robrob74
-
Posts
14,227 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
58
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Videos
Events
Gallery
Posts posted by robrob74
-
-
Maybe he needs to change to 39
-
1
-
-
26 minutes ago, CheersMan said:
I wouldn't give him 15-20 in a row, but id give him 7 straight for sure, including tonight and the next 3. Light schedule to start the season.
It's Rittich's job to be ready at all times. If he is unable to do that then we need to find another backup. This is not a 1A/1B. This is a 1 and 2.
Being sharp is one thing. It has taken smith three games to feel it, plus the two last in preseason. He’s a starter and it took him that many games. We are asking the backup to be ready at all times when they haven’t started a game in around 2 weeks or so.
This is why our back ups never succeed. Look at the Kipper days. I think you need to run your backup ever 3-4 games. I like the idea of playing 3 and sit 1. Be up front with the goalie.
-
23 minutes ago, JTech780 said:
Smith is starting tonight, I really hope they go with Rittich on Saturday regardless of how Smith does tonight. I think we need to know where Rittich is at, we also need to keep Smith's games down.
I am just worried that we are going to keep rolling out Smith and we are going to wear him out by the all star break last year.
Mans possibly have Rittich as cold as ice coming in. It has already been quite awhile since he got a start
-
13 minutes ago, travel_dude said:
No point in arguing about it. Was just saying that we played a good game with some issues. Regardless of the reason for the shots, the number is concerning. You give a team like Toronto that many and you will be fighting for your life. They lost Arviidson for the 1st period, and he's one of their best players.
Smith was good to great. No doubt there. I just don't want to have him to work that much in one game.
I understand what you’re saying. I think he could be the type that thrives on more shots. 43 is high. If we can drop it down to 30ish that would be better.
Although, the 21 in the 2nd period, Forsberg said they weren’t very difficult to stop, that they weren’t doing enough to make it harder on Smith, which I felt is what I saw.
-
3 minutes ago, travel_dude said:
The Flames never shut down offence. The 5v3 call started in the O-zone.
I watch the game more than the stats.
Score effects only occur when you shut down offence.
If 43 shots is a great defensive game, then I hate to see a bad one.
That's not to say they didn't play well in their zone.
Not a perfect game, but I will take it. The PK and PP stood out. That is as important as Smith stopping 43.
Gotta score to win.
Uou gotta remember they’re playing a contender in their barn. Of course the Flames held the play until they were up. Once we got the lead they started pouring it on and we never looked out of place nor in horrible trouble.
I admit I watched the first and then left at the start of intermission and then got to my girlfriend’s with 8-10 min left in the 2nd. I missed the 2man PK. But for me, I think like CCC said, the score made them try harder. We defended well and countered against another team that is supposed to win the cup. They’re going to play that way when they’re down. We just hope we play that way when we are down.
Stats say 43 shots are a lot. Smith played well. There were a few breakdowns but I feel like the situations are different.
So I watched 3/4 of the game, we got hemmed a bit sometimes but not horribly chasing, and the breakouts were good. Huge improvement and a lot to like.
Maybe i I just don’t know hockey anymore. Stats tell me otherwise.
-
14 minutes ago, Khrox said:
Smith I believe in his post-game interview mentioned that with the new protectors, you felt every shot a lot more, and some of the harder slap shots really sting now (so now you got those 100+ slappers that even goalies are probably going to try and duck now).
Yea I saw that after too
-
1 minute ago, redfire11 said:
Good on Smith but man how many wins are we going to post with 40+ shots against us.
30?
He saw the shots tonight. I never really felt like the game was out of our control tonight. There are other games where we apparently have way better stats and lose by a lot, where I really feel like it's out of our control. Tonight, I felt like we counterattacked really well and defensively let Smith see the puck. I never really felt scared about rebound chances against tonight either. The team worked hard for him, and I think it was a better kind of hard, they weren't really chasing the game.
-
6 hours ago, Flyerfan52 said:
I saw Elliott is taking about the new chest protector having little padding on the arms. Every shot seems to leave a bruise & feels like no padding in the arm area. If you don't get the shot in the chest, stop it with the blocker or catch it you hurt a lot.
And they said tonight that Rinne likes the smaller chest protectors better.
-
3 minutes ago, The_People1 said:
Ya man. I don't get this "he needs to play with scorers to score" but look at Elias Petterson. Whatever line he's on and whoever he plays with, his line is the #1 line.
Suggesting anyone needs to play with elite players to put up numbers means that player as an individual isn't very good.
Let's put Monahan on his own line without any talent and see what he does? My guess is he will get 40-45 points. 20 goals and 20 assists. Not bad. Much like Lindholm when in Carolina.
