[PGT] The Gun Went Off In Columbus! : Flames Win 4-3 in OT!!

[Resolute 14]

Originally Posted by Bingo

Personally I wonder how Hartley got through to Iginla because Itse pretty much had Iginla of the last two seasons nailed.

I coach Atom kids and I use "Iginla coverage" as a buzz word when the wingers get in that grey zone between not covering the Dman high, and not collapsing down low and helping out in the corner - essentially covering nobody and just standing in open ice hoping to get the puck and go.

This year he hasn't been that guy for the most part.

I've never though Iginla to be a lazy player, but my guess was always that he wanted to help the team win, and felt he had to score to do that which justified his positioning to him in their zone.

All guessing of course.

Interesting to see Hartley get to him.

Hartley's break out plan is quite obviously built around speed and quick passes. Consequently, we are no longer relying on 35-year-old Iginla trying to bull his way into the zone because 25-year-old Igina could do it. So without Iggy feeling the need to lead a rush, he's no longer leaving the zone so early. And because of that, he is usually in a better defensive position.

Putting him on the PK helps too. Too many of his coaches kept him off it because they wanted him focusing on offence. Then we bitch because he was too focused on offence!

[you got PHANUEFED]

The team is lookin better with each game now all they have to do is protect Irving and play a solid 60 I know thats easier said then done but they have no choice if they want the W's to pile up.

[Henry Fool]

Originally Posted by Bingo

I can't stand people that choose negativism as a sport, but you also have to be careful with this line of thought.

No "haters" could be confused with "drink the kool-aid or don't post" which is pretty much the last thing I want on this site.

I know I've said this before, but we should in general be very careful about directing posts at other posters rather than just expressing our opinions about the team, because that's when the threads turn unbearable.

Too much of that going on lately. Too many people just wanting to call out other posters for things that have no interest for anyone else. "Oh you were negative then, you were positive about that, you liked this player, you hated that player." You have to accept that there will always be people and opinions that you don't like. You don't have to be in a constant panic to tell everyone how they make you feel.

We should all keep in mind how goddamn awful those petty exchanges are for everyone else but the people directly involved. No one else wants to read that crap.

[Komskies]

Originally Posted by Anduril

Exciting end to the game. Can't find my post, but looks like my prediction was accurate to the score/OT.

Bound to get one of them right once in a while.

http://forum.calgarypuck.com/showpos...5&postcount=20

[ComixZone]

Originally Posted by Bingo

Actually I thought his defensive game was weaker in Columbus then it has been. Maybe he thought he needed to be the guy to tie things up or get that go ahead goal, but he wasn't as engaged last night as he has been through the season.

I'd say this was an issue that wasn't exclusive to Jarome. The whole team (other than Lord Brodie), seemed to lack the level of engagement we've been seeing.

That being said - this was a game the Flames would have found a way to lose in previous years. This work ethic this team has been showing so far this season is mind blowingly refreshing. Bouwmeester absolutely screwed the pooch in the 3rd on that giveaway, but the team rallied and landed an ugly win in OT. Important 2 points.

[polak]

Hudler, Cervenka, Backlund are three question marks this season that are coming up good!

Something that hasn't happened for the Flames since freaking Huselius.

[Resolute 14]

Originally Posted by polak

Hudler, Cervenka, Backlund are three question marks this season that are coming up good!

Something that hasn't happened for the Flames since freaking Huselius.

Add Wideman's defence.

[Mike F]

Originally Posted by Bingo

Personally I wonder how Hartley got through to Iginla because Itse pretty much had Iginla of the last two seasons nailed.

. . . .

Interesting to see Hartley get to him.

Isn't it much simpler to suggest that Hartley has introduced a new system (undoubtedly true) that simply asks something different from Iginla than Sutter's than to suggest that Sutter and Hartley have asked for the same thing and Iginla just decided to listen to Hartley but not Sutter?

[AltaGuy]

I give a lot of credit to Feaster/Weisbrod and their search for players with hockey "IQ". Wideman has it in spades. (As do other additions in Hudler and Cervenka - and was a major reason why a guy like Jokinen had no spot.)

Of course, guys with high hockey IQs tend to be diminutive since they've overcome size disadvantages, which partially explains why we've become midgets. Problematic if we ever make the playoffs, potentially, but who's talking about playoffs?

[squiggs96]

Originally Posted by bigpete

Haha. Didn't mean to cause a kerfuffle. Just bugs me that's all. Saying a team has a .500 record to me implies that they are even in terms of wins and losses and would be exactly average. .500 would now not be a benchmark to aspire to or measure success by - the extra point makes .600 a more realistic point of measurement for this.

