[PGT] Avs 3 Flames 2 on the brink

[Manhattanboy]

Originally Posted by EldrickOnIce

Coldest team heading into the playoffs was Vegas, who looks spectacular now.

If we had made the same deadline deals as Vegas we would have won the series by now.

[NewFan]

Originally Posted by ComixZone

For game 5, I'd be trying to force players to get in the game through line changes:

Tkachuk - Ryan - Neal
Ryan is our 3rd best forward this series in my eyes. I'd put him between Tkachuk and Neal, while telling Tkachuk and Neal to get greasy.

No Neal please. He is showing wrong playoff experience to these guys.
And I hope Flames play without any pressure and play like they can. Shock them in game 5 then we have a good chance.

[3rd liner]

Neal aggravated me when he was on NSH and VGK, was a pain to play against and got under guys' skin. I am sure I have some angry previous posts here expressing what I thought of him when he was against us. When the Flames signed him I was excited- consistent scorer, size, aggravating to play against, playoff experience. I don't know enough about the internal workings of the club to say if it is a poor attitude or just not being used properly to his talents, but it hasn't worked this season and playoffs. Unless an amazing offer (or a big fallout) comes up in the offseason, I am sure he will be a Flame for at least one more season. I still think he can play a decent role on an NHL team, in the right situation. At this point it isn't looking like the Flames. If we had not acquired Lindholm, he may have found a home on the Gaudreau/Mony line. Lindholm just clicked much better.

[SuperMatt18]

Originally Posted by 3rd liner

Just shows the importance of being 'hot' going into the playoffs. Avs had to battle to get in there at the end and were in 'intense' mode coming in. Once we clinched, we didn't have to battle, and weren't playing that well anyway for the last month. Despite finishing 1st, we went into playoffs cold, they went in hot.
I think of the 03/04 flames who got hot at the right time and made a huge run, despite finishing 6th in the conference and not being as talented on paper. It also helps that the 03/04 flames were built for the playoffs- grit and determination.

Yeah going in hot is always better, and as a fanbase we likely under estimated the Avalanche a bit.

In the last 30 games of the season:

Avs: 16-8-6
Flames: 17-11-2

In the last 15:

Avs: 9-4-2
Flames: 9-6-0

So down the Stretch they were pretty even, but the Avs were really pushing for a spot, while the Flames were kind of just drifting into the playoffs and no where close to the top of their game.

Plus during that stretch both Landeskog and Rantanen missed some time and other players on the roster stepped up and found some confidence. While the Flames top players really struggled.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by 3rd liner

Neal aggravated me when he was on NSH and VGK, was a pain to play against and got under guys' skin. I am sure I have some angry previous posts here expressing what I thought of him when he was against us. When the Flames signed him I was excited- consistent scorer, size, aggravating to play against, playoff experience. I don't know enough about the internal workings of the club to say if it is a poor attitude or just not being used properly to his talents, but it hasn't worked this season and playoffs. Unless an amazing offer (or a big fallout) comes up in the offseason, I am sure he will be a Flame for at least one more season. I still think he can play a decent role on an NHL team, in the right situation. At this point it isn't looking like the Flames. If we had not acquired Lindholm, he may have found a home on the Gaudreau/Mony line. Lindholm just clicked much better.

Lindholm isn't clicking now, though, so at the risk of rewarding a guy who's not producing (though I'd argue he's had more jam than Jankowski), why not give it a go? Or maybe Gaudreau-Lindholm-Neal? It's arguably the best fit for Neal and it's not like the top line could produce less.

[Classic_Sniper]

Why in the world is there so much James Neal buyout talk? I’ve hated Neal’s game basically from the preseason on, but even I know that’s a completely unrealistic idea. If anything, you trade him for a equally bad contract like a Karl Alzner or an Andrew Ladd or a Loui Eriksson. Dead cap space for 8 year is just insane.

