[PGT] 1-1 series. Off to Colorado.

[Mickey76]

I think some angst is appropriate after last nights game. If Smith had played horrible, or if the ref’s stole the game (Gaudreau dive aside), or if we had just played bad I think I would feel better than I do now. But the fact is we had a 2-1 lead with less than 3 mins left in the game and we blew it. You can’t afford to lose won games in the playoffs. Statiscally how often does a pulled goalie lead to a win? It must be very rare and yet here we sit with the series tied 1-1. My worry is this could be a real momentum changer and Colorado is a good team. We are better no question but the longer the series goes the worse it is for us.

Having said that we are a funny team this year, I could see us losing a heartbreaker in game 7 against Colorado, and I could see us going 15-0 the rest of the way.

[Manhattanboy]

Yup the angst is well warranted. Losing a game we should have stolen the way we did could well turn out to be the turning point in the series.

COL has all the momentum and is feeling really good about themselves heading home and no doubt are thinking the way they have played not only can they win this series but they should win.

Flames are no longer the favourites imo.

[djsFlames]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

I see a lot of posters giving the Avalanche credit and discussing how the Flames need to and can play better. Your post is reflective of a low tolerance for anything other than praising the Flames which is fine but calling out others for being embarrassing because you don't agree with them is simply a bad take.

Actually no, the Flames shouldn't be praised for that game. It was a poor game from them, and they didn't deserve to win. Why should they be praised after that?

But it's not indicative of the rest of the series unless the Flames plan on playing at 50% the rest of the way, which I really doubt.

Are the Flames down 3-1? No. It's tied. And this is a damn fine team on the road, as they have shown on many occasions.

There's way more concern and pessimism than there needs to be. I'm basically calling out *those* posters for still to this day being extraordinarily bad at handling a loss. But we were never going undefeated, and we're probably going to lose another one in this series at least, even if we take it. So spoiler alert, hope you're not going to implode when it happens.

A bad game two doesn't mean the Avs have more gears, or that MacKinnon is in an entirely different league than our top guys.

That sort of talk is embarrassing. You seem to revel in negativity though, so have at it I guess. I'm going to enjoy the most exciting time of the year and not dream up and assume worst case scenarios, while disregarding/forgetting everything these players have shown and proven over the year up until this point, like the same miserable posters like to do habitually.

It just gets old, dude. It's been old for a while. And damn right, I'm calling them out on it.

[oldschoolcalgary]

in theory, the longer the series goes, the hope is that the Flames depth would begin to take over...

there is definitely the psychological aspect to it though; the longer the Avs are in it, the more they begin to believe they can win the series; on the flip side, Calgary as the favorite will begin to tighten up the longer things go...

i think that's why its so important to keep hitting Mckinnon/rantanen... like body blows, the hope is that it begins to slow him down later in the series...

so far, McKinnon hasn't been touched from what i can recall...so he's not hesitant whatsoever in crossing over the middle of the ice nor going into the high traffic areas.

Flames need a lot more north south play; too often entering the zone they are going east west...compare that to Colorado, who is attacking with speed and backing in the Flames defense on every rush seemingly...

[calgaryred]

Originally Posted by djsFlames

Actually no, the Flames shouldn't be praised for that game. It was a poor game from them, and they didn't deserve to win. Why should they be praised after that?

But it's not indicative of the rest of the series unless the Flames plan on playing at 50% the rest of the way, which I really doubt.

Are the Flames down 3-1? No. It's tied. And this is a damn fine team on the road, as they have shown on many occasions.

There's way more concern and pessimism than there needs to be. I'm basically calling out *those* posters for still to this day being extraordinarily bad at handling a loss. But we were never going undefeated, and we're probably going to lose another one in this series at least, even if we take it. So spoiler alert, hope you're not going to implode when it happens.

A bad game two doesn't mean the Avs have more gears, or that MacKinnon is in an entirely different league than our top guys.

That sort of talk is embarrassing. You seem to revel in negativity though, so have at it I guess. I'm going to enjoy the most exciting time of the year and not dream up and assume worst case scenarios, while disregarding/forgetting everything these players have shown and proven over the year up until this point, like the same miserable posters like to do habitually.

It just gets old, dude. It's been old for a while. And damn right, I'm calling them out on it.

I agree Avs gave everything and won in OT good for them. It's all new and off to game three, rather be the Flames now then the Lightning.

Sent from my SM-G930W8 using Tapatalk

[Flames Fan, Ph.D.]

Let's hope the coaching staff and the players are smart enough to adjust.

The Avs coaching staff clearly told them to avoid dump-ins, which has meant forwards gathering speed and trying to bull their way into our zone. The players on the ice need to recognize that, as well as picking up on some of the individual Avs player patterns: for example, Mackinnon almost always tries to cut into the center of the ice after gaining the zone. He's a good enough skater to try, but the players on the ice need to be smart enough to know it's coming and adjust.

