When does a good start become a good season? - Page 2 - Calgarypuck Forums - The Unofficial Calgary Flames Fan Community

edn88 · 10-12-2013, 10:33 AM

I think it is way too early, but they are exceeding my expectations, and I am enjoying it. Don't know if any of the options apply for me (but I am voting for #2 so I can see the results)

Tinordi · 10-12-2013, 10:43 AM

The team's shooting percentage is something like 14% or regress to the mean high. Basically everything's been coming up Flames early in the season. We'll have a much better handle on what this team is when the bounces don't start going our way and their response. But enjoy it in the meantime.

Badgers Nose · 10-12-2013, 10:51 AM

When they clinch a playoff spot that would be a 'good' season.

I am hoping for a 'productive' season: it terms of their development, develop the kids, show consistent effort, figure out who fits long term and does not.

Resolute 14 · 10-12-2013, 11:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tinordi

The team's shooting percentage is something like 14% or regress to the mean high. Basically everything's been coming up Flames early in the season. We'll have a much better handle on what this team is when the bounces don't start going our way and their response. But enjoy it in the meantime.

Our shooting percentage is 11.3%. 18 goals on 159 shots. But you are correct, it is high. We're sixth in the league in that regard, and we all know that is going to come down. (For comparison sake, Toronto was the top team last year, at 11.5%.)

Ace · 10-12-2013, 11:13 AM

Peter Maher always had a theory that the 2nd quarter is what determines how good a team is... I think that's a good rule.

PlayfulGenius · 10-12-2013, 11:22 AM

Does the shooting % have to come down?? Some team has to be 6th overall, why not the Flames??

Beatle17 · 10-12-2013, 11:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by New Era

This is a fun team to watch, but they don't have the talent to keep up this pace. The other teams in the league will get their stuff together and the Flames will begin to fall back to the bottom of the standings where they were projected. MacDonald isn't a starter. He isn't even a good backup. The team has two pair of defensemen worth a spit and a bottom pair that give the fans heart attacks. The forwards are working their asses off, but what do you think is going to happen when you insert Stajan and Cammalleri into the lineup? Two less guys that will be willing to give it their all and less effort all around. Effort is contagious and when you have a couple of your guys not willing to go hard every shift that attitude filters through the rest of the team. I love the team that is being iced right now, but it just isn't going to last.

How do you know this? Cammy and Stajan both work hard, so all of a sudden they are going to stop working and drag the rest of the team down? I agree that eventually they will probably come back down to earth a bit but to state as a fact, in your mind, that this will happen is brutal.

Beatle17 · 10-12-2013, 11:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Flashpoint

We've mostly been playing the backups.

Nobody has been checking Monahan.

None of the teams thus far have been taking the Flames seriously in the first period.

Sooner or later we're going to stop catching teams thinking they are in for an easy two points. This California trip ought to be very interesting.

Regardless, it's the most fun I've had watching the Flames in about 5 years. Love the enthusiasm and effort.

Which backups, Holtby who is trying out for Canada, Bobrovsky who just won the vezina, Cary Price who is trying out for Canada or Martin Brodeur the greatest goalie in NHL history. The only backup they have faced is Eddie Lack. The Oilers have faced more backups than the Flames.

Beatle17 · 10-12-2013, 11:53 AM

I actually came here to comment on what becomes a good season. To me a good season is finishing anywhere ahead of the Oilers. 1 point or 20 points, it doesn't matter as long as they finish ahead.

Tinordi · 10-12-2013, 11:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Resolute 14

Our shooting percentage is 11.3%. 18 goals on 159 shots. But you are correct, it is high. We're sixth in the league in that regard, and we all know that is going to come down. (For comparison sake, Toronto was the top team last year, at 11.5%.)

Before the Devils game I remember looking at it and it was 13.5% or something. Anyway, point is that we're getting the bounces right now, which is great but can't be relied upon to continue.

PeteMoss · 10-12-2013, 12:09 PM

I think the Flames will struggle with teams with really high end players. You've already seen it this year against the Caps and Canucks. Against teams without the super lines - the Flames can almost out depth them by running three 2nd lines (and no top line)... but don't really have any way to match up against the Sedins, Ovys and the like.

Johnny Rotten · 10-12-2013, 12:49 PM

Meant to pick middle choice

Enoch Root · 10-12-2013, 12:51 PM

I think the general goal for the season was to see a good work ethic and some growth and progression from the young guys. Also to develop a winning-culture, good-attitude kind of environment.

