cross16

So I question both the goaltending and defence but everyone else wants to give Elliott a pass and I'm the homer? interesting...

We agree here. Drawing any conclusions based on this limited of a sample size doesn't provide an argument for or against. I just don't understand what argument you are trying to make when you talk about all those games, 10 years etc etc and i jsut found it tough to follow what you were saying. That's why I don't understand and found your post too challenging to repond to that's all, I didn't mean to suggest it was a poor post or a poor argument I just found it tough to respond to . Agree to disagree, and let's see how the rest of the season goes which will provide more discussion points i'm sure. At the end of the day, we are both in agreement that the team needs to play better irregardless of who it is that is in the net. I won't fight you on that point becuase I agree the team play needs to get better. I am however, optimistic that it is heading in the right direction under Gulutzan.

I would agree but that depends on the point you are trying to make. My point was not that Talbot is a great goalie, my point is that Talbot is doing what I think the Flames need right now he is stealing/keeing the OIlers in games behind a so/so defence. You can't steal games 100% of the time, thus why 3 or his 4 games are important.

Becuase of how bad they were against the Sabres. In his 4 wins he has a .930 save percentage and has averaged over 30 shots against in every one of those wins. GAA of 2.5.

He did not play the Tervaninen goal well at all and i'm not relaly sure how you can even defend him there? That was not an overly difficult play for a goalie to stop and once he stopped the rebound he actually slide away from Tervaninen toward the middle of the net and left his glove side wide open. If he stays low and hugs the post, which is prety much goalie 101, that doesn't go in. He is really "busy" in the net right now and he is creating openings by too much movement. He is getting a bit unlucky on bounces I get what you are saying there but at the end of the day you need stops. Having a goalie lay on his belly after a breakaway is sure sign that he got fooled and didn't play that well. I get we don't want to give up breakaway but newsflash all teams do. Its called mistakes. JJ, i'm not going to respond to you because quite frankily you arn't making any sense and I dont' know what your point is anymore and you clearly don't understand mine becuase never once have i ever said this is all on goaltending. It is getting pretty annoying that you cannot have a disucssion about goaltending on this boards. As soon as you criticize the goaltending everyone assumes that means you are letting the players off the hook. Edit: For a point of reference does anyone consider the Oilers D to be good, or playing better than the Flames? Yet they have 4 wins becuase Cam Talbot has been excellent, and when they make mistakes (which they are at I would suggest a pretty simlar rate to the Flames) he's been bailing them out. That's what you sometimes need at the start of the season.

No one is saying that. I bothers me everyone tries to be so black and white on this issue. Yes the team is struglging and not playing well but so is Elliott. Why does it have to be one of the others fault? Early in the season a team is likely going to struggle and you need your goalie to be there for you. Johnson, behind the same team I might add, has been just fine, so why is it Elliott can't get any blame? he was way out of place on the Tervaninen goal and basicaly gave him that side of the net and he's really not playing breakaways well at all. He goes down on his belly so quick and everyone is beating him on the same move, backhand over the glove. Those are the type of big saves you need when you are struggling and its the goalie he wants to be.

Pretty simple, he isn't playing very well. Not his fault by any means, but to say he isn't part of the problem isn't correct either. Early in the season you are going to have issues and you need your goalie to be there, Elliott hasn't been.

Right now I would take Ramo over Elliott. Elliott hasn't played well at all IMO. Johnson has been good and with him in the net the results have been much better.

The nice thing about a new coach sometimes is he has no ties or allegiance to the current player. I could see maybe Hartley have a problem sitting wideman for 3 in a row (and that is NOT a shot at Hartley) but Gulutzan has no reason to put wideman back in the lineup. D played well last night.

Yes but Nak would have given them 4 RH shot dmen and Brodie typically plays the right side so they'd have 5 Right side dmen. Would have been a pretty severly unbalanced D core.

to be blunt, who cares if he isn't a number one stud Dman? There are what, maybe 10-12 of those in the league? Given what the Flames gave up via trade and what they are paying him he doens't need to be. I think we have some very unrealistic expecations if people are going to be upset that Hamilton may not be a #1 stud dman but yet recognize he is a top 3 dman and a very good one at that.

Correct, but its also a Dman who the coach is famaliar with and a guy he very likely has trust in. I would get the compliant if he was jamming him into the lineup but he isn't. Signing an NHL proven dman for basiclaly league minimum is hardly a head scratcher. I don't like Grossman but its a logical signing.

