cross16

I think he’s been good to start the year but tough game for Valimaki tonight. Wasn’t a good call but he put himself in a bad spot.

Horrible drop pass by Rasmus. That’s on him. Flames a little tentative and passive on I start this period. Caps are a good team so you’d expect a push and right now flames arnt handling it well.

Why would you ever give Tom Wilson the benefit of the doubt? Trying to stay onside? My Hash Rate. I hope that hurt Wilson. Disgusting that guy is still out there trying to injure people.

What a play by Gaudreau on that goal to make an extra couple moves and suck the defender and goalie to him and open it up for Lindholm. he is playing such great hockey right now. The details in his game are the best I’ve ever seen

I think his position and play away from the puck has been good and skating wise he looks fine to me. He does look like a player who hasn’t played in a while But that’s getting better every game. Thought he had good jump against Detroit. i just think the comments around being slow and behind the play are not due to Monahan they are part of the system the Flames play.

it was very likely a joint decision with consultation between player, training staff and club. It could very easily have been a discussion of player saying I can play through pain, training staff saying he cannot do any further damage, so organization says OK. At first glance that article makes the organization look bad and certainly didn't make me very happy to read it. At the same time I also think there was likely multiple discussion behind closed doors that we are not privy to that would likely shed light on the situation. If the club forced a player to play through something serious, or pushed them to play through an issue they didn't want that would be a serious issue. But given the Flames track record with players I would suspect that was not the case.

This does not match with the Monahan I've seen through the first few games.

Agreed. it's really common and also can be really successful. Sutter seems to prefer speed up the middle but I actually like the idea of fast wingers with slower centers for improved 2 way play. Also open ups the middle of the ice for Monahan to be the trailer.

I agree, i didn't really have a problem with the way the Flames defended. They were passive but that game plan makes sense given the opponent and It looked intentional to me. I thought they were rushing their clearing attempts under pressure thought which is not what you'd like to see but again understandable given it's early season and so much of the lineup was tinkered with. I'm not negative at all about the game, just point out it wasn't their best. I think it's worth being encouraged by the fact that they can get away with an off night in that area because they limited quality chances and got good goaltending.

Wasn’t a very clean game. Turnovers were an issue, PP doesn’t look very good and they really struggled getting the puck out of the zone. Not a great game all around. On the positive side, if you play with effort, above avg defense and good goaltending you can win games and shutout teams even if other parts of your game are still coming around. That isn’t something that has been common for the team in recent years.

Looks like Zadorov will sit or be the 7th D. Right move IMO

I like the change to the d pairings. not a fan of those last 2 forward lines

I will be very surprised if Gawdin is claimed.

While I wouldn't say I disagree I think one of the biggest issues with this team for the last several seasons is a lack of accountability, in particular on their bigger name players. While I would say not there were egregious mistakes in the game there were multiple situations where I think players should know better. I think raising the bar in terms of accountability is a good thing for this group.

See what happens in the game but those lines feel like sending a message to me. I'll be surprised if they go into the game like that. I think it's far too early to pull the plug on Monahan or suggest he belongs on the 4th line. I think he's playing much better than he is getting credit for here.

I have no doubt Mang would flourish anywhere, but I think any line with Backs is going to get tough matchup and d zone starts. I'd rather Mang get higher o zone starts and more favorable matchups because I think they need his offense more than other players. Backlund will be just fine in his role. he'll start slow, always does, but he'll come around. It's not really about labelling lines it's just situations and I don't think deploying Mang in a Backlund like role is the best idea for their offense.

I'd flip Dube and Mang but I get where you are going. I just don't think you can take Mang out of the top 6 but I agree with the idea of getting Coleman some more ice time. That will likely come in time.

Monahan is what he is at this point and I actually thought that line did a good job of compensating for that. We know he is not fleet of foot so protect that by having 2 faster and quick transition players with him and let him be F3. I thought that line did a good job of getting puck in behind the d and then Monahan was doing a really nice job higher up in the zone and keeping the puck in and allowing Mang/Dube to create. I thought that line has been one of their better ones through 2 games and I think it's the best example of complimentary skill sets. Obviously you want more for his $ but this is the reality of the situation IMO so better make the most of it. I think that line does.

I don't have a problem with the idea of a pairing defending first. The reason I am hard on them is they are not really doing that, they are giving up the most in terms of zone time and high danger chances of any of the pairings. If you are going to struggle moving the puck up the ice, you better be air tight in your own zone.

It is only 2 games but at the same time the only reason I focus on the Zadorov-Tanev pairing is they've never been good. They were bad in the preseason and they've continued to be bad in the regular season. The sample size is growing and I get concerned when pairs/lines don't show any flashes and for me Z and Tanev have shown no flashes or evidence they can or will work. That is an option but it's not the only one IMO. Valimaki has been good to start IMO and Kylington had a great pre season. No reason IMO you can't try those 2 as well. But to be fair here this is not all Zadorov. Tanev has not had a good 2 games either and I thought he really struggled last night.

I don't agree and neither do the numbers. It's only 2 games but so far Zadorov-Tanev have been the Flames worst pair and in most cases it isn't close. They are the only pair that is under water in every metric. Gudbranson-Valimaki lead in most of them. They've given up 1 High danger chance against at 5 on 5, Zadorov/Tanev have given up 6.

My only real takeaway is I really think the Tanev-Zadorov pairing needs to be the evaluated. Really really tough to play the way the Flames do when one of your top 2 pairs can’t start the puck in transition.

Not the result they want but I’m encouraged. Their 5 in 5 game is great. Need Markstrom to be better and need some more from their depth. I think both of those things will happen. I’m not worried .

Monahan will take the heat for that but that was awful by Hanifin

Lots to like for Flames tonight. Another impressive 5 on 5 effort where then we’re the better team by a wide margin imo. Just need to get some more consistency from other likes and generate some more quality chances.