[PGT] Bolts 7 Flames 4. Flames blow a third-period lead and lose for the 6th straight game

[SuperMatt18]

Originally Posted by Igottago

What I'm saying is they haven't been playing as well as you think they are..which is why the standings reflect what they do. Otherwise logic would dictate they would be up there with Vegas instead of where they are.

If you think the trend of play has been so convincingly good, how long do you think it takes for it to yield high end results in the standings -- like challenging for a division, or a conference -- something that would indicate the potential for being a serious contender?

Because standings have a lot of noise in them - like the Flames going 0-5 in the shootout over the last two months. Or now back to back blown leads in the third - after not doing that a single time in the 53 previous games.

Posted this in a different thread but fits in this conversation.

Originally Posted by SuperMatt18

Think there is something else that is somewhat promising.

16/17 Nashville Predators - GP: 51 W: 25 - 18 - 8 58 pts
17/18 Calgary Flames - GP: 51 W: 25 - 18 -8 58 pts

16/17 Nashville

ESGF: 104
ESGA: 101
GF%: 50.7%
CF%: 51.1%
HD%: 51.7% (10TH)
PP: 18.1% (18TH)
PK: 83.1% (8TH)

17/18 Calgary Flames

ESGF: 108
ESGA: 103
GF%: 51.18%
CF%: 52.17% (6TH)
HD%: 53.70% (7TH)
PP: 17.3% (23rd)
PK: 80.3% (17th)

Last year at this time a lot was made about how Nashville was underperforming and that their advanced stats were better than they were showing.

Well this year the Flames have an identical record to what the Preds had last year, have even better 5v5 stats (both advanced & counting) and are also underperforming.

The only real major stat difference between the two teams after 51 games is special teams.

Know how many coaching changes or major trades the Preds made in advance of the playoffs last year? 0 - they believed that their long term strategy was right.

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by Igottago

What I'm saying is they haven't been playing as well as you think they are..which is why the standings reflect what they do. Otherwise logic would dictate they would be up there with Vegas instead of where they are.

If you think the trend of play has been so convincingly good, how long do you think it takes for it to yield high end results in the standings -- like challenging for a division, or a conference -- something that would indicate the potential for being a serious contender?

Any one can look at the standings ...

It's one season.

The Avalanche won a division and then were never seen again, same with the Flames in 2014-15 season. Clearly many in Edmonton are suggesting it's one year abbe-ration, same in Montreal and Ottawa.

A GM has to dig deeper than the standings, it's not a one season job. If a team seems to out play the opposition but finds a way to lose you have to figure out why and not make silly rash decisions.

Is it coaching? A weak goaltender? Special teams? Bounces? A combination?

I see a team that seems to play well, but has a brutal shooting and finishing percentage. That plays out with the highest missed shot total in the league. That says gripping the sticks.

Do you fire a coach for that?

You can, but I'd be careful.

I'm not a huge fan of Glen Gulutzan, I'm not. But I'm also not a fan of organizations that change coaches every two years, especially when metrics say they're playing better than their record is playing out. Don't you worry about whose up next?

[Machiavelli]

I don't think Nashville is as good of a comparison as people seem to think. It appears Treliving wss trying to build something similar, but he overrated the D core.

There are at least two Preds defensemen that I would take before the Flames' best one.

[Igottago]

Originally Posted by Bingo

Don't you worry about whose up next?

I feel like the team is running in place instead of showing definitive improvement. The team's play today doesn't strike me as substantially better from than earlier this season -- or even last year for that matter. They just kind of look and feel the same, and the results are similar too. I think they are lacking something that is required to kick into another gear and become a truly elite team. We can go back and forth about whether that is coaching or players, or both. I just don't think I've seen enough to believe that everything continuing to go the same way will eventually blossom into the types of results we all want -- which is cup contender. I could be wrong -- I hope I'm wrong. But I think eventually BT has to figure out a way to get the team into another gear.

[Brick]

nm

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by Igottago

I feel like the team is running in place instead of showing definitive improvement. The team's play today doesn't strike me as substantially better from than earlier this season -- or even last year for that matter. They just kind of look and feel the same, and the results are similar too. I think they are lacking something that is required to kick into another gear and become a truly elite team. We can go back and forth about whether that is coaching or players, or both. I just don't think I've seen enough to believe that everything continuing to go the same way will eventually blossom into the types of results we all want -- which is cup contender. I could be wrong -- I hope I'm wrong. But I think eventually BT has to figure out a way to get the team into another gear.

We all see different things.

The Flames gave up 3.25 Goal per game up to Dec 5th which is in the range of 27th in the league.

Since then it's 2.20 goals per game, which is first.

That says a team is playing a good system. Defense wins.

Will the finish come around this year or next? Not sure. But I wouldn't blow up when seems to be coming together.

