[PGT] Jets 3 Flames 2

[timbit]

Originally Posted by Bingo

I don't see myself as not criticizing ... I'm just not going to the effort thing.

I thought Gaudreau especially, but Monahan to a lesser extent had more jam in game two five on five.

The powerplay was a mess but I wouldn't hang it on any one player.

Carve away on execution, willingness to go to the tough areas and mental toughness ... I just don't see mailing it in as a likely reason.

When you don’t go to the tough areas and aren’t mentally prepared to compete or overcome adversity, you mailed it in.

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by Bingo

I have zero issue with poking at the strategy or mental toughness of the team ... or even the willingness to go to the tough areas.

I just cringe when I see "mailed it in", "Don't give AF", "out worked" ... rarely the case.

Yup. Results are part of the story, but people's perception swings far too wildly based on wins and losses. 90% of the "mental" narratives after game 2 were also true after game 1. Both teams played incredibly similar games in both, there were very few style or system adjustments on either side, outside of the Jets having to draw 3 new players in.

The bounces didn't go our way as much/went against us more than in game 1, but a most of the issues were there in game 1, and most of what helped us win game 1 was there in game 2, same for Winnipeg. People complain about the zone entry on the powerplay, for example, but it worked plenty in game 1, didn't work as well in game 2. Did Winnipeg do anything different? Nope, same effort, same system trying to shut down the zone entry, it just worked more often in game 2.

Random events largely dictate how we evaluate hockey, and we rarely ever chalk those things up to random events, instead we say "well the pass worked yesterday but didn't work today, it must mean he cares less/the Jets figured us out." Small adjustments do help as you get used to player habits, but it's not like game 1 was the first time these teams have seen or played against each other. It's not new.

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by timbit

When you don’t go to the tough areas and aren’t mentally prepared to compete or overcome adversity, you mailed it in.

Maybe. But not every player goes to the tough areas, doesn't mean all the ones who don't "mail it in."

All teams, even the Flames, come mentally prepared to compete. Just because they lost doesn't mean they weren't, and doesn't mean they "mailed it in."

And overcoming adversity can be as simple as a single bounce going your way. That's the difference between overcoming it, and succumbing to it. It really has nothing to do with "mailing it in."

We create silly narrative because we want the story. But hockey is a game, not a movie. No amount of cliche helps us better understand the game. You might as well say they didn't "give 110%."

[dino7c]

Gaudreau made an amazing play on the PP that ended up in a shot off the post...its a fine line

[GranteedEV]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

Maybe. But not every player goes to the tough areas, doesn't mean all the ones who don't "mail it in."

All teams, even the Flames, come mentally prepared to compete. Just because they lost doesn't mean they weren't, and doesn't mean they "mailed it in."

And overcoming adversity can be as simple as a single bounce going your way. That's the difference between overcoming it, and succumbing to it. It really has nothing to do with "mailing it in."

We create silly narrative because we want the story. But hockey is a game, not a movie. No amount of cliche helps us better understand the game. You might as well say they didn't "give 110%."

And maybe the reason those top players aren't effective is more about their fit together than it is about effort or compete. The media are always showing this graphic about how Monahan and Gaudreau have combined for the most or second-most goals in the last x years. What this tells me, is that the Flames have split their two stars the least over the same period compared to virtually every other team. Sometimes things get stale, but the Flames are the only team that keeps going back to that dry well.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by Bingo

I have zero issue with poking at the strategy or mental toughness of the team ... or even the willingness to go to the tough areas.

I just cringe when I see "mailed it in", "Don't give AF", "out worked" ... rarely the case.

Yup, totally agree.

[timbit]

I am not opining “silly narratives”.

If your best players are not mentally prepared to be at their best, and/or willing to reset during the game ,when under adversity, the team will struggle to win even when the other team is missing their top guys.

Once again, the team that has their best players playing better than the other teams best players wins 80-90% of games.

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by timbit

I am not opining “silly narratives”.

If your best players are not mentally prepared to be at their best, and/or willing to reset during the game ,when under adversity, the team will struggle to win even when the other team is missing their top guys.

Once again, the team that has their best players playing better than the other teams best players wins 80-90% of games.

I think we largely agree.

I just don't see it as mailing it in. Not all players are built to drive to the paint and create havoc.

I wish they were as this team needs more of that.

Could certainly be that Calgary has the wrong type of top players as they just aren't built for this time of year, but I don't think they're mailing it in.

[dammage79]

Yeah. I think the players are giving their all, just haven't made the old sacrifice yet. Dube did in game 1 to create a goal scoring opportunity. I'd say thats what makes Bennett so impactful in a playoff format as well. And I think for the most part, both Monahan and Lindholm are always in the muck.

I know Johnnys a special player, but I just don't think he has the size required to get over that edge in battle. And I .... I dont think the playbook of Johnny carries everything with the game on the line is the right tactic. He can't battle for the play, he backs put with weird passes or no look slap shots. Its all wrong.

