[Game Takes] Leafs 2 Flames 1 (OT)

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

Look at the Flames over the last 3 years (5 on 5 goals):

2018/19: 188 goals, 2.29 GPG (2nd)

2019/20: 133 goals, 1.90 GPG (21st)

2020/21: 32 goals, 1.60 GPG, (24th)

Are they getting less talented?

Is the league 'wise' to them, but not to the other teams in the league - just the Flames have been figured out?

It isn't complicated - they are the same team but they are not performing at the same level

2016/17 140 goals, 20th

2017/18 147 goals, 27th

Aren't we really talking about one outlying season where everything went right here?

[howard_the_duck]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

lol

You are right about one thing: "this is where we are falling down right now as a fanbase"

Toronto
Edmonton
Montreal
Winnipeg
Vancouver (top end talent, not depth)

You're right, I might be high on our talent.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by Bingo

2016/17 140 goals, 20th

2017/18 147 goals, 27th

Aren't we really talking about one outlying season where everything went right here?

well, those 2 years were Gulutzan

[DeluxeMoustache]

Originally Posted by Bingo

2016/17 140 goals, 20th

2017/18 147 goals, 27th

Aren't we really talking about one outlying season where everything went right here?

The team now has 4 guys, all in their prime, who have scored in the 77-99 points range

Until Peters ‘prepared’ them for the playoffs, we got a glimpse of what was possible

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by Bingo

2016/17 140 goals, 20th

2017/18 147 goals, 27th

Aren't we really talking about one outlying season where everything went right here?

Watching the 18/19 season, I never felt that everything was 'just going right'. And there were no discussions at the time to that effect, that I can recall.

Certainly there are seasons where things go well and seasons where they don't go as well, without anything changing - that is part of sports. And obviously, this was a good season.

But scoring goals and having success in the NHL is not easy. And it doesn't happen for a whole team, for a whole season, just by fluke.

Simply dismissing it as an outlier is lazy, and leaving a lot of information on the table.

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

well, those 2 years were Gulutzan

Gulutzan / Peters / Ward ... one very significant outlier season is what I'm seeing.

But don't get me wrong ... not trying to support Ward here. I'm happy to change it up, but I'm not expecting it to change much.

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

Watching the 18/19 season, I never felt that everything was 'just going right'. And there were no discussions at the time to that effect, that I can recall.

Certainly there are seasons where things go well and seasons where they don't go as well, without anything changing - that is part of sports. And obviously, this was a good season.

But scoring goals and having success in the NHL is not easy. And it doesn't happen for a whole team, for a whole season, just by fluke.

Simply dismissing it as an outlier is lazy, and leaving a lot of information on the table.

All of Monahan, Gaudreau, Tkachuk, Lindholm and Giordano had career years.

It was talked about all the time, and the most consistent attack from enemy fans.

4 of the 5 above were young so I was hoping it was a step forward and not a career season binge, but so far that's not the case.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by Bingo

All of Monahan, Gaudreau, Tkachuk, Lindholm and Giordano had career years.

It was talked about all the time, and the most consistent attack from enemy fans.

4 of the 5 above were young so I was hoping it was a step forward and not a career season binge, but so far that's not the case.

And I don't think the league figuring out the Monahan-Johnny combo is an unrealistic assumption, and those two don't have the natural physical ability to say "so what, I'm still skating right past you" of a McDavid or Mackinnon. I think this is a huge reason for taking Lindholm off that line - they think they need to just to get past the shutdown lines of the other team. I'm not genius coach but I think I've a pretty good handle on how to stop Gaudreau and Monahan. I also know how to stop Mcdavid but it involves fines and suspensions.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by Bingo

All of Monahan, Gaudreau, Tkachuk, Lindholm and Giordano had career years.

It was talked about all the time, and the most consistent attack from enemy fans.

4 of the 5 above were young so I was hoping it was a step forward and not a career season binge, but so far that's not the case.

They were career years at the time, but they were all young, other than Gio, and there was no reason to think that it was primarily just continued growth.

Doesn't mean 99 points every year. But no one was predicting 60 points the next year either.

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

They were career years at the time, but they were all young, other than Gio, and there was no reason to think that it was primarily just continued growth.

Doesn't mean 99 points every year. But no one was predicting 60 points the next year either.

That was the hope!

Tkachuk took another step last year ...

Monahan and Gaudreau had terrible seasons last year, so a bounce back was expected this year and we've seen that to some degree. But certainly not to where they were in 2018/19.

Would love to be wrong, and I'm not trying to be lazy as you suggested ... but to me that year is just not like the others, and what we're seeing this year seems to be adding more to that case.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by Bingo

That was the hope!

Tkachuk took another step last year ...

Monahan and Gaudreau had terrible seasons last year, so a bounce back was expected this year and we've seen that to some degree. But certainly not to where they were in 2018/19.

Would love to be wrong, and I'm not trying to be lazy as you suggested ... but to me that year is just not like the others, and what we're seeing this year seems to be adding more to that case.

Again, the question is why?

One of the most puzzling things for me this year is the fact that they are playing so slowly - and they are getting slower every game.

Watch the OT last night... Lindholm enters the zone with Tkachuk and Andersson(?) and they all coast. They cross and adjust positions and pass it a couple times, but they do all of it at half speed. It eventually results in a very mundane shot from Lindholm that was not at all dangerous.

Then Toronto gets the puck and attacks at full speed, resulting in a goal.

And it wasn't just that sequence. More and more that is how they are playing. Slow it down, and slow it down some more. That makes them so easy to defend. And the even strength goals per game are declining in conjunction with their style.

As I said in another post, I am getting concerned that they are out of shape, and sliding further out of shape. Playing uptempo hockey was never a problem for them - in fact, that is what always resulted in the most success.

