Jay Bouwmeester Appreciation Thread

[Rerun]

Originally Posted by StrykerSteve

I don't see the logic in not standing up and supporting the heck out of JBo, regardless of whether you like him or not. He either excels under Hartley and makes the Flames a better team because of it, or if your only desire is to see him shipped out of town, he excels and increases his trade value, again making the Flames better for it.

Either way is a win for this team, so everyone should be standing up and cheering the heck out of this guy.

If most people had your sunny attitude the world would probably be a better place.... boring as hell.... but sunny! J/K

I see your logic but I doubt it will happen as too many people are feeling butt hurt over JBo.

[Reanimate]

One thing I want to know. How does anyone here have any clue what kind of system or game plan Bob Hartley uses?

[Pierre "Monster" McGuire]

Originally Posted by Reanimate

One thing I want to know. How does anyone here have any clue what kind of system or game plan Bob Hartley uses?

I've been wondering the same thing.

When it was rumoured Hartley was the front runner, everyone on CP kept talking about how he plays q boring defensive game.

Then he gets hired and the press conference happens where he talks about playing an exciting brand of hockey and everyone assumes we've got ourselves a high offensive, no defense team who is going to leave Kipper out to dry.

Kind of odd how the consensus turns basically overnight.

[Reanimate]

Originally Posted by Pierre "Monster" McGuire

I've been wondering the same thing.

When it was rumoured Hartley was the front runner, everyone on CP kept talking about how he plays q boring defensive game.

Then he gets hired and the press conference happens where he talks about playing an exciting brand of hockey and everyone assumes we've got ourselves a high offensive, no defense team who is going to leave Kipper out to dry.

Kind of odd how the consensus turns basically overnight.

Yeah, there seems to be some consensus on his coaching "style" if you will, when the guy hasn't coached in 5 years in the NHL. Brent Sutter sounded pretty certain of his system in his intro press conferences as well. We saw how fantastic that craptacular system was.

[Alberta_Beef]

Originally Posted by Pierre "Monster" McGuire

I've been wondering the same thing.

When it was rumoured Hartley was the front runner, everyone on CP kept talking about how he plays q boring defensive game.

Then he gets hired and the press conference happens where he talks about playing an exciting brand of hockey and everyone assumes we've got ourselves a high offensive, no defense team who is going to leave Kipper out to dry.

Kind of odd how the consensus turns basically overnight.

I think it's because people looked at his Atlanta days and not his Colorado days.

Hartley plays to the strengths of his clubs, and with ATL he was week up front, but here the strength is skilled wingers who can score possibly filling 4 lines.

[bubbsy]

It's funny, this thread seems like one of those medals/badges that are handed out in grade school for "Participation".

[Poe969]

[Frank MetaMusil]

Originally Posted by Alberta_Beef

Hartley plays to the strengths of his clubs, and with ATL he was week up front, but here the strength is skilled wingers who can score possibly filling 4 lines.

This was a pretty decent group of forwards, imo. Mind you he only had Heatley up to 2003-2004.

-Kovalchuk
-Hossa
-Savard
-Heatley
-Kozlov

[Alberta_Beef]

Originally Posted by Frank MetaMusil

This was a pretty decent group of forwards, imo. Mind you he only had Heatley up to 2003-2004.

-Kovalchuk
-Hossa
-Savard
-Heatley
-Kozlov

yeah Heatley/Hossa never overlapped, he also lost Heatley for half a season or so after the car accident

I while I think Kozlov is a good player and Savard very good, I think in the case of both without a guy like Kovalshuk or Hossa they are much less effective as they aren't game changers.

[FAN]

Originally Posted by StrykerSteve

I don't see the logic in not standing up and supporting the heck out of JBo

There's a difference between wanting a player to succeed and supporting the heck out of him. I want Bouwmeester to succeed because he's a Calgary Flame, but that doesn't necessarily mean I'll support a player who isn't doing everything in his power to help in hockey games for the Calgary Flames.