No one is saying that Bennett is elite. Right now you're comparing to elite players. And people are starting to talk about how Petterson is going to be elite/ as good as the Sedin twins/elite.
-
18 minutes ago, MAC331 said:
I don't think there should be any doubt Monahan is smarter and a more fundamentally sound player than Bennett. Bennett entire style is built around being aggressive towards the net because it served him well in Junior. Having said this I also think he has learned a lot since being a Flame. He is a more sound defensive player and sees the ice better IMO. Now is the time to get him placed properly and bring out that aggressive competitive player we drafted for.
I don’t mean to say or downplay Monahan, but a lot of posters on here like to say Monahan scored as a rookie without Gaudreau while forgetting to mention that he had an exceptional playmaker in Hudler to help him along. That was great!
Then Bennett had Backlund and they thought he could hold his own as Monahan did, but never did get another player like Backlund or Gaudreau and the expectations are that he plays up to those levels.
I know I have to come to terms that Bennett is what he is I guess.
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, flames for life said:
This lends to my point exactly. He scored 18 and 18 in his first year. Not exactly a playmaker, but the hint of a playmaker. The big difference between Mony and Bennett lies in the hidden strengths. Most of Mony’s goals are from in front of the net. Bennett plants in the corner and tries to charge into the front. He needs to either place himself better or play with his head more in tune with the pass. Just a reminder that Mony also played his first while without Gaudreau, and scored goals the same way he does now.
maybe this speaks more so of his hockey smarts and on ice vision, as well as understanding the role you need to accept in order to succeed in this league.
Monahan had Hudler for most of the first year. And it was Hudler probably at his best.
-
16 minutes ago, MAC331 said:
So how does he do that with 6 or 8 minutes from the 4th line and no PP time ?
On a different team. A few days ago I said, “Trade the bum!” But that was my thinking he’s rotting in Calgary and probably needs a change of scenery to get to his potential and reacting to those who think he’s been given every opportunity and failed to seize it.
Bennett is my favourite player. I think he has what it takes. Maybe their thinking is to finally to stick to something for him. I guess that is with Janks.
-
1 hour ago, ABC923 said:
Andersson yes, Rittich not yet.
Havent been able to watch the games, but it seems like defense has actually been pretty decent. Not many shots allowed, chipping in offensively, etc. Hanifin sounds like he is adjusting pretty well too.
I don’t think that it is necessarily that defence has been good in our own zone though. We play that possession game like last year and the other team waits for the mistakes. They’ve been executing on almost every mistake.
Our possession game is really good, but the other team just makes sure they limit high danger chances and we get a lot of shots from around the perimeter.
I think the the amount of time that we have the puck lulls Smith to sleep.
it was the same way for us last year, and the way BP teams played in Carolina. A lot of time with the puck, but a lot of goals scored against.
-
1
-
-
They should just trade him. He’s a bum!
-
1
-
-
Just now, 7wit said:
I thought Bennett was noticeable when he was on the ice. The team as a whole seemed like they were more interested in periphery. He was definitely not the worst player on the ice.
Nor unnoticeable.
-
3 hours ago, cccsberg said:
Why is everyone so fixated on Bennett? Overall the team wasn't competitive in 1 on 1 battles nor in coordinating good passing plays. The Bennett fixation does nothing to address the overall issues, but I guess at least its a shiny object that distracts fan anger elsewhere giving others a chance to meld and grow together? If you watched the game, Bennett did little to stand out. If you base your analysis on limited stats, he stands out. I don't recall a single moment in the game where Bennett was dangerous or made a dangerous scoring chance, whereas I recall many from Monahan, Dube and others. Perhaps Bennett isn't getting the love because he's not doing much to push the team forward? Hopefully that will change, not only for him but for the whole team.
I was at the game and I noticed him on the ice when he was there. He stood out as much as over half the roster when he was given the chance. 8 minutes is not much.
Yes Petterson did more with approximately the same amount of time, but also had the puck in different situations where we had poor choice breakdowns.
Youre just not willing to give Bennett more credit because you’re expecting more.
See, I didn’t see it the same, especially since we went 0/7 on the pp. they’re on it every time. They didn’t mske much happen until the third when it was too late. I fully expect them to do what you’re saying they did with that much time on the ice and the amount of touches of the puck.
We got outplayed plain and simple, until we were down 3-0/4-1.
-
46 minutes ago, The_People1 said:
I think Bennett is a finisher. As in you pass him the puck in the neutral zone at full stride and he will try to finish the play all by himself. If you pass to him inside the offensive zone, then he will take it to the net. He is a tunnel vision player.