Secondly, I find the Gaudreau for Hall talk to be almost as crazy. Hall has 1 more year left until he’s a UFA, the poor asset management on that alone would be a gigantic no in itself.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Psytic]

Gaudreau-Bennett-Neal Bennett is there to create space and get greasy, Neal is the finisher
Tkachuck- Monahan- Lindholm 2nd scoring threat Monahan has to think on his own or Lindholm at center
Jankowski - Backlund - Frolik True shutdown line

4th line leave them alone


Try Kylington at forward hes fast ? Try anything doesnt matter at this point.

[Flash Walken]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

Lindholm isn't clicking now, though, so at the risk of rewarding a guy who's not producing (though I'd argue he's had more jam than Jankowski), why not give it a go? Or maybe Gaudreau-Lindholm-Neal? It's arguably the best fit for Neal and it's not like the top line could produce less.

[Shazam]

Ah, it's like being in the 90s again. Great regular season and then they poop the bed in the playoffs.

[Shazam]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

Lindholm isn't clicking now, though, so at the risk of rewarding a guy who's not producing (though I'd argue he's had more jam than Jankowski), why not give it a go? Or maybe Gaudreau-Lindholm-Neal? It's arguably the best fit for Neal and it's not like the top line could produce less.

I see this series has broken you too.

[AC]

It's kind of amusing hearing the talk about needing to learn through playoff failure, because I thought that's what getting swept by Anaheim 2 years ago was supposed to be.

We outplayed Anaheim for the vast majority of that series but found ways to lose, now we've been playing poorly and Mike Smith has given us a chance to win and we're still finding ways to lose.

[Hemi-Cuda]

Originally Posted by badradio

A lot of people are going to look pretty bad when we find out Monahan is playing injured again. I’m only guessing, but he hasn’t been able to put much on his shot for quite awhile. I’m guessing it’s the same as last year where he needs surgery and would be out for the season if he had it. I just think there is history of undisclosed injuries and people should hold off on the harsh judgement.

If true, then the Flames should trade Monahan anyway for being so fragile. If he is hurt, then it's the exact same recipe as last year and proof that his body can't handle an 82+ game schedule. Some guys just don't have the physical endurance to play hockey at the highest level for 7-8 months of the year, so get rid of him and bring someone in who can

[TheScorpion]

I don't see why we'd trade Monahan

Just add another guy. Keep Monahan and add another top-six centre with more intensity to his game

[djsFlames]

I'm torn when looking in hindsight. Stone is the type of play driver this team is thirsting for and might even be playing as good as MacKinnon. But on the other hand there is a lot of promise in Valimaki. I may have made that trade as it would give us a strong chance to flirt with some 3-4 round runs in the next 3-4 years.

I feel like the top line ran out of gas 60 games in. I feel like Monahan specifically has fizzled out down the stretch every season. He's on pace for over 40 goals by February and ends up around 30. Johnny's PPG falls fairly significantly as well. Either these guys don't have the endurance or they're not able to elevate to another gear when the games get harder.

If the season was half the length we might have a decent chance, the way these guys are usually going in December. Don't know why our offence routinely dries up when April hits.

Colorado never should have given us the difficulty it has. Allowing 56 and 52 shots against consecutively takes some poor possession and not enough pressure in the d-zone and neutral zone. That's a tale of a team being passive/cautious while another plays assertive.

I've watched maybe 70 games of an assertive flames team regardless of who they played.

It's beyond head scratching to see them back off and allow zone entries and extended possession against like they have.

Picking up a guy like Hall might be worthwhile. Need that relentless line driver that can use their body and attack with speed.

I would make some significant changes to the lineup for game 5 to try and shake up the team and by some chance find some chemistry that sparks them for a run. Czarnik, Dube in, new combinations in the top 6. Maybe even Rittich, if there's anything to the team having more swagger in front of BSD. Now is the time to test that theory.

[Cecil Terwilliger]

Few thoughts.

Having read first hand accounts of guys who have had their careers fall off a cliff, I wonder what the deal is with Neal. It’s not always as simple as he’s getting old, his skills are diminishing. Is it coaching style? Personal life? Fitting in with the rest of the room?

