[PGT] Flames jobbed by officiating. Lose 3-1 to the Sharks.

[bax]

Sharks were a better team than the Flames

Smith and Jones played equally well I thought. A few ten bell saves on both sides.

Game really could have gone either way. With that being said, I think this was the worst the Flames have looked since the Pittsburgh game. There is going to be the odd game where the don't look like the better team. If they can rebound and continue to play like they have been (and if Smith has turned a corner) then they will be just fine.

[Table 5]

The Flames looked relatively lacklustre for all 3 California games...they lost some of that ability to bring constant waves of pressure, which previously had ground the opposing team down by the third period. I didn't really have any sense that they would tie up the games against the Ducks or Sharks, and that LA game was a little too close for comfort.

Hopefully they find their energy again.

[Manhattanboy]

If the Flames fail to make the playoffs, this year's epitaph may be they could not finish their many chances.

Ironic that we sign James Neal, a known finisher, and he can't even seem to keep up.

[Flash Walken]

Originally Posted by Bingo

Disagree.

A scoring chance has to come from within a designed perimeter home plate on the ice. That's as objective as it comes. Human error can appear in missing one or so, but it's not interpretational.

A high danger chance is the same but with a pass or deflection.

Defining an area and simply counting from an independent base is as objective as you can get.

Bennett essentially has to be inside the crease jamming the puck into the net to score a goal.

A high danger scoring chance for stamkos is not the same thing as it is for Bennett.

2 years have gone by with bennett seriously underperforming his hdscp results and you're still suggesting it's an indicator for him, when clearly the only indication hdscp serves for Bennett is to highlight the stark terms under which he is consistently unable to create tangible offense.

Your stats aren't suggesting he's unlucky or that he's doing the right things, your stats suggest he may be THE WORST finisher in the entire NHL.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by Manhattanboy

If the Flames fail to make the playoffs, this year's epitaph may be they could not finish their many chances.

Ironic that we sign James Neal, a known finisher, and he can't even seem to keep up.

a. Why are you even talking about missing the POs when the Flames are in a great spot?

b. The Flames are scoring well this season, just not in the last couple games. It happens.

[jonkaupp]

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

Bennett essentially has to be inside the crease jamming the puck into the net to score a goal.

A high danger scoring chance for stamkos is not the same thing as it is for Bennett.

2 years have gone by with bennett seriously underperforming his hdscp results and you're still suggesting it's an indicator for him, when clearly the only indication hdscp serves for Bennett is to highlight the stark terms under which he is consistently unable to create tangible offense.

Your stats aren't suggesting he's unlucky or that he's doing the right things, your stats suggest he may be THE WORST finisher in the entire NHL.

Ya, pretty much spot on. I quit bothering when he doubled down on not understanding the difference between a objective and a subjective stat.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by ComixZone

A 5-hole attempt on a power play is what now? That’s a pretty big reach. We see 5-hole gold on penalty shots/in shootouts frequently.

Over analyzing things here.

Sharks had the better goalie in a game with two good teams. Smith blinked, Jones didn’t. That will happen.

Only on dekes where you make the goalie move and he opens up the legs. Not on a shot from an angle. Bennett's attempt was neither a deke nor a good shot.

I don't think Jones played any better than Smith. Smith robbed the Sharks a few times on odd man rushes and at least one breakaway, as well as his cross crease save. They both were beaten by really hard, accurate shots. And the other Sharks goal was in no way on Smith. I thought Jones had the easier time of it overall. And the Flames missed two open nets.

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by Resolute 14

Bingo, you are arguing that your position is correct because Bill Peters agrees with you. That is classic appeal to authority. Also, it presumes that Peters thinks the same way you do. For all we know, Peters wanted him out there to go in the corners and bang people around, and leave creating scoring chances to his players who, you know, score.

Moreover, the premise that we are arguing is that Sam Bennett - nominally a scoring forward - is failing at his job because he is not scoring. Yes, he's doing other things well. But he's not doing what we need him to do, and there's just no way to sugar coat that.

I'd just love to have a discussion without someone putting words in my mouth.

I've stated dozens of times that he isn't productive, he may never be productive.

But when you put a roster together you find homes for your productive players and then you fill out your roster with guys that create chances, bring energy and never take a shift off over the rest.

He's in that group and because of that contributing.

I've haven't said anything else.

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by Strange Brew

Except that wasn’t what was said.

It's what was meant.

He's giving you examples of the different ways to say the same thing.

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by Strange Brew

I have not seen that expression used frequently. Whereas “then I can’t help you” is a somewhat commonly used expression that has an underlying tone of superiority.