End of the day, the player GAF, but haven't learned to bite the bullet or learned the "at all costs" mentality required for the deep push.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by GranteedEV

And maybe the reason those top players aren't effective is more about their fit together than it is about effort or compete. The media are always showing this graphic about how Monahan and Gaudreau have combined for the most or second-most goals in the last x years. What this tells me, is that the Flames have split their two stars the least over the same period compared to virtually every other team. Sometimes things get stale, but the Flames are the only team that keeps going back to that dry well.

If they are the most productive duo over a period of time, it is hard to call it a dry well.

[Johnny Makarov]

Originally Posted by timbit

I am not opining “silly narratives”.

If your best players are not mentally prepared to be at their best, and/or willing to reset during the game ,when under adversity, the team will struggle to win even when the other team is missing their top guys.

Once again, the team that has their best players playing better than the other teams best players wins 80-90% of games.

Lots of Gaudreau hate daily. Where is your criticism for our below average captain? Where is his leadership?

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by timbit

I am not opining “silly narratives”.

If your best players are not mentally prepared to be at their best, and/or willing to reset during the game ,when under adversity, the team will struggle to win even when the other team is missing their top guys.

Once again, the team that has their best players playing better than the other teams best players wins 80-90% of games.

Sure, I agree that when your best players are better than the other team's best players, you win 80-90% of the games. But "better" isn't just "more mentally prepared" which is tenuous and silly. Better is better in terms of overall skill, better in terms of luck (bounces), and better in terms of opportunity. If you don't have all three of those things, or a significant advantage in one or two areas, you aren't going to be better no matter how you "mentally prepare to be at your best."

A great player can play at their absolute best and still have bad luck and a team that can shut them down. Happens to Ovechkin, happens to Crosby, happens to Kane, McDavid, McKinnon, Burns, etc. Doesn't mean they weren't mentally prepared to be their best. As dino said, the line between these things is razor thin.

They overcame a 2-0 deficit, so they were obviously prepared to overcome adversity, by any reasonable logic. They had plenty of posts and near misses (all teams do) that could have resulted in a lopsided win, and we wouldn't be having this conversation. So what does that tell you about the value of being "mentally prepared" when so much of the results (and every result) hinges on good luck and good bounces?

[JohnnyB]

Although I'm coming around to the view that Monahan and Gaudreau just aren't the right combo for this team to have success, I don't think Johnny lacks for effort in the past few games. Monahan's level of effort I don't feel like I can even fairly comment on because I haven't noticed him on the ice at all, but Johnny seems to be putting the effort in.

The team really needs one or two top-end players that have the capacity to score virtually by force of will along with high-end talent. The team just doesn't have that now. Johnny and Monahan are apparently too easy to shut down in the playoffs.

They could make me look like a fool within a couple of hours for writing that, but I think it's what their record is unfortunately starting to show unless they have a big turnaround in actual scoring.

[SuperMatt18]

We may be a bit too harsh on our top line in this series so far to be honest. They have contributed 2 GF (1 PP, and 1 ES) and 0 GA, and have driven play without giving up much defensively.

I thought the effort has been there especially defensively, and on the back check, the problem has been they've shown no creativity or skill in the offensive zone at even strength in both games, and on the PP in game 2.

Their biggest issue was the PP yesterday, so I think that's fair critisim for sure. They needed to score on that bad penalty that Ehlers took.

I was surprised when I saw them fairing so well in this line ranking chart today:

[mrdonkey]

Originally Posted by Johnny Makarov

Lots of Gaudreau hate daily. Where is your criticism for our below average captain? Where is his leadership?

Nobody hates Gaudreau, stop with this silly narrative.

[Enoch Root]

somebody hates Giordano though

[Wastedyouth]

Originally Posted by SuperMatt18

We may be a bit too harsh on our top line in this series so far to be honest. They have contributed 2 GF (1 PP, and 1 ES) and 0 GA, and have driven play without giving up much defensively.

I thought the effort has been there especially defensively, and on the back check, the problem has been they've shown no creativity or skill in the offensive zone at even strength in both games, and on the PP in game 2.

Their biggest issue was the PP yesterday, so I think that's fair critisim for sure. They needed to score on that bad penalty that Ehlers took.

I was surprised when I saw them fairing so well in this line ranking chart today:

This falls in line with what my eyes have been seeing, I do not understand the narrative that has been ongoing in the last couple games. Seems people may want to see the top line fail, so that is what they are seeing, which is clearly not the case.

[timbit]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

So what does that tell you about the value of being "mentally prepared" when so much of the results (and every result) hinges on good luck and good bounces?

So kind of like poker or horseshoes?

Interesting.

[AC]

Gaudreau is one of my all-time favourite players, and yet I have serious concerns over his ability to overcome the tight checking and high pressure of the playoffs.

If he can't produce even strength in the playoffs to a top line level, then he NEEDS to be a PP specialist. Of course that applies to Monahan, Lindholm, and Tkachuk especially as well. Tkachuk with 0 points so far isn't good enough.

[BACKCHECK!!!]

I generally agree that most of these tropes about "mental toughness" and "not being engaged" and "doesnt GAF", are completely bogus for the most part.

But Joe Colborne, man. Joe Colborne.