While Kipper is out, The Who Starts Next Game Thread

[VANFLAMESFAN]

Originally Posted by Francis's Hairpiece

Dude, you were the only one debating this. If you don't want the debate don't start the thread.

Hypothetically on Saturday, Irving gets lit up for 5 goals in the first period, and Taylor comes in a performs well in the 2nd and 3rd, you don't consider starting Danny against Minny? Of course you would.

Again, I hope Leland can shut the door and Flames win, but it's a fair question to ask if a worst case scenario happens. Is it not?

[PantherExtreme]

"The flames are teetering on the brink with two completely unproven goalies and things went moderately ok tonight... so should we completely screw with that??" I would not even need to know what a goalie was to answer that question. No, dont screw with things until something goes wrong.

[Yoho]

Originally Posted by PantherExtreme

"The flames are teetering on the brink with two completely unproven goalies and things went moderately ok tonight... so should we completely screw with that??" I would not even need to know what a goalie was to answer that question. No, dont screw with things until something goes wrong.

That's a real "mouthful".

[indes]

Originally Posted by VANFLAMESFAN

Jesus, no one is throwing Leland under the bus. He played fine, not great. Is that not a fair comment?

He played fine is a fair comment, I was just wondering where your expectations were before the game.

I think fine is exactly what the flames were hoping to get from him this game and I believe he delivered.

I'm also curious what you expect out of Danny Taylor, as I presume its an above average performance
where he hasn't even practiced with NHL players since 2008.

I'm sorry if I'm coming off as an ass here but I just don't understand these threads after a win.

[GGG]

I think you give Irving 5 games no matter what. And as long as he shows Improvement and is competitive you keep going with him. Doesn t even have to win.

The key is I dont think we can win with average goaltending so Irving or Taylor doesnt matter. What we need to do is evaluate if Irving has a place in the future. That takes at least 5 games maybe more.

[Phanuthier]

Originally Posted by VANFLAMESFAN

Hypothetically on Saturday, Irving gets lit up for 5 goals in the first period, and Taylor comes in a performs well in the 2nd and 3rd, you don't consider starting Danny against Minny? Of course you would.

Again, I hope Leland can shut the door and Flames win, but it's a fair question to ask if a worst case scenario happens. Is it not?

Did you use the 5 goals in the first period as a hypothetical, because thats the summary of Danny Taylors NHL career?

[Francis's Hairpiece]

Originally Posted by VANFLAMESFAN

Hypothetically on Saturday, Irving gets lit up for 5 goals in the first period, and Taylor comes in a performs well in the 2nd and 3rd, you don't consider starting Danny against Minny? Of course you would.

Again, I hope Leland can shut the door and Flames win, but it's a fair question to ask if a worst case scenario happens. Is it not?

Where is this coming from? Why does he have to get lit up?

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by VANFLAMESFAN

Hypothetically on Saturday, Irving gets lit up for 5 goals in the first period, and Taylor comes in a performs well in the 2nd and 3rd, you don't consider starting Danny against Minny? Of course you would.

Again, I hope Leland can shut the door and Flames win, but it's a fair question to ask if a worst case scenario happens. Is it not?

The thread title says next game. YOu posed a question and everyone said Irving. Now you are making up hypothetical situations in an attempt to generate some sort of support for your view.

Let it go

[VANFLAMESFAN]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

The thread title says next game. YOu posed a question and everyone said Irving. Now you are making up hypothetical situations in an attempt to generate some sort of support for your view.

Let it go

Fair enough, I've already acknowledged that I realize I'm in the vast minority on Saturday's game. I believe it's worth a discussion, others clearly don't. Fine, it's my opinion, I'm entitled to it.

But I also have in the original post that it's a thread that can be used down the road on a continuous basis as long as Kipper is out. If bad things happen, who the starter is in the "NEXT GAME" will make for interesting discussion.

[ken0042]

Irving's tasks as the backup:

- Save the win in Detroit
- Earn a win in Columbus

He did both, and now has some confidence. So you keep going with him.

One more little tidbit for you; we all know Kipper got the win in Detroit. Ironically if Irving had let in 2 goals instead of zero; he would have got the win instead.

[Karen]

Originally Posted by ken0042

Irving's tasks as the backup:

- Save the win in Detroit
- Earn a win in Columbus

He did both, and now has some confidence. So you keep going with him.

One more little tidbit for you; we all know Kipper got the win in Detroit. Ironically if Irving had let in 2 goals instead of zero; he would have got the win instead.

Totally agree. Solid backup

[Dion]

It's a no brainer, you go with Irving. He needs the ice time at the NHL level to develop further and gain more confidence. Taylor will be riding the pinr till Kiprusoff returns.

[Phanuthier]

Originally Posted by VANFLAMESFAN

Fair enough, I've already acknowledged that I realize I'm in the vast minority on Saturday's game. I believe it's worth a discussion, others clearly don't. Fine, it's my opinion, I'm entitled to it.

But I also have in the original post that it's a thread that can be used down the road on a continuous basis as long as Kipper is out. If bad things happen, who the starter is in the "NEXT GAME" will make for interesting discussion.

Planning ahead, I see...

[VANFLAMESFAN]

Originally Posted by Phanuthier

Planning ahead, I see...

I was just trying to start what could be an interesting discussion thread given that we haven't had a backup start two games in a row since 2004. It wasn't meant for just this Saturday's game.

Mods, please delete the thread, it's clearly not having the desired effect.

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally Posted by T@T

Irving for sure but he better learn in 48 hours to come out of his crease and challenge shooters or he'll be pulled in 10 minutes against Vancouver.

This.

He should get the start, but he was still not great. The last thing we want to do is shatter his confidence though. It's not like Kiprusoff hasn't had his poor games.

[zunie75]

I think that Irving could get eaten alive by the Canucks (based on how he has had rough time during the lock out and wasn't even facing AHL shots.) Tonight's win however, could give him confidence to go in and play very well against Vancouver.

[OffsideSpecialist]

Irving played well against Vancouver last year iirc, either way you have to play him

Give Taylor either Dallas or Phoenix next weekend.

[ah123]

I fail to understand why this is even a question. Taylor has not even had a full practice against NHL level shooters. On top of that, Irving played lights out in Vancouver end of last season.

[nik-]

Originally Posted by VANFLAMESFAN

I was just trying to start what could be an interesting discussion thread given that we haven't had a backup start two games in a row since 2004. It wasn't meant for just this Saturday's game.

Mods, please delete the thread, it's clearly not having the desired effect.

What was the desired effect? Overwhelming support for an unnecessary move?

[sergei_makarov]

Weird expectations from the OP. Shouldn't be surprising at all that the overwhelming majority would go with starting Irving next game after he wins his first game of the season. Definitely start Irving next game... in fact, bet Hartley doesn't even think about starting Taylor.