[GDT] Flames vs Sabres - 5:00 - SNet 360

[edslunch]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

So, I think a big part of the decision to play Hiller is also the hope of giving him opportunities to end the season on a high note. It honestly doesn't matter how many games Ortio plays to ride out the season, so long as he plays a bunch of them.

We tend to forget that coaches and managers form relationships with the players on their roster. As much as this is a business, as much as Hiller is not in their plans moving forward, I have NO DOUBT that Hartley and Treliving want the best for him. Playing Hiller in this game doesn't have any impact on the Flames this season AT ALL. But these remaining starts could mean a lot for Hiller.

All that said, this is a pretty silly thing about which to be outraged.

I disagree. Hartley may well want to let Hiller go out on a high note but it should much more important to let Ortio go out on a high note. Hiller can't be in the Flames' plans after this season but Ortio more than likely is. They should be doing what they can to reward his decent play of late and try to get him a win against a relatively easy opponent. Hiller can take the back seat.

If on the other hand Hartley is trying to get Hiller's confidence back so he can win a few more games for the Flames this year then I don't what to say.

[Street Pharmacist]

Originally Posted by jayswin

Wow, I view not believing in losing culture in pro sports to be on the same level as believing in flat earth theory.

That's silly. One is scientific the other is an unproveable theory on an unimportant entertainment topic

[CalgaryFan1988]

Originally Posted by heep223

Kind of funny that lots of posters are acting like if the Flames were trying to win they'd start Ortio.

Joni Ortio
0-6-2
.889 Sv%
3.33 GAA

I agree they should start Ortio over Hiller because I like watching him play and he's younger, but who cares really, both goalies suck. Let's just be honest.

GFG! 5-2 Flames

One difference is that if he doesn't get his games in, Ortio becomes UFA. He doesn't "suck" and I'd rather have his rights, instead of losing them for nothing.

Hiller? Yeah, he sucks.

[Street Pharmacist]

Originally Posted by GranteedEV

I don't think Edmonton Oilers Taylor Hall is a loser. Dude plays balls to the walls for a team that is awful for most of the season until they're pretty much eliminated. I don't blame him for stepping intensity down when his team is in 30th place despite him being a +. I don't see how he's different from a young Sakic or Iginla TBQH.

I do consider Justin Schultz a loser, because you can actively see the compete level fall off the map. That's different from Hall's season progression, which tends to be "play reckless" --> "play hard enough not to cost your team, but not reckless". Schultz's basically "show up to camp out of shape --> quit on every play". Another guy I consider a loser is Phil Kessel, again for how soft he plays that costs his team.

Losing doesn't breed losers. Not competing breeds losers. Losers do breed losing though.

I disagree about Hall. He plays balls to the walls in situations he enjoys like when he's got the puck, etc. Watch his body language when they're losing and he's going off for a change, sitting on the bench after a goal against, etc the guy facts the wrong way after the chips are down. Fair or not, the guy is a leader on that team and gives up when the going gets tough. That's the problem

[codynw]

Originally Posted by jayswin

Wow, I view not believing in losing culture in pro sports to be on the same level as believing in flat earth theory.

Other than the fact that there's real evidence that the Earth isn't flat?

The only evidence of a "losing culture" is anecdotal. Pittsburgh and Chicago were just as bad as Edmonton for a while and they turned out fine.

[shotinthebacklund]

Here is how I see it.

I will never cheer for a team to go out with the intention to lose a game.

First off I dont think this even enters the mind of players. They play for a job.

That being said I don't believe the "losing culture" is possible with this group. Giordano cares too much every single game to let this occur. Gaudreau is a winner, his body language exemplifies this on every night.Up north it was allowed to persist due to a lack of personality

I wont cheer for a loss this season, But its putting your head in the sand to believe a team that competes , cares about the outcome of every game , and drives to win night in and out BUT loses is a bad thing for the remainder of the year.

[Street Pharmacist]

Originally Posted by codynw

Other than the fact that there's real evidence that the Earth isn't flat?

The only evidence of a "losing culture" is anecdotal. Pittsburgh and Chicago were just as bad as Edmonton for a while and they turned out fine.

I absolutely believe in a losing culture, but some teams find a way out of it, some don't. It's a big risk.

It's obtuse to suggest is flat earth denying is equivalent to denying it exists though

[Finger Cookin]

Originally Posted by bomber317

sigh, why do we need to see Hiller in any more games this year?

