[PGT] Flames lose 7-3 to Edmonton...

[Hanna Sniper]

Originally Posted by TheScorpion

I... did. The Flames get horribly outplayed whenever Monahan plays without Gaudreau and have been outscored 20 to 6 in those scenarios over the last three years. That's not me cherry-picking anything. That's literally just goals.

And come on, man, I watch every game.

Not saying for you to watch the game “personally” scorp. Don’t be like like. I understand the nature of the forum in comparative and argumentative but please don’t make it such as it only devalues the actual attempt to partispate

What I mean there’s more to it then just rolling back numbers and weighing it with what happens is the game is important

How many of those minutes are when they do play together and are carryover shifts. What are the assignments and linemates. What are the game situations. All those account to game play and how a player is performing

Saying Monahan has not played well without Johnny is not what has happened when they have played of different lines

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

I think he's getting it regardless and he's smart enough to know what he got himself into as he knows the contract situations and that changes will have to come. Gaudreau isn't going to be a Flame long term and Tkachuk also isn't likely to be.

I've never thought that Tkachuk was going to be a Flame for life, or even beyond this contract. He's got too much of his old man in him. I mean every player will have a bad year, but this is a catastrophic year in that it feels like he's neutered and has no energy or engagement. That's shocking to me.



I think it is getting close to that decision time. While the Flames have some really nice younger pieces, and this isn't a really old lineup. Its the lack of chemistry at the time on this team, and how ineffectual the top guys are looking.


As much as I wanted Gio to retire a Flame, I do think they have to look at the moving him to a contenda favor. I do think its time for a serious sit down with Gaudreau with the question of do you want to go home? MT, maybe you at least explore what you're going to get for him, I still think its a high value.



But watching at least the first period and a half last night, the margins for this team winning or losing is too thin. Maybe we get a short term pain scenario here because frankly I just don't feel a playoff vibe with this team.

[Lanny_McDonald]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

That is a pretty convenient post-hoc read on the situation. In fact, the Flames could not really have started the season with Phillips on the roster: He lost a lot of time on IR last season, and in the last few weeks coming back before the cancelation in March he did not look quite right. Before Flames training camp Phillips had played only a handful of games in a calendar year; there is no way the Flames were going to start him in the NHL after only an abbreviated training camp, and this had almost nothing to do with whether or not he is an NHL talent.

Hahaha. No, this is based on what player development's job is, to know where a player is in their development cycle, and whether they are capable of playing in the NHL. You can bet your ass that during the off season the Flames were quite certain to discuss if there were any players on the farm ready to make the jump. That was answered with a resounding no when they started loading up on 4th liners during the free agent period. So, yes, the team knew that Phillips was not a NHL player coming in and nothing appears to have changed in that regard. There has been more than enough opportunity to bring a player up (hello Mr. Gawdin) and the team has not bother to go that route again. Considering the style of Sutter's game, the chances of Phillips ever getting an opportunity with this team seems pretty tiny, just like Phillips himself.

[Winsor_Pilates]

Originally Posted by Hanna Sniper

Saying Monahan has not played well without Johnny is not what has happened when they have played of different lines

Monahan struggles immensely without Gaudreau, I'm shocked its being debated.

The only surprising stat Scorp posted was that Johnny does well without Monahan. I would have expected they both struggle without each other.

[Red]

Johnny is a much better player than Monahan. He can skate, shoot and pass, but most importantly, he can carry the puck and make D look silly.

Monahan is a finisher that can't do anything else at a high level. Just too slow and too passive.

[ForeverFlameFan]

It’s time to retool and trade some of the core. Pre-Sutter, I was this way. With Sutter as HC, I’m the same way.

[Hanna Sniper]

Originally Posted by Winsor_Pilates

Monahan struggles immensely without Gaudreau, I'm shocked its being debated.

The only surprising stat Scorp posted was that Johnny does well without Monahan. I would have expected they both struggle without each other.

