Will the Flames put it together?

[dino7c]

2nd wild card team damn near won the cup last season...gotta get hot at the right time

[Jay Random]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

I don't care about 25 other teams.

That is your problem precisely – tunnel vision. If the Flames are behind Vegas, it can't possibly be because Vegas is doing something right. Oh, no, it has to be because the Flames are doing something terribly wrong. And you are too fixated on your own negativity even to notice that 80 percent of the league is in exactly the same fix; and when it is pointed out to you, you snark about it and change the subject back to your pet obsession.

[GioforPM]

The Flames may not have led until a couple minutes left against Vancouver, but they dominated that game at both ends of the ice.

[Hemi-Cuda]

The Flames are what they always are, a bubble team that probably won't go far if they do make the playoffs. I don't trust that will change until they get a better coach

[icecube]

They need to pony up for a legit coach if they want to take the next step.

[Vinny01]

I am not convinced they will be much more than an average team under Gulutzan. Having said that I have liked some of what he has said recently and the effort the last 3 games has been great.

[Jay Random]

Originally Posted by Hemi-Cuda

The Flames are what they always are, a bubble team that probably won't go far if they do make the playoffs. I don't trust that will change until they get a better coach

If that's what they always are, then clearly no number of coaches can possibly change that. Your remark is entirely illogical.

It's also non-factual, since in the last 10 years alone the Flames have been (1) a veteran team built to contend, which blew up in the playoffs because of injuries, (2) a veteran team with the wrong coach, which missed the playoffs – once with a better record than either of the finalists in the other conference, (3) a lottery feeder going through a complete rebuild, (4) a Cinderella team that rode luck and hard work to the second round with a highly unconventional system, (5) a post-Cinderella team whose coach turned into a pumpkin at midnight, (6) a bubble team that drew the worst possible matchup in the first round and was swept thanks to rotten goaltending.

If you can see those six teams as somehow all being the same, I'm afraid there's no help for you.

[Inferno]

Not with Gulutzan. Even if they do get into the playoffs I don't see them making much noise. If he's not replaced at some point this season I hope they try and upgrade this offseason like they thought they were when they fired Hartley and hired him.

[tvp2003]

With such parity in the NHL these days, I think it'll be the rare exception rather than the rule when a team can really evolve into a perennial contender. Any team can beat anyone on any given day, and we've certainly seen that the past two seasons here (looking like world beaters for one stretch of games, and amongst the worst in the league during other stretches).

At the end of the day I think it's a matter of getting hot when the playoffs start -- the Flames seem especially sensitive to getting hot and cold which makes it frustrating for fans and I'm sure the team as well. The good news is that we probably have the right players in place -- all four lines, all three pairings, and between the pipes -- I think we'll go as far as Gulutzan will take us. Unfortunately that could be a nice playoff run or getting swept -- again. You could flip a coin as to where things might stand four months from now -- just need a invitation to the dance.

[djsFlames]

They have to find a combination/strategy/system that allows for sustained consistency. They seem to go when players get hot enough to carry them. Right now it's Bennett/Tkachuk, for a couple weeks it was the first line. Would be nice to see less up and down play from key players and more consistent contributions even if it's not every game. Can't have a week on, two weeks off, type thing, bounce backs have to happen quickly. That will be reflected in greater play of the team if the individuals can level out their games.

I think by far the biggest thing is consistency from the top two defensive pairings. They have to click on way more nights than they don't. This team has nearly allowed 100 goals, while Smith has been vastly good to great which isn't a positive sign if you're looking at contending. Cutting those goals against down by a quarter is wherein lies the road to contention. The "top" teams are positive double digits in the goal differentials, cause they have minimal blow outs on the losing side, and are more often the ones dealing the blow outs. The Flames win their share of 1-2 goal games, but have a decent amount of 3-4+ goal losses. That's a sign of a team that skates with others on its good nights, but gets dominated on bad ones.

The Flames have to be on the other end of that. Have more nights of losing by a little, or winning by a lot.

[CroFlames]

Gulutzan is not the guy who can lead this team to the promised land.

This team has been a disappointment so far. Their 3 on 3 record is masking huge deficiencies in 5v5 play and the goaltender has also made their record look better than they are.

Last year should have been the year of figuring everything out and ironing out the inconsistencies. I don't expect the team to go 82-0. But I expect them to be ready to compete every night, and frankly, they are not close to that. The special teams look horrid, and it's mind bottling the players they choose to be on those units.

I'd love to be proved wrong, but based on the last 1.5 seasons, I don't think this coach can lead this group. The last 3 games don't erase what's happened so far this season.

[killer_carlson]

I don't think we are a team built for the playoffs.

We are weak physically, no jam and have been pushed around in our own rink a few times already this season.

While not every Cup winner needs to be a bruising team, those that are not bruises make opponents pay through special teams success. We are weak on special teams as well.