Barrie is practically the only Avs dman that can bring the puck into the zone, so that should be a realistic adjustment.

Otherwise, our players just have to compete. Precious little of that out there so far.

[Winsor_Pilates]

Originally Posted by djsFlames

Actually no, the Flames shouldn't be praised for that game. It was a poor game from them, and they didn't deserve to win. Why should they be praised after that?

But it's not indicative of the rest of the series unless the Flames plan on playing at 50% the rest of the way, which I really doubt.

Are the Flames down 3-1? No. It's tied. And this is a damn fine team on the road, as they have shown on many occasions.

There's way more concern and pessimism than there needs to be. I'm basically calling out *those* posters for still to this day being extraordinarily bad at handling a loss. But we were never going undefeated, and we're probably going to lose another one in this series at least, even if we take it. So spoiler alert, hope you're not going to implode when it happens.

A bad game two doesn't mean the Avs have more gears, or that MacKinnon is in an entirely different league than our top guys.

That sort of talk is embarrassing. You seem to revel in negativity though, so have at it I guess. I'm going to enjoy the most exciting time of the year and not dream up and assume worst case scenarios, while disregarding/forgetting everything these players have shown and proven over the year up until this point, like the same miserable posters like to do habitually.

It just gets old, dude. It's been old for a while. And damn right, I'm calling them out on it.

I agree with everything except McKinnon not being another league over our top line guys.
I actually think he is and a top 3 forward in the league.
Johnny is amazing but he's still a level below McKinnon .

Having said that, we are better on lines 2, 3, 4, all defensive pairings and at least equal in net.
We should still have what it takes to win this series when you look at our overall depth of a team.

[Macindoc]

Avs turned it up a notch in this one, and played with desperation from start to finish, so the Flames will have to answer in the next if they want to take the series. I actually think that home ice will not be much of an advantage for Colorado, because the altitude may limit how many minutes their top forward line can actually play.

I think the loss may be a blessing in disguise, a lesson learned early against a weaker opponent about what it takes to win in the playoffs. I still think that the Flames are a much superior team to the Avs, and will show their superiority over a 7 game series.

Actually, the more I think about it, the more it reminds me of the Flames' first round series against the Canucks in 1989. The team does not have a lot of playoff experience, and it probably needs to be pushed and experience some adversity to become the team it can be.

[Igottago]

The thing I noticed was the Flames inability to create turnovers at their blue line and get away to their quick transition into offense like we've seen most of the season. The Avs did a great job getting past the Flames sticks and bodies, got established in the zone and went to work once there.

Ultimately I think the loss could be a good thing. Everyone (from fans to players) was probably feeling great about game one and started seeing the glory that awaits. But in the playoffs you have to be ready for war every game. Elite players like Mackinnon are not going to stand by and watch you cruise to victory. The Flames will have to get some performances like that from their top players in response.

[tvp2003]

Good news is that Colorado played desperate and we were still less than 3 minutes away from winning the game. And even then, it took an extra attacker and a lucky bounce in front of our net — if Lindholm can manage to win that draw (he was 4 for 5 in the defensive zone overall), it may be a 3-1 win instead of a 3-2 loss.

That said, Flames need to be better in all zones. A big difference was special teams — even though the Flames had a PP goal and did not give up a goal on the PK, Colorado did a much better job of limiting our PP zone entries and did everything but score when they had the man advantage. We need to give them a different look for Game 3. And of course the SH goal — one of three misplays by Brodie before the game was even half finished.

I think we see a hungrier Flames team in Game 3. And hopefully we don’t have to rely on Smith and the 4th line to get us going because that won’t be enough.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by Cecil Terwilliger

For all the talk of the Avs top line getting burnt out I can’t help but wonder about Backlund. Played 23 mins again and had a rough night. -3 and got dominated by MacKinnon all night.

I'm not worried about him. When you constantly play the best player on the other team, once in a while you get lit up. For example, we all know Backlund plays great against McDavid, but once in a while McDavid wins the night.

I think they need to match intensity and they will win, as long as Smith keeps it up. Frankly, this is where Peters is key, as well. Can he get a better game out of the top line, can he get them refocused, can he teach from last game, but positively.

[Beninho]

The Avs undoubtedly made adjustments that others in this thread have noted, especially with them reverting from dumping the puck in to attacking the Flames zone with speed and gaining some easy zone entries. Peters has been very good at making adjustments all season, the Avs made the first adjustment after the Flames controlled the last half of game 1 and now Peters will have to make adjustments against an obviously successful strategy that was used by the Avs. I have a lot of faith that Peters and the coaching staff will make the changes necessary, and from his post game press-conference Peters clearly understands that an adjustment is needed.

Some of you guys need to have more faith, especially in Peters. I Billieve we will see a very determined Flames team on Monday that will have honed in on the adjustments made by the Avs.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[sa226]

Just caught up on the PVR due to working late. First off, I'm floored that I was able to make it to this morning without having the result spoiled.