Peters appeared to show us time and time again to trust his decisions. But he’s been out coached this series, no doubt about it. When you’re playing this bad, a full shakeup of the line up is required. I’m talking different lines and different personnel getting the nod to play. After the last two performances I’ll be blown away if he doesn’t make a change or two in the forwards who dress. We’ve also shown no ability to adapt to Colorado’s offence or defence. We’re getting killed in all 3 zones. Beyond just not getting performances from our top guys (or any guys for that matter).

He also needs to abandon the line match ups. It’s not working. Try something else.

It becomes so difficult to pinpoint problems when we look as terrible as we do top to bottom, forwards and defence. Tells me it is more than our top guys not producing.

I’m at a loss to explain how awful everyone looks compared to earlier in the season. It’s difficult to comprehend how good everyone looked for the first 3 months and how terrible they look now.

If Smith doesn’t get a contract next year, it’ll be a sad way for a career to end.

I don’t think we’re losing because we’re too soft or too small. If we got knocked around and bullied by a big, strong team I’d understand a bit. But Avs aren’t tougher. They’re beating us at our own game, skill and speed.

Two awful road games. For about 15 mins last game we played a good road game. Slowed it down, used our puck possession to kill their momentum. But we couldn’t maintain. Once Colorado turned it up again we had no answer.

I don’t buy into the narrative of being hot going into the playoffs but we look like a team who bought into it. Playing with no fight, no confidence. I hate when the Flames get into all these emotional scrums after every whistle and then play with no emotion other than between plays. It’s literally the exact opposite of how we need to play to be successful. Given our style of play I figured we’d be pushing the speed/skill during play and keeping emotions down after the whistle.

[Igottago]

Originally Posted by AC

It's kind of amusing hearing the talk about needing to learn through playoff failure, because I thought that's what getting swept by Anaheim 2 years ago was supposed to be.

We outplayed Anaheim for the vast majority of that series but found ways to lose, now we've been playing poorly and Mike Smith has given us a chance to win and we're still finding ways to lose.

Exactly. The argument might hold more weight if the Flames at least progressed a round or two, played well and came up short. But that's not what this is.

Also factor in the fact that Colorado isn't waiting around for their playoff lessons to school the number one team in the conference.

Probably just a way for people to avoid the fact that the Flames best players are not up to the task.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by Classic_Sniper

Why in the world is there so much James Neal buyout talk? I’ve hated Neal’s game basically from the preseason on, but even I know that’s a completely unrealistic idea. If anything, you trade him for a equally bad contract like a Karl Alzner or an Andrew Ladd or a Loui Eriksson. Dead cap space for 8 year is just insane.

Secondly, I find the Gaudreau for Hall talk to be almost as crazy. Hall has 1 more year left until he’s a UFA, the poor asset management on that alone would be a gigantic no in itself.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I would agree with you except that cap hit becomes less and less meaningful if the cap goes up. 1.8 now is probably way more impactful than in three years.

If you are just trading for another bad contract I'd rather keep Neal and try to get him going.

[Moneyhands23]

Originally Posted by Manhattanboy

If we had made the same deadline deals as Vegas we would have won the series by now.

Well that's def true. I'd say if we made one of the trades that cbj made it would be the same.

Controversly if we had traded brodie + a 3rd to ott we would prob have Duchenne. Kind of a win win if you get me

[AC]

Originally Posted by djsFlames

I'm torn when looking in hindsight. Stone is the type of play driver this team is thirsting for and might even be playing as good as MacKinnon. But on the other hand there is a lot of promise in Valimaki. I may have made that trade as it would give us a strong chance to flirt with some 3-4 round runs in the next 3-4 years.

Remember Treliving said the ask for Stone was Valimaki + Rasmus + 1st.

Really hard to say. Stone is legit, but also would have taken a salary of $11.5M with Calgary to get the equivalent in post-tax takehome compared to $9.5M with Vegas.

[Moneyhands23]

Originally Posted by AC

Remember Treliving said the ask for Stone was Valimaki + Rasmus + 1st.

Really hard to say. Stone is legit, but also would have taken a salary of $11.5M with Calgary to get the equivalent in post-tax takehome compared to $9.5M with Vegas.

That would have potential to be even worse than the Gilmour trade.