So while I think we are a playoff team, in certain matchups we'll be lucky to win a single game.

[kukkudo]

The team is a borderline playoff team, and I'm not expecting much. They are a team that would get bounced out quick in the playoffs.

[Five-hole]

Originally Posted by CroFlames

...This team has been a disappointment so far. Their 3 on 3 record is masking huge deficiencies in 5v5 play and the goaltender has also made their record look better than they are.

I see this narrative picking up steam here and I don't buy it.

The Flames are 4-1 in OT this year. If the Flames were 0.500 in extra time (they are 2-1 in the SO), they would be 4-4 after regulation. That's a difference of a whopping 4 points. You're telling me the 4 extra points from those OT wins are "masking huge deficiencies in 5v5 play"?

Meanwhile, the Flames are 4th in the NHL in shot attempt differential at 5v5 (all situations) and in 5v5 (close).

That story has a nice ring to it but it ain't true. I'd say the special teams have been a far bigger contributor to the lack of success thus far than overtime/shootout or 5v5 play.

[Ashasx]

Some retweets from Kent Wilson indicating that the Flames underlying numbers are improving and probably should be getting better results than we are seeing. Well, either that or we are playing for the Corsi.

[Red]

Originally Posted by Five-hole

I see this narrative picking up steam here and I don't buy it.

The Flames are 4-1 in OT this year. If the Flames were 0.500 in extra time (they are 2-1 in the SO), they would be 4-4 after regulation. That's a difference of a whopping 4 points. You're telling me the 4 extra points from those OT wins are "masking huge deficiencies in 5v5 play"?

Meanwhile, the Flames are 4th in the NHL in shot attempt differential at 5v5 (all situations) and in 5v5 (close).

That story has a nice ring to it but it ain't true. I'd say the special teams have been a far bigger contributor to the lack of success thus far than overtime/shootout or 5v5 play.

Those 4 points mean that we are in a playoff spot right now.
Without them we are just above the Oilers well outside of playoff. I think the mood would be very different here if the Flames occupied 13th spot today.

Same for last year. Not a playoff team without 3 on 3 success.

[GioforPM]

I'm interested in what you naysayers think are the good consistent teams in the NHL. Look at the Blues. They have wildly differing nights, bad starts to game, etc. Recently, they are 6-5 with two of those wins in OT (one against the weak Canucks and one against the terrible Sabres). So less regular time wins than they have losses. Two of their wins were against the Oilers. They've lost to the Flames 7-4. They beat the Wild 6-3 and then lost to them a few games later 2-1. Lost to the Kings 4-1. They got off to a seven game streak, and since then have been no more consistent than anyone else.

The Lightning? They're 6-4 in their last 10, but 2 wins in OT, so only .500 in regular time. And they've lost to the East and won against the West, so they lose "important" games.

[kukkudo]

If the Flames were sitting where the Kings, Blues or the Lightning were in the standings, there would be no negativity.

[Kovaz]

Originally Posted by Five-hole

I see this narrative picking up steam here and I don't buy it.

The Flames are 4-1 in OT this year. If the Flames were 0.500 in extra time (they are 2-1 in the SO), they would be 4-4 after regulation. That's a difference of a whopping 4 points. You're telling me the 4 extra points from those OT wins are "masking huge deficiencies in 5v5 play"?

Meanwhile, the Flames are 4th in the NHL in shot attempt differential at 5v5 (all situations) and in 5v5 (close).

That story has a nice ring to it but it ain't true. I'd say the special teams have been a far bigger contributor to the lack of success thus far than overtime/shootout or 5v5 play.

We're exactly 4 points above .500, so those points are the difference between the Flames and mediocrity. For a team with as many strengths as we should have (excellent 1st line and 1st D pair, strong depth at both F and D, well above-average goaltending), by definition there'd have to some deficiencies for that to add up to "mediocre". That said, I agree that it's special teams that are primarily to blame. So amend "3v3 is masking deficiencies in 5v5 play" to "3v3 is masking deficiencies in regulation play" and the point stands.

[zamler]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

I'm interested in what you naysayers think are the good consistent teams in the NHL. Look at the Blues. They have wildly differing nights, bad starts to game, etc. Recently, they are 6-5 with two of those wins in OT (one against the weak Canucks and one against the terrible Sabres). So less regular time wins than they have losses. Two of their wins were against the Oilers. They've lost to the Flames 7-4. They beat the Wild 6-3 and then lost to them a few games later 2-1. Lost to the Kings 4-1. They got off to a seven game streak, and since then have been no more consistent than anyone else.

The Lightning? They're 6-4 in their last 10, but 2 wins in OT, so only .500 in regular time. And they've lost to the East and won against the West, so they lose "important" games.

Uh, overall record? Tampa is the best team in the NHL, Blues are 2nd. Do you honestly think the Flames are on the same level of for example the Lightning? Also look at the standings and goal differential of the best teams.