Because Backstrom won't play any games and Ortio won't start 19 consecutive games.

[Royle9]

Originally Posted by jayswin

Wow, I view not believing in losing culture in pro sports to be on the same level as believing in flat earth theory.

This is almost "Making a Murderer" level of complete irrelevancy to be honest.

"Is that in a sense that anythings possible?"
"Thats in a sense of its possible aliens put it there"

"There weren't any aliens in the room, right?"
The officer replied, "Not that I know of."

[MarkGio]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

So, I think a big part of the decision to play Hiller is also the hope of giving him opportunities to end the season on a high note. It honestly doesn't matter how many games Ortio plays to ride out the season, so long as he plays a bunch of them.

We tend to forget that coaches and managers form relationships with the players on their roster. As much as this is a business, as much as Hiller is not in their plans moving forward, I have NO DOUBT that Hartley and Treliving want the best for him. Playing Hiller in this game doesn't have any impact on the Flames this season AT ALL. But these remaining starts could mean a lot for Hiller.

All that said, this is a pretty silly thing about which to be outraged.

You could argue that any game has no impact on the season at all. I mean even the best teams lose a game now and then. Or what about the relationships between Raymond and management/coaching. Favouritism is a slippery slope, even if it's kind justified. Again, Hartley's mantra is supposedly "earned, never given". Well it's clear to me from the past games of both goalies that Ortio has earned more starts down the stretch over Hiller.

I think if Hiller wanted to end his season on a high note he needed to be better during the games he's played.

[Street Pharmacist]

Originally Posted by Finger Cookin

Because Backstrom won't play any games and Ortio won't start 19 consecutive games.

Management already said Backstrom will be playing

[Flames Draft Watcher]

Originally Posted by Finger Cookin

Because Backstrom won't play any games and Ortio won't start 19 consecutive games.

Backstrom will get starts, they've already said so.

Hartley has apparently liked Backstrom's work in practice so far as well.

[Finger Cookin]

Originally Posted by Flames Draft Watcher

Backstrom will get starts, they've already said so.

I'll believe it when I see it.

[MarkGio]

Originally Posted by Flames Draft Watcher

Backstrom will get starts, they've already said so.

Hartley has apparently liked Backstrom's work in practice so far as well.

Then it's clear to me that the team sees no future in Ortio

[jayswin]

Originally Posted by Street Pharmacist

That's silly. One is scientific the other is an unproveable theory on an unimportant entertainment topic

Haha, FFS dude, it was a joke. You don't have to judge and respond to every post as CP's mediator, making sure we're all being fair and realistic with everything we say, lol.

[jayswin]

Originally Posted by Street Pharmacist

I absolutely believe in a losing culture, but some teams find a way out of it, some don't. It's a big risk.

It's obtuse to suggest is flat earth denying is equivalent to denying it exists though

Ahaha, and he kept going on it. That's me, I was totally comparing flat earth believers to losing culture deniers with a straight face because I'm obtuse. Good lord man.

[Street Pharmacist]

Originally Posted by jayswin

Haha, FFS dude, it was a joke. You don't have to judge and respond to every post as CP's mediator, making sure we're all being fair and realistic with everything we say, lol.

It's a message board. We exchange ideas and opinions.

Hahaha you got me!?

[Poe969]

The losing culture most are talking about here is more along the lines of slumps. I don't know if I've ever seen a team come close to having a "losing culture" because you can see in most every team that they're not happy when they lose and they prefer to win.

Irregardless (ya I went there....it's not really a word but auto correct didn't fix it) I don't think the Flames are even remotely close to having to worry about a losing culture with the current team. Guys are doing just about anything they can to win. As some fans want them to lose now to get a better pick, it's not much different then when fans want them to win at the beginning of the year. If the fans who want the Flames to finish in 30th and "cheer for losses" control the culture of the team, it'll be fixed at the beginning of next year when those same fans are cheering for wins.

I do think that it does exist but I don't know if I've seen it exist in any NHL team other than the oilers.

[shotinthebacklund]

think Heartly's french accent:
What does Heartley say to Hiller after each game?

"Tanks for the game"

[Erick Estrada]

Originally Posted by Finger Cookin

I'll believe it when I see it.

Well it won't be long until you are believing it.