If a team goes 0W - 27L in regulation length games, and 28W - 27L in games going to a shootout, they could say "hey we have a record of above .500"

Even though they did not win a single game in regulation or overtime all year and it would be considered a terrible year and probably the worst in the history of NHL hockey. Just sayin. I realize it is all semantics, but it just kind of bugs me.

You are arbitrarily using the word average. Just because there are an equal number of teams above and below you doesn't necessarily mean that you're average. That's the median. The mean, or weighted average, is found by taking the sum of all observations and dividing it by the number of observations.

.500 is a mathematical output. It means you received exactly 50% of the possible outcomes, in this case points. You take the number of points you received and divide it by the number of points you could have possibly received. Right now the Flames have 8 points out of 16 for a .500 record. Their win rate is .375, but their record is still .500. It's the same in baseball when a guy is hitting .300 and his home run rate is .050. These aren't opinions, they are basic mathematical facts.

.500 does not imply anything besides they received 50% of the possible points. You are inferring (not implying as you stated) something that isn't true. It doesn't mean they are an average team, playoff team or anything else. I don't think that any team is trying to end the season with a .500 record. The last team that was able to make the playoffs with a record at or below .500 was the 1998-99 Oilers, and there were only 27 teams in the NHL that year.

Being .500 at the end of the year is not a benchmark to measure success by, in my opinion. The Flames are one of three teams since the lockout to have at least 90 points in ever year since the lockout. On the surface that sounds great, but we all know they haven't made the playoffs since the 2008-09 season. They still managed to have at least a .549 record. A .600 record, as you pointed out, would get you into the playoffs every year. That does not change, in any way, shape or form, the fact that when you received half of the points you possibly could have won, you have a .500 record, no matter what you infer.

[red sky]

Originally Posted by polak

Hudler, Cervenka, Backlund are three question marks this season that are coming up good!

Something that hasn't happened for the Flames since freaking Huselius.

Cervenka doesn't appear to be a great skater although he seems to get better as the games progress. I understand he is probably still not in game shape but his stride appears abnormal. While I am some what impressed with his play, I think he will continue to improve over the season.

[Henry Fool]

Originally Posted by Mike F

Isn't it much simpler to suggest that Hartley has introduced a new system (undoubtedly true) that simply asks something different from Iginla than Sutter's than to suggest that Sutter and Hartley have asked for the same thing and Iginla just decided to listen to Hartley but not Sutter?

Could be a little bit of both, but to me it's clear that Iginla and Sutter had different ideas about how Jarome can best help his team. Just recall Brent's amazing 15-minute rant about offensive players changing into a different mentality, for example. We all knew who he was talking about. Iginla has basically been a classic RW sniper for many years now, and if you're going to keep him around, I don't think you can ask him to become anything else any more than Anaheim can ask Selänne to become a defensive forward.

That's the game Jarome wants to play, and if he's allowed to be himself without any inner conflict, I think that frees up some energy for other areas as well.

[Henry Fool]

Originally Posted by red sky

Cervenka doesn't appear to be a great skater although he seems to get better as the games progress. I understand he is probably still not in game shape but his stride appears abnormal. While I am some what impressed with his play, I think he will continue to improve over the season.

Jury's still out on Cervenka. I think Hudler has been feeding him really well and actually working pretty hard for him, but Roman's shots keep missing the mark. He might look pretty bad anywhere else in the lineup.

He's smart, but I don't know if he's quick enough. Some similarities to Leino with the skill and smarts and lack of speed, and similarly his success might be determined by chemistry with linemates and playing in the right kind of system.

[Clever_Iggy]

Originally Posted by Henry Fool

Jury's still out on Cervenka. I think Hudler has been feeding him really well and actually working pretty hard for him, but Roman's shots keep missing the mark. He might look pretty bad anywhere else in the lineup.

He's smart, but I don't know if he's quick enough. Some similarities to Leino with the skill and smarts and lack of speed, and similarly his success might be determined by chemistry with linemates and playing in the right kind of system.

I noticed he looks like the slowest player on the ice most shifts. But, he also was not playing for a month (more?) due to his blood clot so I caulk it up to not being at 100% game shape (I'd say just north of 75%). Give him another 7-10 games and I think we'll have a better body of evidence to opine on.

Regardless, he's found open space, had plenty of good chances and looks to be in sync with Hudler, so at this point, I'll take 75% based 6 games.

[Igster]

Originally Posted by Clever_Iggy

I noticed he looks like the slowest player on the ice most shifts.

Yup, noticed this as well. Looks to be slower and winded quite easily. Once he is in full game shape, I think he'll be lights out with Hudler. Very smart player.

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by Mike F

Isn't it much simpler to suggest that Hartley has introduced a new system (undoubtedly true) that simply asks something different from Iginla than Sutter's than to suggest that Sutter and Hartley have asked for the same thing and Iginla just decided to listen to Hartley but not Sutter?