So far it is an excellent season in the sense that they are right on track for their goals - and those goals can continue to be met, regardless of the standings.

As for the 5 year rebuild, the simple fact of the matter is that there isn't enough talent on this team yet in order to become a contender. So the rebuild has a long way to go.

I like to look at the roster by age..

1990: Brodie and Bouma, with Knight, Colborne, Cundari, and Hanowski as hopefuls
1991: Horak, Ramage and Ortio as hopefuls
1992: Baertschi, with Reinhart, Agostino, Ferland and Arnold s hopefuls
1993: Gaudreau, with Wotherspoon, Granlund, Culkin and Brossoit as hopefuls
1994: Monahan, Gillies, Poirier, Jankowski, and Sieloff, along with Harrison, Kulak and Gordon as outside hopefuls
1995: Klimchuk Kanzig as hopefuls, along with Rafikov

(yes, I left some names out - I stuck with the ones I have the most hope for)

When I look at that list, I see the 1994 class as the future backbone of the team (along with 1993).

When the 1994 class is 21, we will know whether this group was the beginning of a successful rebuild, or whether it will drag on into a more-than-5-year thing.

That will be the 2015-2016 season. I would want the team to be showing early signs of being a cup contender by then - like St Louis for the last couple seasons, or Chicago the year before they put it all together.

Until 2015-16, I just see it as 2 more years of asset gathering and player development and I am not overly concerned with the standings, as long as the effort/attitude remains.

PeteMoss · 10-12-2013, 12:58 PM

I'd also say in some ways the season is already a success. The biggest thing that could happen this year was Monahan proving he wasn't going to bust.

Pierre "Monster" McGuire · 10-12-2013, 01:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Flashpoint

We've mostly been playing the backups.

Nobody has been checking Monahan.

None of the teams thus far have been taking the Flames seriously in the first period.

Sooner or later we're going to stop catching teams thinking they are in for an easy two points. This California trip ought to be very interesting.

Regardless, it's the most fun I've had watching the Flames in about 5 years. Love the enthusiasm and effort.

This! This is a successful season to me personally. I don't mind if they go 5-75-2 for the rest of the season as long as they play like they've been playing the last five games.

We all knew it was going to be a long, probably rough season. If the Flames make it hard for teams to get two points, then the goals, the big saves and the wins are gravy IMO.

Flash Walken · 10-12-2013, 01:04 PM

Word, Pierre, for this team the destination isn't as important as the journey.

What a night and day product on the ice. So much effort.

Cheese · 10-12-2013, 01:04 PM

The Flames wont catch teams off guard the second time around. Teams with more talent will understand better how to plan against the Flames with video and pre scouting, and after game 15-20 will start getting very tough to get points.
Need to remain realistic, we have some good pieces here but we aren't ready for prime time yet.
It is great seeing "effort" every game...its fun again to be a Flames fan.

djsFlames · 10-12-2013, 01:11 PM

I see the Flames maybe at 5-2-3 after the trip, or maybe 6-2-2.

I just have a feeling they'll ride the momentum into the trip. 1-2 of the wins may come late in games or OT, won't be winning by any landslides, but they'll find ways. I think the key game will be the Ducks, though. If they can steal two points there it'll give them a huge shot of confidence for the rest of the trip.

San Jose will be, by far, the hardest game. But we've found ways there before..

Tinordi · 10-12-2013, 01:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cheese

The Flames wont catch teams off guard the second time around. Teams with more talent will understand better how to plan against the Flames with video and pre scouting, and after game 15-20 will start getting very tough to get points.
Need to remain realistic, we have some good pieces here but we aren't ready for prime time yet.
It is great seeing "effort" every game...its fun again to be a Flames fan.

I didn't fully appreciate how much I grew to despise the Country Club Flames until this season and seeing this team play this type of hockey. My goodness, amazing when you have a team of people with accountability to each other and the coaches and you have youth hungry to make a difference and to establish themselves.

Hemi-Cuda · 10-12-2013, 01:13 PM

What I've seen so far gives me far greater hope for the future than I've had in years, but this is still a work in progress and I don't know if the Flames young players are ready for the grind of an 82 game regular season. I'm just enjoying watching a team with energy and passion play on a game-by-game basis with zero expectations