[PGT] Mike Smith loses the game with 2 abysmal goals against. Flames lose to Habs 3-2.

[The Boy Wonder]

Originally Posted by Classic_Sniper

The stat that confuses me the most is that Mike Smith has 5 wins and 8 losses, David Rittich has 5 wins and only 1 loss. How is it not more obvious that we should've been playing Rittich yesterday or even against San Jose. You'd think that after years of porous goaltending with Carolina that once Peters found himself a decent one, that he would run with him and never look back. But for some reason that hasn't happened.

The Flames should've kept Karri Ramo. Really bad decision in letting him go. He was the best of the bunch and gave us consistent goaltending every season he was here. I'll take a .911 sv% and a playoff round win over whatever junk we've had since. All we've done is manage to do blow assets on trading for Brian Elliott and Mike Smith and it's gotten us no where so far.

Yup...

I feel like they could still bring him back if they asked nicely

[Johnny Makarov]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

Canucks were a flash in the pan. The Flames are a good team.

You seem to revel in the fact Smith had a bad game because you think it proved people wrong about the Sharks game. (a) It didn't and (b) that's pretty sad.

Whats sad is that we have 2 losses in a row due to inept coaching decisions.

The Flames are a good team if they have a good goalie. With Smith we are only a 12th-14th place team in the West.

[Manhattanboy]

Originally Posted by Johnny Makarov

Whats sad is that we have 2 losses in a row due to inept coaching decisions.

The Flames are a good team if they have a good goalie. With Smith we are only a 12th-14th place team in the West.

Yup so true.

Why is it with the Flames its always something?

Game Saturday against EDM could not have come at a worst time. Unless McDavid gets locked in a storage room at the Saddledome for a few hours.

[Fan in Exile]

Originally Posted by Travis Munroe

Peters can't win. Start Rittich and Rittich has a weak game and the same people who are saying we should have started Rittich would be saying we should have started Smith because he looked great last game after the first soft goal.

We also don't know if anything is being asked from above in terms of what goalie to play. Who knows, Tre may have told Smith he is on very thin ice. Smiths camp may have asked for a couple starts in a row to prove he has it back. Again, who knows but when nearly ever decision from Peters has been perfect all year except for some questionable goalie starts, I will continue to put my trust in him.

I know I wouldn't and I just don't think that's true. There is a strong objective basis for starting Rittich over Smith. Smith is the one that should have to prove himself in the occasional back-to-back before he gets more starts, or if Rittich starts to falter carrying more of the load. Hellebuyck also fell flat as a starter the season before last. It's a new season and Rittich has been solid. It's just the obvious choice. It may not pan out, in which case it's not on Peters' head, it's on Treliving's. But to keep starting Smith is indefensible.

[transplant99]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

Smith hasn't played a playoff game as a Flames so for accuracy sake lets stick to regular season stats and I already mentioned that Elliott crapped the bed in the playoffs but at least he got the Flames that far. Besides that playoff performance cost Elliott his job with the Flames. Smith keeps getting starts.

But you were responding to a post that said this..

Originally Posted by bigrangy
As bad as Smith has been, playoff Elliott was much, much worse.

Your reply was....

This is 100% unequivocally false. The stats do not back that up nor does the fact that the Flames made the playoffs with Elliott starting 49 games. The Flames missed the playoffs last season with Smith as the starter and will likely miss the playoffs this season if he's still the starter by the end of the season. Sure Elliott had the playoff meltdown but the Flames would kill for Smith to have Elliot's stats as a Flame right now.

I was merely pointing out niether was worth a damn.

[transplant99]

Originally Posted by Stay Golden

It's been a while since I was this angry after a Flames game mainly due to Mike Smith and being forced to listen to all the yo-yo''s screaming Ole Ole leaving the dome.
Peter's better not start Smith vs the Greasers on Saturday night.
Too big of a game to gamble on Smith.

Not a chance.

Rittich gets the next 4 at least...unless he gets injured or totally falls flat on his face.

[MikeMc]

Some of you need to chill the f out.

[Fan in Exile]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

Canucks were a flash in the pan. The Flames are a good team.

You seem to revel in the fact Smith had a bad game because you think it proved people wrong about the Sharks game. (a) It didn't and (b) that's pretty sad.

Yeah, not cool to gloat I suppose. But you represent the stubborn status quo which reflects a coaching/management apparatus that sticks with bad decisions until it absolutely blows up in their faces. You made post after post defending Raymond, Wideman, Stajan, Brouwer, Hiller, Elliott and Gulutzan. Peters in most ways seems to be a departure from that line of thinking but he's been wrong on Smith. If there's a silver lining from last night, it should be that there's no more mistaking who should be getting priority for starts in goal, even if it was obvious to most of us already.