Could it be that I'm only remembering the recent time that both struggled and played apart and it was Monahan that played well... of course that's a possibility as recent bias is a very real thing

But , not always the case

[CSharp]

Originally Posted by TheScorpion

Three things I would do to change the Flames right now:

- Reunite Tkachuk with Backlund. It's a combo that works and is effective at both ends.
- Put Monahan on the wing. I'm not sold on him being an NHL option down the middle right now. With Lindholm looking effective at centre, Monahan might be redundant.
- Reunite Ryan with Mangiapane for a secondary match-up combo.

Hear me out...

Tkachuk - Backlund - Monahan
Gaudreau - Lindholm - Dube
Lucic - Ryan - Mangiapane
Leivo - Bennett - Ritchie

Rotate Phillips in there, too.

Sutter's line combo works - just that everyone drank too much green beer before the game last night. The Flames best line was still Lucic-Backlund-Mangiapane. So, leave that line alone. Not sure why some are still insisting on SN2 to be at center when even Sutter knows he's ok where he is, if he doesn't take any stupid penalties.

[DeluxeMoustache]

I will volunteer this

Sutter has mentioned a couple of things. Very early, he said something about players coming in with special status. It was a passing comment, and I don’t recall directly the precise context and phrasing, but there was something he was thinking of.

I wondered if the reference was Tkachuk. All of the talk from Burke and Treliving about him being around the rink his whole life, about his maturity and him being future captain material - that seemed to be

The second thing was last night when Darryl said that the current group was probably more talented than the 2004 group, but the 2004 group was more mature, in terms of understanding how they had to play

Anybody expecting a bunch of kids to instantly complete the maturation within just over a week of when Darryl walks in is obviously quite optimistic. There have been more days with coaches allowing bad habits to form over the past several years.

Yesterday was a pretty predictable relapse. It will be interesting to see what shakes out against the backdrop of the next 4 against Toronto and Ottawa

[The Boy Wonder]

Originally Posted by CSharp

Sutter's line combo works - just that everyone drank too much green beer before the game last night. The Flames best line was still Lucic-Backlund-Mangiapane. So, leave that line alone. Not sure why some are still insisting on SN2 to be at center when even Sutter knows he's ok where he is, if he doesn't take any stupid penalties.

What game were you watching???

they were -4 while it mattered and they scored a consolation goal late in the third.

[CroFlames]

Also, you don't put a guy on the wing who has played 8 NHL seasons at center, plus 2-3 seasons in junior as center.

Like where did you go to coaching school that makes you think that is a good move?

[ForeverFlameFan]

Originally Posted by DeluxeMoustache

I will volunteer this

Sutter has mentioned a couple of things. Very early, he said something about players coming in with special status. It was a passing comment, and I don’t recall directly the precise context and phrasing, but there was something he was thinking of.

I wondered if the reference was Tkachuk. All of the talk from Burke and Treliving about him being around the rink his whole life, about his maturity and him being future captain material - that seemed to be

The second thing was last night when Darryl said that the current group was probably more talented than the 2004 group, but the 2004 group was more mature, in terms of understanding how they had to play

Anybody expecting a bunch of kids to instantly complete the maturation within just over a week of when Darryl walks in is obviously quite optimistic. There have been more days with coaches allowing bad habits to form over the past several years.

Yesterday was a pretty predictable relapse. It will be interesting to see what shakes out against the backdrop of the next 4 against Toronto and Ottawa

Good post.

I think if you can win 3 of next 4 games (ideally 1 against Toronto and both against Ottawa), then we’re slowly clawing our way back up.

[Erick Estrada]

Originally Posted by DeluxeMoustache

I will volunteer this

Sutter has mentioned a couple of things. Very early, he said something about players coming in with special status. It was a passing comment, and I don’t recall directly the precise context and phrasing, but there was something he was thinking of.

I wondered if the reference was Tkachuk. All of the talk from Burke and Treliving about him being around the rink his whole life, about his maturity and him being future captain material - that seemed to be

The second thing was last night when Darryl said that the current group was probably more talented than the 2004 group, but the 2004 group was more mature, in terms of understanding how they had to play

Anybody expecting a bunch of kids to instantly complete the maturation within just over a week of when Darryl walks in is obviously quite optimistic. There have been more days with coaches allowing bad habits to form over the past several years.

Yesterday was a pretty predictable relapse. It will be interesting to see what shakes out against the backdrop of the next 4 against Toronto and Ottawa

It's possible. Darryl went thought this once with Phaneuf. A young player that broke out early and thought he was a leader despite not gaining the respect of the locker room.

