[PGT] Flames lose 10th consecutive season-opener (5-3 Avs win)

[SuperMatt18]

Originally Posted by Psytic

When it takes until half way through the third to break even at 5v5 events for me that's being out possessed but we are all free to our opinions. Classic Flames either way, anyway i'm sure they will be prepared for next game.

That's just a bad period though.

They were out possessed in the first at 24% Corsi- but the game was still only 2-1 going into the 2nd.

In the second they were 60% , and in the third they were 67%, so outside of the first 20 they outpossessed Colorado. And by the end of the game they finished ahead as on the whole. So sure the Flames were behind the 8-ball because shot attempts were 16-5 after the first period but then over the next 40 minutes it was 42-24.

[FlamesAreOne]

Bad news is we're likely down a 1st and 3rd line player tomorrow.

[topfiverecords]

Originally Posted by FlamesAreOne

Bad news is we're likely down a 1st and 3rd line player tomorrow.

Which of Frolik or Jankowski are the 1st line player?

[EldrickOnIce]

Originally Posted by Bonded

It would be quite magical if Bennett could break out this year. I give it like a 1% chance but that would be game changing, especially if Mangipane or Dube could break out as well

That's the problem with Bennett on any scoring line.
There has never been any tiny hint whatsoever that he is capable of producing there. So yeah, 1% seems about right.
I love Bennett, but he's not that guy.

[combustiblefuel]

Originally Posted by BlAcKNoVa

Reddit is a warzone tonight between Avs/Flames fans lol

At first I wasn't sure why Avs fans are so angry and then I saw this

https://streamable.com/k6v1p

Does get a decent chunk of his neck/head with the hit. Doesn't look too bad but you never know with the NHL's wheel of justice.

Guess they missed the hit Frolik took up high just before this.

[Knut]

Originally Posted by FlamesAreOne

Bad news is we're likely down a 1st and 3rd line player tomorrow.

Who ?? Czarnik ? Bet Reider in for him was the plan anyways.

[Geeoff]

Originally Posted by DazzlinDino

I thought the Flames power play was too predictable. but when I watch the AVS they were really effective how they run the power play. I thought that was the difference in the game

Both teams scored 2 power play goals. Although the Avs did score a 3rd goal immediately following a PP.

[The Boy Wonder]

How anyone can be down on Bennett after last night is incredble...

He looks like a differnet player tahn last year. he is defensively in teh right place almost all teh time. and able to start generating some positive chances. Best of all. No penalties, and no giveaways.

Frolik needs to be dropped to third or 4th line in place of Bennett.

[Psytic]

Originally Posted by SuperMatt18

That's just a bad period though.

They were out possessed in the first at 24% Corsi- but the game was still only 2-1 going into the 2nd.

In the second they were 60% , and in the third they were 67%, so outside of the first 20 they outpossessed Colorado. And by the end of the game they finished ahead as on the whole. So sure the Flames were behind the 8-ball because shot attempts were 16-5 after the first period but then over the next 40 minutes it was 42-24.

You can marginalize it if you want but it was that bad that it took until the last 10 minutes of the game ie. most of the game to break even on events 5v5. I could look at it on a 40 minute or by period basis but the game is 60 minutes as they say. Point being classic Flames didnt show up to play. I hope they learn to play the full game for the next one.

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by FlamesAreOne

Bad news is we're likely down a 1st and 3rd line player tomorrow.

What is this about?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[AC]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

What is this about?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I guess he thinks Tkachuk and Lucic are both getting suspended?

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by AC

I guess he thinks Tkachuk and Lucic are both getting suspended?

If this was happening, we would have heard something about supplemental discipline by now, no?

[AC]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

If this was happening, we would have heard something about supplemental discipline by now, no?

Yeah, there's been nothing. They announce the NHL is looking at events almost immediately.

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by Psytic

You can marginalize it if you want but it was that bad that it took until the last 10 minutes of the game ie. most of the game to break even on events 5v5. I could look at it on a 40 minute or by period basis but the game is 60 minutes as they say. Point being classic Flames didnt show up to play. I hope they learn to play the full game for the next one.

But this is a very weird way to gauge possession. Event shares are not banked to be withdrawn at a later point in time. All that the Flames needed to do to get back on even footing with Colorado was match their play IN THAT MOMENT, and that is precisely what they did in the early part of the second period, and they carried that forward straight through to the end of the game. If the Flames were 5% better than Colorado from the 20 min–60 min mark, it doesn't matter the slightest that Colorado was 30% better in the first 20. They still maintained possession longer and more consistently, which is what you want.

[Harry Lime]

The only problem that I ever had with Backlund, if you can call it a problem, is that whatever line he is on is inevitably going to be the 'shutdown' line. You can have Tkachuk and Gaudreau as his wingers, and he will still be centring the shutdown line.

As Textcritic has pointed out before, Backlund has above average production for a second line centre. The issue is, while watching the games, is that Tkachuk is still a full level above Backlund in terms of offensive ability. It's not the fault of Backlund that Tkachuk is being stunted on that line, because whatever line Backlund is on is going to be the shutdown line.

