Now that the First Round is over will everyone step away from the ledge?

[oldschoolcalgary]

Originally Posted by dino7c

Canes played decent but they should have lost last night really...Holtby allowed two terrible goals in regulation when the Caps were in complete control. There is some luck involved.

i guess i see it differently.

the Canes went down 2 games on the road, but were able to win both at home. They then faced elimination in game 6 and won that game to force game 7.

they were down twice 2 goals to the caps and fought back to tie and then win it in OT...

were the two goals by Holtby good goals? not particularly... the aho goal he flubbed the catch and the Staal goal he lost his net.

but in a 7 game series, breaks go both ways... Canes proved to be a very resilient team and that's why they won the series.

[Psytic]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

But it is still an incredibly small sample size. This playoff series will almost certainly not define the Flames nor the players involved. I have watched the NHL long enough to see how volatile results can be from one year to the next.

They have a larger body of work than just this series to go off of. I'm not advocating moving Johnny or Mono like some but they definitely need help and i'm confident Tre knows and the right changes will be made.

[Igottago]

Originally Posted by Salt Water Cowboy #10

Disappointing playoffs, but seriously, the Avs were like the 04 Flames. Came in hot, nothing to lose, underdogs. We got caught flat footed. Much like Detroit and San Jose in 04. It was Iggy and Kipper, and the Avs were Mackinnon and Grubauer. We played soft and they played hungry

The 04 Flames needed 7 games and overtime to beat the favoured Canucks in round 1.

There's no excuse to be out in 5.

[CGY12]

If anything the conclusion of the 1st round has soured me even more on the Flames failure.

The intensity, the desperation, the never quit attitude of other teams, coupled with the Flames performance both down the stretch and playoffs, further cements my stance that as currently constructed the Flames aren't a playoff threat.

Do I think we need to go into a full rebuild? No, but changes certainly need to be made, and not just minor support player changes, a real hard look at each and every core member.

I'm also not basing this solely on this year, the last 3 playoffs series they've participated in have been alarmingly bad, with no signs of improvement.

[Igottago]

Originally Posted by Cali Panthers Fan

Flames won the first game pretty solidly, lost 2 of their 4 games in overtime, and yet were "dominated" by the opposition in 4 out of 5 games.

Ok then.

I remember comments like this the last time they made the playoffs too. Its pretty amazing that people can rationalize getting swept and being out in 5 as close.

[dino7c]

Originally Posted by oldschoolcalgary

i guess i see it differently.

the Canes went down 2 games on the road, but were able to win both at home. They then faced elimination in game 6 and won that game to force game 7.

they were down twice 2 goals to the caps and fought back to tie and then win it in OT...

were the two goals by Holtby good goals? not particularly... the aho goal he flubbed the catch and the Staal goal he lost his net.

but in a 7 game series, breaks go both ways... Canes proved to be a very resilient team and that's why they won the series.

They won fair and square...just saying there is certainly some luck/bounces involved. Canes didn't even play well until overtime where they dominated so full credit to them for that but if Holtby doesn't #### the bed its "good try guys"

They weren't doing a damn thing until that short handed goal

[CGY12]

Originally Posted by dino7c

They won fair and square...just saying there is certainly some luck/bounces involved. Canes didn't even play well until overtime where they dominated so full credit to them for that but if Holtby doesn't #### the bed its "good try guys"

They weren't doing a damn thing until that short handed goal

No surprise a young team battling nerves took a bit to find their feet in a game 7 on the road.

Lucky bounces or not, you create your own breaks. When faced with adversity they fought through it and eventually found a way to win.

Unfortunately I can't say the same for the Flames.

[Flash Walken]

Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina

I think part of the concerns that some have is that the playoff series was a continuation of the main second half concern - the play of the top forwards.
The team was carried in the second half, by everyone else. The top line stopped producing.
So some of the theories are valid to propose
- There is a fitness issue with some of those players such that they trail off as the season goes on
- Teams adjusted to their play and they were unable to readjust
- Teams realized they can easily take those players off their game by frustrating them by being more physical

Either way, what happened in the playoffs was in some ways a continuation of things that were happening for the balance of the second half. So I don't fully buy that it was a small sample size.

IMO i'm just as concerned about Backlund's ability to perform in the playoffs as I am with monahan or gaudreau's.

The other thing that happened to that top line was Lindholm's shooting percentage in the last 41 games of the year dropped by half.

Loved what he brought this year but IMO it looks like the Flames are still looking for a bonafide top 6 scorer.

[TheIronMaiden]

Originally Posted by Corral

Pretty much this.


And the Flames were beaten by essentially only one line of the Avs. That's what stings the most.

I don't really get takes like this. The Avs are a good team. They have made the playoffs two years in a row while playing in the most competitive division. They didn't back in either time, they absolutely won in, during clutch games. They are in a lot of ways a hardened team that has came back from a brutal season, and won when it counts.

Sure most of their production comes off of one line - arguably one of the best lines in Hockey. Still, they have a strong D-Corpse which balances puck moving and strong play. Behind all of that is good goal tending.

Are they an elite team - No. But they certainly are not some push over that doesn't deserve any of the success they've earned.

[zarrell]

"Good teams" don't lose 6 more games than they win over a whole season

[Strange Brew]

Is there any verifiable evidence to support the Gaudreau fitness issue that gets brought up? Didn't the club release the results of fitness testing? I thought he had more energy than anyone in a Flames uniform in the last game of the year. And he played all 82 this year.

I think Flash brings up a good point. We might have to be ready to accept that second half Lindholm is closer to the real Lindholm, which is more in line with his Carolina performance. Still a very useful player.