[Flash Walken]

Some great work by Ferland late in the game down by a goal.

https://streamable.com/fpfmk

[Beninho]

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

Some great work by Ferland late in the game down by a goal.

https://streamable.com/fpfmk

He really really needs to work on his game in his own end. The whole top line does imo. Gets stuck puck watching often

[Flash Walken]

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

Some great work by Ferland late in the game down by a goal.

https://streamable.com/fpfmk

Sam Bennett Sets the Tone at the start of the 3rd Period, up by a goal.

https://streamable.com/fr821

[SportsJunky]

Ha, the Ferland giveaway and subsequent failure to pick up his man was terrible. This Bennett one? I don't know. I'm not sure Sam was thinking Smith was going to find him with that pass up the boards. It was more unfortunate than anything.

Edit - on second and third viewing, Sammy definitely coughed it up. Not pretty.

[Roof-Daddy]

These young players are going to have to get better or this team is not going anywhere.

That is just sloppy, lazy lackadaisical play.

There is no elite help coming from anywhere anytime soon, so the growth is going to have to be mostly internal, and that kind of lazy crap has to disappear.

[Firebot]

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

Sam Bennett Sets the Tone at the start of the 3rd Period, up by a goal.

https://streamable.com/fr821

How is this on Bennett? Killorn is supposed to be Kulak's man. He never once picked up that Killorn was behind him. Bennett is a winger and was positioned right where he should be and got the puck pushed away from him. Stone being in lala land and not recognizing it is not good either.

[Flash Walken]

Originally Posted by Firebot

How is this on Bennett? Killorn is supposed to be Kulak's man. He never once picked up that Killorn was behind him. Bennett is a winger and was positioned right where he should be and got the puck pushed away from him. Stone being in lala land and not recognizing it is not good either.

Jankowski is in position to receive the outlet from bennett from the boards. Kulak has to step up to cover the ice Jankowski would normally occupy.

Bennett decides instead of chipping it to Janko, who is where he is supposed to be, that he's going to turn back towards the boards and do...I don't know what with the puck. Tampa D pinches, forces the turnover, Janko caught out of position as the play transitions from low danger to high danger and Kulak/Stone/Brouwer end up no man's land. That's 5 seconds into the period, up by a goal.

Tampa is pressing for a goal. If Bennett makes that outlet to Janko, it's an odd-man break for Calgary. If bennett eats it along the boards, Stone/Kulak/Brouwer have time to adjust positioning.

The '#### me' on the way to bench says it all.

[SuperMatt18]

That ones a tough one. Bennett makes a bad turnover but really a turnover at your own blue line when the other teams dman pinches down shouldn’t turn into a wide open chance in front.

Kulak kinda skated into no mans land. Stone wasn’t paying attention and then it ended up in the back of the net.

Tough play by Bennett but not 100% his fault for sure.

[cannon7]

Given the two options below which do you take?

1. A team with stellar fancy stats that finds ways to lose games.
2. A team with average fancy stats that finds ways to win games.

The disconnect, as I see it, in your argument Bingo is that you can't say with any more certainty that there is a correlation (let alone causation) between strong fancy stats and winning hockey games. Yet you're criticizing other posters emphasis on the win-loss record, with a hand wavy claim that fancy stats result in a sustainable winning record long term.

I would argue there's a lot of noise in modern fancy stats and that such a correlation is dubious at best.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by SuperMatt18

That ones a tough one. Bennett makes a bad turnover but really a turnover at your own blue line when the other teams dman pinches down shouldn’t turn into a wide open chance in front.

Kulak kinda skated into no mans land. Stone wasn’t paying attention and then it ended up in the back of the net.

Tough play by Bennett but not 100% his fault for sure.

You're doing it wrong - Bennett is the chosen whipping boy here.

Seriously though, to your point, Kulak and Stone had one of their worst games in a very long time. Happens. Also, to be fair, when the goalie let's every single shot from any angle in, everyone else is going to look horrible defensively.

The simple fact of the matter is that both teams will turn the puck over and miss assignments defensively multiple times per game. But those mistakes only really get noticed and discussed when it results in a goal. And unfortunately, on Thursday night, many resulted in goals.

[GranteedEV]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

You're doing it wrong - Bennett is the chosen whipping boy here.

Seriously though, to your point, Kulak and Stone had one of their worst games in a very long time. Happens. Also, to be fair, when the goalie let's every single shot from any angle in, everyone else is going to look horrible defensively.

The simple fact of the matter is that both teams will turn the puck over and miss assignments defensively multiple times per game. But those mistakes only really get noticed and discussed when it results in a goal. And unfortunately, on Thursday night, many resulted in goals.

spot on.

[Robbob]

I was just looking at the scoresheet in the caps v pens game. Looked to be similar situation where Holtby wasn't pulled until the 6th goal to make it 6-4 for the Pens. I didn't watch the game but it is amusing the following day 7-4 game where the coach left the starter in until the 6th goal.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by Robbob

I was just looking at the scoresheet in the caps v pens game. Looked to be similar situation where Holtby wasn't pulled until the 6th goal to make it 6-4 for the Pens. I didn't watch the game but it is amusing the following day 7-4 game where the coach left the starter in until the 6th goal.

Barry Trotz is obviously a terrible coach.

[Robbob]

That was my first thought as well