[Reign of Fire]

Probably a good game to go through early in Sutter's tenure. He'll have their attention rest of the season.

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by DeluxeMoustache

I will volunteer this

Sutter has mentioned a couple of things. Very early, he said something about players coming in with special status. It was a passing comment, and I don’t recall directly the precise context and phrasing, but there was something he was thinking of.

I wondered if the reference was Tkachuk. All of the talk from Burke and Treliving about him being around the rink his whole life, about his maturity and him being future captain material - that seemed to be

The second thing was last night when Darryl said that the current group was probably more talented than the 2004 group, but the 2004 group was more mature, in terms of understanding how they had to play

Anybody expecting a bunch of kids to instantly complete the maturation within just over a week of when Darryl walks in is obviously quite optimistic. There have been more days with coaches allowing bad habits to form over the past several years.

Yesterday was a pretty predictable relapse. It will be interesting to see what shakes out against the backdrop of the next 4 against Toronto and Ottawa

Starting with three straight wins was creating a "everything is fixed" feel around the team and certainly on this web site.

There had to be a stumble.

I said yesterday it's hard to beat teams back to back, and when you have every set of games back to back it makes for a season with less streaks.

So now we have a setback, how do they respond?

Last night we actually saw some signs. They were pretty good in the second period looking to get back into it down 2-0. Shot attempts were 18-10, scoring chances were 12-5, that's running the period.

But the high danger was even at 3 so the high end talent disparity did them in, which it will.

The third was pretty odd as Markstrom just lost it.

I'm less concerned about what the rest of the season looks like given how that second went. If they wilted and called it a day it would be another story.

I wanted 3-1 in these four, and got it.

Now they have to go on another one ... split in Toronto, and sweep Ottawa.

[transplant99]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

I think he's getting it regardless and he's smart enough to know what he got himself into as he knows the contract situations and that changes will have to come. Gaudreau isn't going to be a Flame long term and Tkachuk also isn't likely to be.

Nonsense.

He is 23 years old...far from his peak years yet.

Sutter is not here for a rebuild and ownership certainly didnt open their wallets to bring him in and oversee one.

Since coming into the NHL and among those that have played over 300 games, he is a top 35 ppg producer in the entire NHL.

This whole narrative about him being a poor skater is just so overblown as well. No he is not a fast skater at all, but he is no worse than half the NHL in that aspect ano he makes up fpr that is with his IQ and strength. His body positioning and ability to anticipate where to be, negate almost any lack of foot speed. He is very good defensively on a team that struggles being so.

MT is a pretty special layer and it behooves me how many have turned on him because he appears to be having a down season. Its like what he accomplished in his previous 300 games is the outlier and what has happened in the last 30 is the norm. It makes zero sense.

Now should he be asking for some outrageous salary on his next deal, then fine...explore dealing him. That is not an issue at this point and BT has a year and a bit to get that figured out.

You want a rebuild here? You start by keeping the young guy in MT, not by trading him.

[dissentowner]

Originally Posted by CroFlames

Also, you don't put a guy on the wing who has played 8 NHL seasons at center, plus 2-3 seasons in junior as center.

Like where did you go to coaching school that makes you think that is a good move?

Many high end coaches have done exactly that so not sure where you are going with this? It happens quite frequently.

[CroFlames]

Originally Posted by dissentowner

Many high end coaches have done exactly that so not sure where you are going with this? It happens quite frequently.

I think I need some examples of high end, career centermen being moved to the wing.

[DeluxeMoustache]

Originally Posted by dissentowner

Many high end coaches have done exactly that so not sure where you are going with this? It happens quite frequently.

I’m interested, I’ll bite.

Centres with 7 complete seasons, 200 goals , never played wing and then moved to wing

Who are all of these players?

Edit: looks like I’m second to ask

[Scroopy Noopers]

Originally Posted by DeluxeMoustache

I’m interested, I’ll bite.

Centres with 7 complete seasons, 200 goals , never played wing and then moved to wing

Who are all of these players?

Edit: looks like I’m second to ask

Does Team Canada count?