So while Gaudreau might return a lot in trade, but still need to think about where offense comes from. I am generally of the view that the defense corps has been over invested and relatively underperformed vs. that investment. That is the pool I would draw from to get forward help.

I also haven't written off the ability of Gaudreau, Monahan and Tkachuk to perform in the playoffs. Yes they were bad this year. And have absolutely disappointed. But I prefer the likelihood of them figuring it out while still wearing a Flames uniform vs. winning a trade where they are involved.

[zamler]

If we completely ignore how the Flames played then yea this is a valid thread.

[Itse]

Originally Posted by Psytic

What concerns me is that from what I seen we were the worst team of the 16 by a fair margin. I dont think we would have beat any other team in the west with how we played. it wasn't like it was close.

Tampa was the worst. We were flat and lifeless, they were outright bad for long stretches. Like "junior hockey" bad, "can't make a smart play to save their life" bad. It was a really phenomenal choke.

[FanIn80]

Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina

I think part of the concerns that some have is that the playoff series was a continuation of the main second half concern - the play of the top forwards.
The team was carried in the second half, by everyone else. The top line stopped producing.
So some of the theories are valid to propose
- There is a fitness issue with some of those players such that they trail off as the season goes on
- Teams adjusted to their play and they were unable to readjust
- Teams realized they can easily take those players off their game by frustrating them by being more physical

Either way, what happened in the playoffs was in some ways a continuation of things that were happening for the balance of the second half. So I don't fully buy that it was a small sample size.

Not just the second half of this season...

2015 (Top Line: Johnny Monny Hudler)
Round 1: We (Ferkland) pushed Vancouver around and our whole team was able to play our game. Result: Win.
Round 2: Anaheim pushed our top line around and distracted the rest of the team with stupid #### that took us off our game. Result: Loss.

2017 (Top Line: Johnny Monny Ferland(?))
Round 1: Anaheim pushed our top line around and distracted the rest of the team with stupid #### that took us off our game. Result: Loss.

2019 (Top Line: Johnny Monny Lindholm)
Round 1: Colorado pushed our top line around while their top line overpowered the rest of our team. Result: Loss.

[Manhattanboy]

In hindsight its quite shocking that we were up late in the third period in Games 2 and 4 and had good looks in the OT of each game. Credit Smith for playing out of his mind or those games are lopsided losses.

Flames were completely out coached and out played. Give the Avs brass credit, they scouted Calgary and were very well prepared.

Hugely disappointed and looking forward to (hopefully) some significant roster changes.

[TheIronMaiden]

Originally Posted by zarrell

"Good teams" don't lose 6 more games than they win over a whole season

Bad teams go 7-1-2 in their last ten game before the playoffs right? The Avs had a bad stretch of hockey in the middle of the season, but for the last 30 games of the season, and the first 20 for that matter, they were as good, if not better than most playoff teams. I am not making excuses for the Flames they choked - no denying that. All the same, Discounting the Avs as a quality team is simply playing the victim.

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by Psytic

They have a larger body of work than just this series to go off of. I'm not advocating moving Johnny or Mono like some but they definitely need help and i'm confident Tre knows and the right changes will be made.

In 2017 Monahan was arguably the Flames best player in their short-live playoff series, and this year he played poorly. Gaudreau was considerably better than Monahan this year, but he was not in 2017. So, while I would agree that the top-six can benefit from changes, I remain unconvinced that we know enough about either of these players in the playoffs from which to predict future performances. This is part of what I mean by a small sample size.

[CGY12]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

In 2017 Monahan was arguably the Flames best player in their short-live playoff series, and this year he played poorly. Gaudreau was considerably better than Monahan this year, but he was not in 2017. So, while I would agree that the top-six can benefit from changes, I remain unconvinced that we know enough about either of these players in the playoffs from which to predict future performances. This is part of what I mean by a small sample size.

Playing well on the PP is great, and Monahan was certainly great on the PP in 2017. But 5 on 5 has left a lot to be desired for, with both players. To win in the playoffs you can't just be 1 dimensional threat.

Over the course of the 4 series both players have played in, generally speaking, they've looked rather ineffective 5 on 5.

[Manhattanboy]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

In 2017 Monahan was arguably the Flames best player in their short-live playoff series, and this year he played poorly. Gaudreau was considerably better than Monahan this year, but he was not in 2017. So, while I would agree that the top-six can benefit from changes, I remain unconvinced that we know enough about either of these players in the playoffs from which to predict future performances. This is part of what I mean by a small sample size.

I think part of it has to do with the immaturity (and I mean that in the broad sense as well) of Monahan and Gaudreau. I think value can be had for Monahan. I might have read that Tre had good things to say about Backlund but I saw a centre who seemed slow and rather unengaged.

[Corral]

Originally Posted by TheIronMaiden

I don't really get takes like this. The Avs are a good team. They have made the playoffs two years in a row while playing in the most competitive division. They didn't back in either time, they absolutely won in, during clutch games. They are in a lot of ways a hardened team that has came back from a brutal season, and won when it counts.

Sure most of their production comes off of one line - arguably one of the best lines in Hockey. Still, they have a strong D-Corpse which balances puck moving and strong play. Behind all of that is good goal tending.

Are they an elite team - No. But they certainly are not some push over that doesn't deserve any of the success they've earned.

I agree with your assessment of them as a team. But my point was more that the Avs top line beat us all on their own. The Flames showed some serious weakness getting pushed out of the playoffs by one or two guys. It was obvious from Game #2 onwards, which is sad considering how good the Flames looked for most of the year.


I suppose the warning signs were there when the Flames went almost 2 complete games at home in late March without even scoring a goal.