigotry as much as just a trope to single out certain players for being soft. You're absolutely right that it's whataboutism but by the same token it's not that Frost has been as bad at 5v5, he's actually been demonstrably much, much worse. And yet over in the underperformers thread, he hasn't been mentioned once. What is shaping that perception?

To me, I get more frustrated with the wingers than centers. Because we do not have a lot of players that can replace Frost from the minors, but we have a surplus of Sharogivich and Farabees.

Same thing with the defense. We have so many players in the AHL who can play just as well as Bean, Miromanov, and Hanley. So why exactly aren't they getting an opportunity?

And I just like Frost for some reason. I don't know what it is, but he does not frustrate me as much as some of the other players.

[TheScorpion]

Kerins is a natural centre who looked great at that position in the preseason ... he's by far the most NHL-ready forward in the Flames' system. If anything, is Frost not the one preventing him from potentially playing centre in the NHL?

Just an observation. I for one think every player on this roster is playing below their true skill level. I don't fault any one of them more than any other for just happening to be on the 25-26 Flames.

[Calgary4LIfe]

I think this is what happens when belief starts eroding on a team.


Last year everyone bought into the system, and everyone bought into the play-style. This year, a portion of the players aren't giving enough effort, and some players are trying to do too much and looking terrible.


I was wondering what would happen if the Flames get off to a losing streak, and I guess I have my answer. There hasn't been a culture change here. They have been a 'good team' one year, and 'bad team' the next over the last 10 years.



Anyway, I am not even complaining. I wanted more pushback from them against Vegas. They own Vegas' first round pick, and they should at least work a little harder to get it a little lower, or maybe at least make Vegas sweat a little and perhaps lose the next game.


Vegas was on cruise control. They step it up when they need to, their good players make plays suddenly out of nowhere, and they score. The only way for Calgary to win is to out-work Vegas, and play within their structure. Neither of that is going on, thus a 6-1 loss in which the Flames weren't getting really outshot or even hemmed-in their own zone for long stretches. The score tells you how close the game is, and it wasn't a matter of Wolf being unlucky or bad.


Anyway, I expected this last night, and I expect more of this throughout the season. It sucks and is hard to watch, but I prefer to try and see how the young guys are playing and adjusting, or whatever positive storyline there is. Hey, at the very least, when the team turns around, I will appreciate it that much more.

[Badgers Nose]

Originally Posted by TheScorpion

Eh I don't think it's bigotry as much as just a trope to single out certain players for being soft. You're absolutely right that it's whataboutism but by the same token it's not that Frost has been as bad at 5v5, he's actually been demonstrably much, much worse. And yet over in the underperformers thread, he hasn't been mentioned once. What is shaping that perception?

I think Frost's good pre-season bought him a bit of leeway, but yeah you are right. He's bad too.

So we have a pro-scouting problem, or maybe GMCC has a restoration project player gambling addiction? LOL

As long as we don't hand out long contracts to some of these projects we should be OK.

The threat of underperformance being NHL career ending maybe motivates some? Send them to the Wranglers if you can (notwithstanding NMC). ECHL even. Is that too extreme? Probably. I doubt anything like this happens, but what if players don't figure it over the next 10, 20, 40 games?

I'm not sure what other stick Flames have for the really bad cases.

In the past we had hard working guys with low talent. This time it seems we have the opposite. Has to be a coaching problem if we have so many people that fit the description, no? Or did we just 'luck out' and acquire mostly guys with low GAF?