Originally Posted by Mass_nerder

It's completely ridiculous that I see some people blame bouwmeester for us not making the playoffs.

I don't think it's ridiculous. The Flames were in a position to make the playoffs down the stretch and Bouwmeester did little to help the team make the playoffs. Bouwmeester is one of the highest paid players on the team, he's the #1 defenseman in both salary and minutes, and he folds down the stretch every year and constantly fails to raise his compete level when the games matter. The coach, as one of the team's leaders, was let go. One of the offensive leaders who failed to deliver down the stretch (even taking into account his injuries), Jokinen, was not re-signed. It's about making players accountable and as one of the leaders Bouwmeester has to take his share of the blame.

[Reanimate]

No. People blaming Bouwmeester solely, is ####ing ######ed. Period.

[Poe969]

You can't solely blame Bouwmeester for the Flames not doing well since he got here and you can't blame him for the Panthers not doing well when he was there either. You can however say that it just isn't working out with him on the team. He's making too much money because of the expectations put on him. He just isn't doing as well on the team as most thouoght/hoped. He isn't bad but he isn't good enough to make this team much better.

The team as a whole just isn't good enough, out 2 all-stars are getting older and just can't carry the team like they used to and thats this teams problem. We just don't have a real "star" on this team and most thought JayBow could be that guy. Keeping on the team isn't going to make us better then before but trading him won't make a huge difference either.

The teams lack of success can only be blamed on the team itself. No one is doing good enough on this team and thats why some fans (like me) want a re-build.

Bouwmeester is a good defensman playing on a below average team that doesn't fit his style of play. He has the tools but they aren't working on the team, its not his fault but changes need to be made if either him or the team want success.

[CsInMyBlood]

Originally Posted by ricardodw

Bouwmeester was cheated out his only first star selection in the last game of the year by Aliu. Bouwmeester got second star in that game. He finished off the season strong!! If only all games were just for fun.

You would think that Bouwmeester as an an elite defenseman would have been a 1st star once in the 82 games he played!!! Not only do I undervalue him so do the analysts watching the games.


Butler was First star in 1 game as a was Gio, Comeau, Horak , Bourque and Irving.

Tanguay was able to dominate 3 games as was Jokinen. Glencross was only first star in 2 games but was in the 3 stars in 10 games.

Brendan freaking Morrison, playing on one leg and muscle memory was first star twice

Stempniak , who I apparently under value, was first star in 2 games.

Bouwmeester 0 for 82 in being the best player in a game.

Iginla was First star in 11 games .... Kipper 10. If they were good team-mates you would think they would give one selection to Bouwmeester.

Cammalleri only played 28 games for the Flames .... first star twice.

I see all the Bouwmeester fans pissing on Ricardodw for this post.

It is relevant. It shows that Bouwmeester in 82 games didn't garner one single night where he was the best player on the ice or a difference maker.

You can say it means nothing but it is rather telling no? A guy who has a huge contract, and plays almost half the game every night never got the first star selection even one time out of pity in 82 games? It's not like 10 year olds are picking these star selections, these are people who watch and dissect hockey on a daily basis for a living.

I wanted to stay out of this thread, because I understand it is supposed to be for people that love Jay Bouwmeester and I am not one of those folk, but to slag the crap out of him for his research because it isn't what J-Bosians want to hear makes me laugh.

Sorry for coming into your thread, carry on with the love for the mediocre.

[Reanimate]

Originally Posted by CsInMyBlood

I see all the Bouwmeester fans pissing on Ricardodw for this post.

It is relevant. It shows that Bouwmeester in 82 games didn't garner one single night where he was the best player on the ice or a difference maker.

You can say it means nothing but it is rather telling no? A guy who has a huge contract, and plays almost half the game every night never got the first star selection even one time out of pity in 82 games? It's not like 10 year olds are picking these star selections, these are people who watch and dissect hockey on a daily basis for a living.