I really do think that many of the playoff cliches ring true. Its the results that matter. One game at a time. I've heard that there's no momentum in the playoffs. Not that it doesn't exist, just that it can change so easily.

Colorado is s good team. You can tell they're well coached. Yeah sure they're a one line team, but in game 2, the Flames didn't have an answer for that one line. Though as far as the stat line goes, each top line had a goal.

The lopsided offensive zone time is pretty crazy, but to the Flames credit, the Avs directly had nothing to show for it. Their goals were on a bad bounce and off the rush. They certainly had their chances, but the Flames composure defensively while under seige was impressive for lack of a better word. Bend but don't break.

As much as the Avs dominated large portions of this game, you could argue that the Flames could have easily won it, save for some bad luck and missed opportunities. That speaks to the quality of this team and their structure.

Its been a ling time since this phrase was muttered around these parts, but never apologize for having great goaltending. Last I checked, Smith is part of the 23 man roster. His play is as relevant as any others.

I think secretly many of us hoped for a sweep, but the playoffs ate never easy. The Avs are a good team, and I think have been a little under appreciated. McKinnon is reminding me of Iginla the way he affects the game every time he's on the ice. The rest of the Avs are playing their roles to a T, regardless of the talent gap.

This is now a series. There were 2 question marks heading into the post season. Early on the first seems to have been answered. The second question of playoff experience is continuously under review. You can see players still adjusting.

Brodie wasn't great. Lindholm was better than game 1, but still seems a bit shell shocked, I think he's finding his way. Gio seemed a bit more savvy last night. Monahan was better. Playoff Sam Bennett has arrived.

I also think the 3M line took a step back. They were excellent in game 1.

Disappointed in the loss, but I think for a group of players that is learning on the fly what it takes in the playoffs, they're in decent shape.

[Erick Estrada]

Originally Posted by tvp2003

Good news is that Colorado played desperate and we were still less than 3 minutes away from winning the game. And even then, it took an extra attacker and a lucky bounce in front of our net — if Lindholm can manage to win that draw (he was 4 for 5 in the defensive zone overall), it may be a 3-1 win instead of a 3-2 loss.

That said, Flames need to be better in all zones. A big difference was special teams — even though the Flames had a PP goal and did not give up a goal on the PK, Colorado did a much better job of limiting our PP zone entries and did everything but score when they had the man advantage. We need to give them a different look for Game 3. And of course the SH goal — one of three misplays by Brodie before the game was even half finished.

I think we see a hungrier Flames team in Game 3. And hopefully we don’t have to rely on Smith and the 4th line to get us going because that won’t be enough.

The crazy part is that Bednar dew up the play that led to the goal and it was one of those rare occurrences where the play ended up going according to plan. If Lindholm wins that faceoff we are likely discussing a 2-0 lead today.

[Robbob]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

The crazy part is that Bednar dew up the play that led to the goal and it was one of those rare occurrences where the play ended up going according to plan. If Lindholm wins that faceoff we are likely discussing a 2-0 lead today.

A lot went right for them on that play. Flames made it a difficult pass through the seam. It was off target and ended up going off Landeskog's skate. From there it was a couple fortunate bounces, off both Hamonic's skates until it stopped right where Compher could jump on it.

[midniteowl]

Originally Posted by Manhattanboy

Why don’t you guys start a lovefest thread for MacKinnon?

Yes, that way I don't have read them because I won't be clicking into that threat.

[flamesfan1297]

Even though they lost the game my first playoff game was still an amazing experience!! Great atmosphere in there, I'd love to go to the Red Lot Party at one of the games in the future. That looked like a blast

Sent from my SM-G955W using Tapatalk

[Ragnar]

"JAMES NEAL!... Fans on the shot."

Neal is probably the worst player in the NHL right now. Czarnik or Quine would be a huge upgrade for game 3.

[flames_fan_down_under]

I will add that I think the least concerned people about this loss are the guys in Calgary Flames dressing room. They have shown to be extremely confident about their game and quite resilient.

[flames_fan13]

Originally Posted by Ragnar

"JAMES NEAL!... Fans on the shot."

Neal is probably the worst player in the NHL right now. Czarnik or Quine would be a huge upgrade for game 3.

No they wouldn't be a huge upgrade, Neal has experienced the playoffs and been to the finals multiple times. Czarnik and Quine have a combined 10 games of playoff experience, all by Quine.

Although Neal has underachieved this year, Peter's is not going to scratch the guy with the most playoff experience on the team. Neal may not be producing on the ice as many expected but from Dube's comments earlier in the year and his experience leave to believe his experience will be relied on by others on the team. There probably isn't a lot that Neal hasn't seen in the playoffs so he can probably be relied on for help.


Edit to add: Game 2 was not a good game for the Flames, but from what this year has shown is the team can bounce back and stop losing streaks. Also Peters has had the ability to know what needs to be changed to get the team playing to their capabilities again.