Maybe it was just my screen but that post of yours is showing up about 5 or 6 times so was making a joke. Was not a comment in regards to the quality of the post or anything like that. For what is is worth, D pairings today at practice were the same. Grossman - Wideman as the extra pairing.

You really want your post count up eh TD? You are assuming that Wideman will not play any better then he did the first two games. assuming he won't get any better is equally as flawed as saying that if he got back in he will play better. Also, for the record I am not suggesting he would play as well as he did 2 year ago. I'm just saying in the past he reponsed well to being sat down so I see no reason to write it off now and say that he won't respond and play better this go around. If he doesn't then sit him again. At the end of the day we are talking about someone who is likely going to play 3rd pairing for 15 mins a night.If Widmean can take care of the puck better we are not having this conversation and taking care of the puck is a correctable issue.

I think he should sit, but if they put Wideman back in next game its far from the worst decision. If Kulak played great sure it would be a no brainer but I thought Kulak was ok. He got the job done but hardly excelled so its not like this is a no brainer of a decision. Wideman is a vet and if he can turn it around its a huge win for the flames. Sitting him for 1 game and putting him back in to see how he responds also makes alot of sense. Not what I would do, but still a sound decision if GG wants to go that route. As AlbertaBoy mentioned, Hartley sat Wideman two years ago and he really responded.

For sure he sits. He has to know he's played like crap so far. He'll get in again and when he does, play better.

I see no reason you would make a change on D. They played well, need forwards to step up.

Kulak played 13 mins last night. That is hardly top 5 D.he was fine but that's just it, he was fine but that's all you should expect from a 6th dman. I wish people would get off Engellands back. He's been solid since signing here and is off to another good start this year. Other than getting trapped in that Canuck goal for way too long a shift the D last night was very good.

3 goalies is defiantly frowned upon in the NHL but pretty normal on the AHL. 3 goalies down there plus Macdonald in the ECHL is not too many at all. All will get plenty of games. Scheduling in the A can get crazy.

Nothing has been announced, flames haven't even confirmed the signing which makes sense given they can't fit McCollum under the cap as the roster is currently structured.

Smart signing. McCollum can be exposed in the expansion draft and now covers the flames requirement to have a goalie exposed underconact or rfa. This allows them to potentially negotiation an extention for Elliott without him having to be exposed plays gives them some depth and some depth that's actually played in the NHL. Wouldnt shock me if Macdonald did go to junior but I'm not sure that's what motivated this signing.

Gio is most definitely off to a slow start again and given expectation he's been my most disappointing player through the two games tough to be at your best as a core when one of your best is not as his best. Especially when he is playing the minutes he is. That being said it's also part of the reason in good wth the direction. He isn't going to play this poorly for long

JJ can never wait to tell you "I told you so" personally i like where they flames defence is heading. They are playing much better in the neural zone and their own blue line by stopping rushes before they even get in the zone. Their play in their own zone it a bit better but communication is a bit of an issue there still but that comes with a new coach and new system. They were much better in this regard last night. Really outside of Widemans poor turnovers and Gio forgetting for a half second it was Mcdavid on the ice I liked how the d core played last night.

I dont think that was the discussion, it is a question of fit. Flames have Hamilton, Wideman and Engelland as RH shots and Brodie plays the right side frequently. Nak would never get it to the lineup and if he did you likely have to shuffle a few things around which is not ideal. Flames needed a LH shot as their depth guy.

No I didn't say at all that only my opinion mattered and in fact even said I don't know if he is a good coach or not. Reality is with position coaches and even assstant coaches we don't know because we are not in the room. How do you know that goalies don't love playing for him? How do you even know his coaching style? It's too simplistic to just look at results for certain players because no coach is going to be any good unless he has talent. Danny Taylor was bouncing around his career and under Sigalet was one of the better goalies in the A. One season Abbotsford went through about 8 different goalies and still had a really good year, that takes good coaching. People also forget two seasons ago the flames goaltending with Ramo and Hiller was in the top half of the league even with a tough goalie rotation. After a tough start last year Ramo and Sigalet made adjustments and Ramo actualky played quite well. I also like how Ortio bounced back after a tough start and a tough showing in the A and played solid down the stretch. Those are the reasons I like Sigalet and the good things I think he's done in the organization. If you want a more experienced goalie coach then fine I understand that. I dont agree because all good coaches have to start somewhere so a lack of experience is not a huge deal for me. I'm comfortable with Sigalet but certainly agree the next few years will be telling.