Not sure what your comment to me means TBH. I don’t agree with anything that poster is saying. And I’m in no way attacking you personally. Just stating that is an expression I don’t care for. Which is probably entirely off topic to the conversation so I regret even bringing it up.

Honestly I'll keep that in mind ...

Just an odd thing to have to defend in the middle of defending everything else

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

Bennett essentially has to be inside the crease jamming the puck into the net to score a goal.

A high danger scoring chance for stamkos is not the same thing as it is for Bennett.

2 years have gone by with bennett seriously underperforming his hdscp results and you're still suggesting it's an indicator for him, when clearly the only indication hdscp serves for Bennett is to highlight the stark terms under which he is consistently unable to create tangible offense.

Your stats aren't suggesting he's unlucky or that he's doing the right things, your stats suggest he may be THE WORST finisher in the entire NHL.

He may be the worst finisher in the NHL. In fact that's a growing concern.

But are you telling me you'd rather have third liners that don't generate scoring chances?

He creates. That's good. If he gets better at finishing they'll have a whale of a player. If he doesn't hopefully his teammates get the rebounds, or at very least he creates momentum and wears out the opposition defenseman in the meantime.

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by jonkaupp

Ya, pretty much spot on. I quit bothering when he doubled down on not understanding the difference between a objective and a subjective stat.

Oh I understand.

We disagree.

You own the correct answer I guess?

[UKflames]

I wonder what the conversation would have been if he had scored the penalty shot? It's not like penalty shots are missed by some of the top layers in the game on a nightly basis (not that I am saying Bennett is one of the top payers in the game, just before anyone mentions that)

[Travis Munroe]

Bennett has to be one of the top 3 flames this year to bring it every night. As Bingo says, not ever roster player is going to fill the net. I believe Bennet actually has potential to do this as he develops but it is not as if he is hurting the team while potentially turning into a more point productive player.

Bennett doesn't have to ever become a big time scorer. His draft position is now irrelevant to me. As long as he brings that grit and hustle every single night, I am sure 30 teams would line up to take him over a current bottom 6 player. The big difference this year from last is that he is moving his feet and this has lead to less lazy penalties. I sometimes feel as if he is trying to do too much but it's in the offensive zone where it doesn't really hurt the team.

[PeteMoss]

Originally Posted by Bingo

He may be the worst finisher in the NHL. In fact that's a growing concern.

But are you telling me you'd rather have third liners that don't generate scoring chances?

He creates. That's good. If he gets better at finishing they'll have a whale of a player. If he doesn't hopefully his teammates get the rebounds, or at very least he creates momentum and wears out the opposition defenseman in the meantime.

Paul Byron was similar with Calgary. Got chances out the yang and couldn't score. Went to Montreal and puts 20 a year there. That might be what Bennett becomes - a bigger Paul Byron. Sure you'd have hoped for more as a 4th overall pick but there are worse things in the world than a guy who can play solid minutes on the PK and drive play with bad finish.

[Stanley]

If Backlund could put a puck into an empty net + Janko doesn't get stoned + Bennett's attempt is halfway resembling an NHL shot/deke, we're probably all talking about how we got 2 pts despite being outplayed

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by Stanley

If Backlund could put a puck into an empty net + Janko doesn't get stoned + Bennett's attempt is halfway resembling an NHL shot/deke, we're probably all talking about how we got 2 pts despite being outplayed

True, except if Backlund doesn't shank it, Bennett gets no penalty shot.

[bigrangy]

Originally Posted by Table 5

The Flames looked relatively lacklustre for all 3 California games...they lost some of that ability to bring constant waves of pressure, which previously had ground the opposing team down by the third period. I didn't really have any sense that they would tie up the games against the Ducks or Sharks, and that LA game was a little too close for comfort.

Hopefully they find their energy again.

I think they are missing Dubé more than most think. He was very strong at bringing the puck to the offensive zone, much more so than any other bottom sixer in my mind.

I hope he's back soon.

[direwolf]

Originally Posted by Table 5

The Flames looked relatively lacklustre for all 3 California games.

Disagree. They outplayed Anaheim by a wide margin and simply failed to capitalize on multiple grade A chances. Not to mention Smith was awful in that game. Had Rittich started, they likely would have won.

They also dominated for the majority of the LA game, and earned a well deserved victory as a result.

The Sharks game was the only one on this trip where they were lackluster, and it was really only the 2nd period where they truly looked awful. And even then I thought they rebounded with an impressive push in the 3rd. Had it not been for Jones' stellar goaltending and the refs' incompetence, that game could have gone either way.

[Strange Brew]

Originally Posted by Bingo

Honestly I'll keep that in mind ...

Just an odd thing to have to defend in the middle of defending everything else

No need to defend yourself. I was really just referring to the phrase and not you in any way.