But now, we are not only seeing it less, but they now seem unable to even do it!

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

Again, the question is why?

One of the most puzzling things for me this year is the fact that they are playing so slowly - and they are getting slower every game.

Watch the OT last night... Lindholm enters the zone with Tkachuk and Andersson(?) and they all coast. They cross and adjust positions and pass it a couple times, but they do all of it at half speed. It eventually results in a very mundane shot from Lindholm that was not at all dangerous.

Then Toronto gets the puck and attacks at full speed, resulting in a goal.

And it wasn't just that sequence. More and more that is how they are playing. Slow it down, and slow it down some more. That makes them so easy to defend. And the even strength goals per game are declining in conjunction with their style.

As I said in another post, I am getting concerned that they are out of shape, and sliding further out of shape. Playing uptempo hockey was never a problem for them - in fact, that is what always resulted in the most success.

But now, we are not only seeing it less, but they now seem unable to even do it!

They do play slowly. But OT isn't really a good place to judge it - you are either scoring off a breakdown on a rush or you are scoring on a breakdown in the cycle like they were doing. It was a poor choice by Lindholm.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

They do play slowly. But OT isn't really a good place to judge it - you are either scoring off a breakdown on a rush or you are scoring on a breakdown in the cycle like they were doing. It was a poor choice by Lindholm.

both are more likely at speed

[Jeff Lebowski]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

Again, the question is why?

One of the most puzzling things for me this year is the fact that they are playing so slowly - and they are getting slower every game.

Watch the OT last night... Lindholm enters the zone with Tkachuk and Andersson(?) and they all coast. They cross and adjust positions and pass it a couple times, but they do all of it at half speed. It eventually results in a very mundane shot from Lindholm that was not at all dangerous.

Then Toronto gets the puck and attacks at full speed, resulting in a goal.

And it wasn't just that sequence. More and more that is how they are playing. Slow it down, and slow it down some more. That makes them so easy to defend. And the even strength goals per game are declining in conjunction with their style.

As I said in another post, I am getting concerned that they are out of shape, and sliding further out of shape. Playing uptempo hockey was never a problem for them - in fact, that is what always resulted in the most success.

But now, we are not only seeing it less, but they now seem unable to even do it!

"It's not what you get but what you leave."

If you are focused on what you leave - I think that is what's going on. They want to ensure they have good structure for the opponent attack. What are the talking points? What are the players being told to focus on?

Perhaps if you want to have more balance (offense/defense) there has to be some tolerance of risk.

I can get behind the notion of putting it behind teams that play 5 guys in the neutral zone - I think that's a reasonable adjustment.

I question playing that all the time with the ability I believe is on the roster - but I admit, I'm no expert however I agree 100% with you. 18-19 was no fluke and CGY can score more or be better offensively.

[Jeff Lebowski]

I think many coaches (I think Gully harped on it while here too) think this way. "What you leave."

[Jiri Hrdina]

Originally Posted by Bingo

Gulutzan / Peters / Ward ... one very significant outlier season is what I'm seeing.

But don't get me wrong ... not trying to support Ward here. I'm happy to change it up, but I'm not expecting it to change much.

And I would argue that the play started to diminish under Peters.

Peters' team first half of 2018/2019: f'n amazing
Peters' team second half of 2018/2019: Hmmm not looking as good. Still winning but signs of problems
Peters' team in playoffs: Ugh.
Peters' team first half of 2019/2020 season: mediocre at best


I would say this team enjoyed half a season of elite play. That's it.

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina

And I would argue that the play started to diminish under Peters.

Peters' team first half of 2018/2019: f'n amazing
Peters' team second half of 2018/2019: Hmmm not looking as good. Still winning but signs of problems
Peters' team in playoffs: Ugh.
Peters' team first half of 2019/2020 season: mediocre at best


I would say this team enjoyed half a season of elite play. That's it.

And I would say that this follows a pretty consistent trend for this group under their last four coaches:

Bob Hartley 2014–15 0.591
Bob Hartley 2015–16 0.470
Glen Gulutzan 2016–17 0.573
Glen Gulutzan 2017–18 0.512
Bill Peters 2018–19 0.652
Bill Peters 2019–20 0.500
Geoff Ward 2019–20 0.622 (includes play-in)
Geoff Ward 2020–21 0.500

I know it is oversimplified, but there is a pattern there with this group under every single coach and playing system: they have a tendency to fall off. The second year is always much worse than the first. Certainly, the coaches deserve criticism for not keeping the players engaged enough to be consistently good, but I also don't think there is any evidence to suggest that a long-term "proven" coach would yield any different results.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

And I would say that this follows a pretty consistent trend for this group under their last four coaches:

Bob Hartley 2014–15 0.591
Bob Hartley 2015–16 0.470
Glen Gulutzan 2016–17 0.573
Glen Gulutzan 2017–18 0.512
Bill Peters 2018–19 0.652
Bill Peters 2019–20 0.500
Geoff Ward 2019–20 0.622 (includes play-in)
Geoff Ward 2020–21 0.500

I know it is oversimplified, but there is a pattern there with this group under every single coach and playing system: they have a tendency to fall off. The second year is always much worse than the first. Certainly, the coaches deserve criticism for not keeping the players engaged enough to be consistently good, but I also don't think there is any evidence to suggest that a long-term "proven" coach would yield any different results.

Maybe not.

But there IS evidence that a new coach would makes this better for this season. And for now, that's all we can address.

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

Maybe not.

But there IS evidence that a new coach would makes this better for this season. And for now, that's all we can address.

Yes, absolutely. How much hope are you holding out that this might actually happen? I have none.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

Yes, absolutely. How much hope are you holding out that this might actually happen? I have none.

I have almost none as well.

But I fail to see why that means we shouldn't talk about it.