[getoverit]

man people are going to flip when Smith starts Saturday LMAO

[Manhattanboy]

Originally Posted by MikeMc

Some of you need to chill the f out.

You should start a new thread.

[TheIronMaiden]

Originally Posted by getoverit

man people are going to flip when Smith starts Saturday LMAO

Most people will probably just tune out. I know that I will. I am not a glutton for punishment. I would rather take a break from hockey than get upset.

[Manhattanboy]

Originally Posted by getoverit

man people are going to flip when Smith starts Saturday LMAO

If that happens the Supreme Court should intervene and stay the execution on the grounds of cruel and unusual punishment.

[Toonage]

I'll watch. I love this team, I love the game, yadda yadda. I just don't love myself apparently.

[belsarius]

I didn't get to watch the whole game and peeked at CP after the game to see if I should finish watching it. Watched the 3rd goal and I threw up a little bit in my mouth. The D couldn't have played that better to get the shot to the outside for an easy save. Not a pipelines chance in Canada should Smith start Saturday. Run Rittich as the number 1 for a couple weeks. If this lineup gets a wasted season due to not dealing with the goalie situation then its time to take a long look at management.

[The Boy Wonder]

Originally Posted by belsarius

I didn't get to watch the whole game and peeked at CP after the game to see if I should finish watching it. Watched the 3rd goal and I threw up a little bit in my mouth. The D couldn't have played that better to get the shot to the outside for an easy save. Not a pipelines chance in Canada should Smith start Saturday. Run Rittich as the number 1 for a couple weeks. If this lineup gets a wasted season due to not dealing with the goalie situation then its time to take a long look at management.

Love it

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by Fan in Exile

Yeah, not cool to gloat I suppose. But you represent the stubborn status quo which reflects a coaching/management apparatus that sticks with bad decisions until it absolutely blows up in their faces. You made post after post defending Raymond, Wideman, Stajan, Brouwer, Hiller, Elliott and Gulutzan. Peters in most ways seems to be a departure from that line of thinking but he's been wrong on Smith. If there's a silver lining from last night, it should be that there's no more mistaking who should be getting priority for starts in goal, even if it was obvious to most of us already.

I never "defended" anything. What I post about which people think are defences are over the top reactions which usually contain inaccurate factual statements. Like the amount of time Brouwer spent on the power play, which was totally blown out of proportion. But I never said Brouwer was performing well. I advocated buying him out.

And I daresay that after everyone crapped on Stajan three years ago, most of my points about him were shown to be correct. A year later everyone loved him as a fourth line centre. I defy you to find a post last year where I said anything about him other than it was his last year.

The only thing I ever defended Wideman on was his suspension. I remain of the view that his action wasn't intentional. So what?

On starting Smith last game the most you could say is that I posted that one could see where Peters was thinking that Smith had a good outing against SJ and might be working his way out of his funk. And uggested that one weak goal against SJ didn't change the fact that his overall game was pretty darn good. That's it.

[The Cobra]

Originally Posted by Johnny Makarov

Whats sad is that we have 2 losses in a row due to inept coaching decisions.

When your team has scored 3 goals in two losses, there is no guarantee that another goalie would have brought two wins.

[crapshoot]

Originally Posted by The Cobra

When your team has scored 3 goals in two losses, there is no guarantee that another goalie would have brought two wins.

This needs to stop immediately. Average goaltending would have won or at least got a point out of a few of these games Smith has lost. Sometimes you win a game 1-0 or 2-1. That was damn near the only thing Miikka Kiprusoff ever did during his first seasons with the Flames. Decent goaltending wins low scoring games, and every team goes through patches of scoring no more than 2-3 goals multiple times every season. Just stop it.

[Inglewood Jack]

Originally Posted by The Cobra

When your team has scored 3 goals in two losses, there is no guarantee that another goalie would have brought two wins.

who says they would have only scored 3 goals for Big Save Dave? maybe they get to execute the game plan on their terms and play more freely, as opposed to starting every game with 1 goal against by default, and then having to waste time/energy going into chase mode for 55+ minutes.

[Johnny Makarov]

Originally Posted by The Cobra

When your team has scored 3 goals in two losses, there is no guarantee that another goalie would have brought two wins.

You think we would have lost to Montreal yesterday with Rittich in net? Maybe. but there is no way we would have lost on a piss poor gwg you and me could have saved.