The systems aren't that different without the puck ... Iginla just didn't roll his sleeves up in recent seasons, but now he is.

no coach would instruct a winger to just stand in open ice doing neither of a) covering his D or b) collapsing down low to help out the defenseman and the center

[Henry Fool]

Originally Posted by Clever_Iggy

I noticed he looks like the slowest player on the ice most shifts. But, he also was not playing for a month (more?) due to his blood clot so I caulk it up to not being at 100% game shape (I'd say just north of 75%). Give him another 7-10 games and I think we'll have a better body of evidence to opine on.

Regardless, he's found open space, had plenty of good chances and looks to be in sync with Hudler, so at this point, I'll take 75% based 6 games.

Probably true, but him and Hudler are still probably the slowest forwards on the team. It's more about situational quickness though. Like how quickly you can get to the puck that's in front of you, how quickly you close in on the player on the boards, and so on. Just reacting, a few explosive steps. We'll see. Sometimes he's been slightly behind but maybe I'm just putting him under the microscope since I want him to prove himself.

[Five-hole]

Cervenka has showed flashes of brilliance but I agree with the somewhat slow, possibly out of shape comments. I'd like to see him re-signed and have him work a lot on his skating, fitness, and English in the offseason and we could have a real player on our hands.

[bigpete]

Originally Posted by squiggs96

You are arbitrarily using the word average. Just because there are an equal number of teams above and below you doesn't necessarily mean that you're average. That's the median. The mean, or weighted average, is found by taking the sum of all observations and dividing it by the number of observations.

.500 is a mathematical output. It means you received exactly 50% of the possible outcomes, in this case points. You take the number of points you received and divide it by the number of points you could have possibly received. Right now the Flames have 8 points out of 16 for a .500 record. Their win rate is .375, but their record is still .500. It's the same in baseball when a guy is hitting .300 and his home run rate is .050. These aren't opinions, they are basic mathematical facts.

.500 does not imply anything besides they received 50% of the possible points. You are inferring (not implying as you stated) something that isn't true. It doesn't mean they are an average team, playoff team or anything else. I don't think that any team is trying to end the season with a .500 record. The last team that was able to make the playoffs with a record at or below .500 was the 1998-99 Oilers, and there were only 27 teams in the NHL that year.

Being .500 at the end of the year is not a benchmark to measure success by, in my opinion. The Flames are one of three teams since the lockout to have at least 90 points in ever year since the lockout. On the surface that sounds great, but we all know they haven't made the playoffs since the 2008-09 season. They still managed to have at least a .549 record. A .600 record, as you pointed out, would get you into the playoffs every year. That does not change, in any way, shape or form, the fact that when you received half of the points you possibly could have won, you have a .500 record, no matter what you infer.

Thanks for the post, I completely agree with what you are saying.

I believe most people look at a .500 record (in terms of points) as being average. Anything above .500 is pretty good, and anything below .500 is poor. A team's fan would say "Hey, we are 4-3-2, we are a game above .500, we are doing pretty well this year!" When in reality they may have won 2 regulation games, lost 3 regulation games, won 2 shootout games, and lost 2 shootout games, which is actually quite a poor performance compared to most teams.

Sorry about continuing this discussion, but I was getting called out on my math, so I need to defend myself. I’m not saying that the Flames are not .500 points-wise. They obviously are. My point is that being at .500 points-wise is absolutely meaningless in a system where there are extra points given out for OT or shootout losses. A team could finish the season at .500 and be dead last in the league by a wide margin.

Think about it. Next season, first game of the year, the Flames beat the Oilers in a shootout. Every single game for every single team after for the entire rest of the year goes to overtime and/or a shootout. The Flames lose every single time. Their final record is 1 - 0 – 81, for a total of 83 points. Every other team in the league wins about half of their OT/shootouts and loses about half of their OT/shootouts. Every other team finishes with a record of approximately 42 – 0 – 40, for a total of about 124 points. The Flames finish dead last in 30th place with 83 points, miles behind the 29th place finisher who finishes with around 124 points. But hey, we played over .500, so pretty successful season though right? We played over .500 points wise and points are what matter right? Oh wait we finished dead last in points by a huge margin.

As you can see, .500 points-wise is absolutely meaningless. .500 wins-wise is a goal to aspire to and is a better benchmark to measure success.
Anyway, I don’t mean to be a stick in the mud, but just wanted to stick up for myself. Haha. I’m liking how the Flames have looked all year. They deserve a better record than they have, but at least the results are starting to come now.

Go Flames Go!

[Enoch Root]

no one ever said 500 was pretty good

just that it was half of the available points