This is why I support a move of Backlund to the third line. There would not be a better third line centre in the league, and the second line can fully utilize one of it's biggest assets, that they just paid 7M for.

As for Bennett, his role is to cause chaos and take the other team defensive setup and throw it out the window. He does this very well. It's not his job to score 40 goals, it's his job to make sure that his linemate scores 40 goals.

My vote for second line :

Tkachuk - Monahan/Lindholm - Bennett

Kirk out.

[Monahammer]

Originally Posted by Harry Lime

The only problem that I ever had with Backlund, if you can call it a problem, is that whatever line he is on is inevitably going to be the 'shutdown' line. You can have Tkachuk and Gaudreau as his wingers, and he will still be centring the shutdown line.

As Textcritic has pointed out before, Backlund has above average production for a second line centre. The issue is, while watching the games, is that Tkachuk is still a full level above Backlund in terms of offensive ability. It's not the fault of Backlund that Tkachuk is being stunted on that line, because whatever line Backlund is on is going to be the shutdown line.

This is why I support a move of Backlund to the third line. There would not be a better third line centre in the league, and the second line can fully utilize one of it's biggest assets, that they just paid 7M for.

As for Bennett, his role is to cause chaos and take the other team defensive setup and throw it out the window. He does this very well. It's not his job to score 40 goals, it's his job to make sure that his linemate scores 40 goals.

My vote for second line :

Tkachuk - Monahan/Lindholm - Bennett

Kirk out.

Been asking for Tkachuk-Lindholm-Bennett since the beginning of last year.

Make it so!

[Psytic]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

But this is a very weird way to gauge possession. Event shares are not banked to be withdrawn at a later point in time. All that the Flames needed to do to get back on even footing with Colorado was match their play IN THAT MOMENT, and that is precisely what they did in the early part of the second period, and they carried that forward straight through to the end of the game. If the Flames were 5% better than Colorado from the 20 min–60 min mark, it doesn't matter the slightest that Colorado was 30% better in the first 20. They still maintained possession longer and more consistently, which is what you want.

So your totally fine with the Flames not coming to play the first period as long as they show up for the second and third? To me that's strange. Showing up for 40 minutes was good enough to lose the game. Id rather they come to play.

[Strange Brew]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

But this is a very weird way to gauge possession. Event shares are not banked to be withdrawn at a later point in time. All that the Flames needed to do to get back on even footing with Colorado was match their play IN THAT MOMENT, and that is precisely what they did in the early part of the second period, and they carried that forward straight through to the end of the game. If the Flames were 5% better than Colorado from the 20 min–60 min mark, it doesn't matter the slightest that Colorado was 30% better in the first 20. They still maintained possession longer and more consistently, which is what you want.

I don’t know if possession tracking is an in the moment thing. It is only meaningful when tracked on a cumulative basis.

I don’t really have a strong opinion but if one team has the puck all of the first 29 minutes of a game, and then the split is 49/51the rest of the way, team 1 had the puck more in that game. Otherwise you’re cherry picking when to start measuring it seems. Wouldn’t it be the same as shots on goal?

At the end of the day, who has the puck more in a 60 minute game should be the measurement. Doesn’t mean the trend of possession isn’t very relevant which is what happened in Denver.

[Flash Walken]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

Yes, of course. Ignore that fact that Backlund’s production is consistent regardless of who he is playing with. Ignore the fact that Backlund was a considerably better-than-average second line ES scoring centre last year, out scoring all three of Kadri, Schenn and Bennett.

Backlund is NOT the problem.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

This is not the ringing endorsement you think it is.

Even with Tkachuk on an absolute tear last year, backlund couldn't eclipse 50 points. That he's been in the league for 10 years and scored 50 points 1 time isn't suggestive that he's going to be the missing offensive link to unlock even more potential from Tkachuk.

I don't care that Backlund is a better 2nd line centre than what's in Edmonton, Montreal or Ottawa. It is inconsequential whether backlund score 5 more points than Paul Stastny in 27 more games.

What is consequential is that if there isn't a legit top 6 winger beside him opposite of Tkachuk, that line is going to be a defacto shut down line because they can't do much of anything else.

Backlund is perfectly adequate sandwiched between Tkachuk and Mark Stone or Tkachuk and Lindholm or Tkachuk and Phil Kessell or...But if Backlund is the second best offensive producer on that line, the Flames are going to struggle turning that defense role into much in the offensive zone.

The problem is not having another legitimate winger, but one way you can fix not having a legit winger is with a better centre.

Calgary has neither.

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by Psytic

So your totally fine with the Flames not coming to play the first period as long as they show up for the second and third? To me that's strange. Showing up for 40 minutes was good enough to lose the game. Id rather they come to play.

Wherever did you get that idea? This entire time I have been countering your assertion that Colorado "clearly dominated possession" in last night's game. They did not.

· 5v5 shot attempts: Flames 54% (24% 1st period; 61% 2nd; 67% 3rd)
· 5v5 HD splits: 53% (50%/63% and 43%).

· Shot attempts, all situations: 49%; 50% of the high danger chances (12/12)