I wanted to stay out of this thread, because I understand it is supposed to be for people that love Jay Bouwmeester and I am not one of those folk, but to slag the crap out of him for his research because it isn't what J-Bosians want to hear makes me laugh.

Sorry for coming into your thread, carry on with the love for the mediocre.

No, I am sorry, but arbitrarily selected molson 3 stars has to be the dumbest way to evaluate a players anything, ever.

[CsInMyBlood]

Originally Posted by Reanimate

No, I am sorry, but arbitrarily selected molson 3 stars has to be the dumbest way to evaluate a players anything, ever.

Sure, but it still tells a bit of a story no?

Give me even one Bouwmeester stat that makes him look good then, honestly anything.

Ironman?

[Alberta_Beef]

Originally Posted by Poe969

Bouwmeester is a good defensman playing on a below average team that doesn't fit his style of play. He has the tools but they aren't working on the team, its not his fault but changes need to be made if either him or the team want success.

I just want to address this, the style of play will be changing. And it should be a style that is more suitable for Bouwmeester. More importantly it should also be a style that is more suitable for Giordano, Iginla, Tanguay, Cammalleri and more suitable for newcomers Hudler and Wideman than the last few years.

On paper a team can be a poor team and do very well if the coaches know how to utilize their players. Look at the Blues, they were what worst in the league when Hitchcock took over? What about LA, Sutter turned them around. Or look at Phoenix and Nashville, Tippett & Trotz always get the most out of mediocre lineups.

And on paper our team isn't that bad, so if Hartley can get the players playing their games, we can be successful.

[Reanimate]

Originally Posted by CsInMyBlood

Sure, but it still tells a bit of a story no?

Give me even one Bouwmeester stat that makes him look good then, honestly anything.

Ironman?

Yep. His boxscores look terrible. But it isn't 1995 anymore. Time to look a little beyond that.

[kyuss275]

Originally Posted by CsInMyBlood

Sure, but it still tells a bit of a story no?

Give me even one Bouwmeester stat that makes him look good then, honestly anything.

Ironman?

I doubt it. To me the 3 best players down the stretch for Calgary last season were, Kipper,Gio and Sarich ( i dogged on him all season, but he showed up when it counted). How many stars did Gio and Sarich get? I do not recll many but i could be wrong.

[mikeecho]

Originally Posted by CsInMyBlood

I see all the Bouwmeester fans pissing on Ricardodw for this post.

It is relevant. It shows that Bouwmeester in 82 games didn't garner one single night where he was the best player on the ice or a difference maker.

You can say it means nothing but it is rather telling no? A guy who has a huge contract, and plays almost half the game every night never got the first star selection even one time out of pity in 82 games? It's not like 10 year olds are picking these star selections, these are people who watch and dissect hockey on a daily basis for a living.

I wanted to stay out of this thread, because I understand it is supposed to be for people that love Jay Bouwmeester and I am not one of those folk, but to slag the crap out of him for his research because it isn't what J-Bosians want to hear makes me laugh.

Sorry for coming into your thread, carry on with the love for the mediocre.

Is there a specific criteria or methodology used to pick the 3 stars? We all laugh at Simmers inane in game assessments (keep feet moving, blah blah) and yet we're supposed to put stock in his (and other media types) selection of 3 stars.

I can't even count how many games I've watched where the star selections have no real relevance to performance...
- it's his first game back from surgery and he was +1 and wasn't a noticeable liability so why not?
- so and so got an empty net goal to give him a 2 point night
- the road team out played the home team all game and yet the home team gets 2 stars because the local beat writer is a homer?

I'm completely indifferent to Bouwmeester, yet using 3 star selections to determine anything other than a popularity contest is laughable.

[CsInMyBlood]

Originally Posted by Reanimate

Yep. His boxscores look terrible. But it isn't 1995 anymore. Time to look a little beyond that.

Yeah, there are a lot more advanced stats than what shows up on boxscores, cherry pick me one that makes him look good.

Ironman?