Some skills can't be taught. You have it or you don't.
Therefore, if Peters was true to his word, he would play him to his strengths where get him the puck in those situations.
Hockey coaches can be a, “do it my way or no way,” or they can be, “do it my way but do it your way whenever possible,” or, put him with players that can get him the puck in stride, or in the zone to finish it.
Peters said he’d look at the players strengths but is it too early to see that happening?
-
42 minutes ago, kehatch said:
Smith let in 4 goals on 22 shots. At least one of them was pretty questionable. I didn't see any 'holy crap' saves in there. I get there were defensive break downs, but when you keep it to 22 shots and every mistake goes in you aren't going to win a lot of games.
I don't blame Smith for the lost. The Flames couldn't score on a tonne of power plays. The defense on two of those goals was terrible. Plus we just weren't winning the puck battles. The game was sloppy and low effort across the board.
But Smith doesn't get a pass. He was mediocre at best and will need to be better of the Flames are going be successful this season.
Smith is an average goalie. Like any other average goalie in the league, about 85-90% of the goalies out there, will play as good as the tram in front of them. Sometimes he will steal a game or two, but I think what we ask of our goalie is too much. I think it is more about where, when and who when we make those mental mistakes.
I think if iany goalie who has average or slightly above average numbers played for us, they’d do the same.
-
1
-
-
4 hours ago, rickross said:
I’ve just about accepted the fact that we may have already seen Bennett’s ceiling. It’s too bad but also unfair to the kid having to bear the expectation of the Flames “highest draft pick ever”. Tough position to be in, keep him and he can play between the 3rd and 4th lines and ramp his play up in the playoffs...or trade him for picks/prospect or another NHL reclamation project?
I don’t think we have seen him reach his ceiling but I think he has reached his peak in a Flames jersey.
I think he can top top out at a 45-50 point player. I am optimistic, and pessimistic as I think he’ll do that with a different team.
-
1 hour ago, conundrumed said:
He is where he is on the depth chart.
No kid gloves. He has to play his way up the roster.
Don't even think about trading him to make room.
He won’t play his way up the roster. He’d need to score at a much higher percentage in relation to time on ice. For the stats people, the likelihood of that happening with any player is fairly low.
i don’t know if this (or the last few years) system is right for him. It seems to cause a lot of low danger scoring chances from the perimeter which Bennett just isn’t.
I thought this coach might be able to harness his skill as he claims he coaches to players strengths. Maybe it’s too early to tell, but it really looks like much the same.
-
1
-
-
5 hours ago, travel_dude said:
I think you are jumping to conclusions based on one game.
Was Backlund ineffective last night?
He was involved on the Tkachuk goal.
He made a weak attempt when he was alone in front of the net.
His one PK went fine.
What is Sam's role right now?
If it's 5v5, we had 14 minutes of PP time.
Was he effective enough to jump up the lines?
No more so than Dube.
He had a bunch of hits, shots and a block.
If you are giving minutes to the lines that generated 5v5 goals, somebody is losing minutes.
If you are trying to tie up the game, you will give minutes to the top 2 lines.
For Bennett to get the recognition he deserves, he has to generate points. Or be the go-to guy on PK's.
Frolik had an off night, but that was as much due to Backlund's off night. Tkachuk makes his own space and can generate offence without Backlund.
I was at the game and from what I saw from Bennett was more jump than anyone else. I think he pushed the play ahead, but apparently It’s not enough.
i think it’s going to be a lot like what Lazar said, he needs to touch the puck more and get the feel and the feel to score points. I get it, he doesn’t do enough on his opportunities when he gets them.
I dont see Bennett doing anything this year. We lose him for next to nothing and don’t know what he will do elsewhere.
-
2
-
-
1 hour ago, CheersMan said:
There were times last year when I thought MS handled the puck too much because it got me out of my seat. I would consider him "confident", because he does it well, maybe the best in the game. Not many coaches would complain about having an extra dman back there to help defend while giving you options with the transition game. Coaches like options.
Don't remember you complaining last year when Smith was the team MVP before going down to injury with a 23-16-6 record, 2.51 GAA, and a 0.921 SA%. Maybe watch MS over the next few games to get the story straight in your head again, your memory seems to have gotten foggy.
i think something we aren’t thinking about is the idea that MS might’ve been a bit injured before the supposed injury. We don’t really know. Everyone plays through little / small nagging injuries. Maybe he wasn’t. But many criticized his numbers the week or two leading up to the injury.
-
1 hour ago, Cowtownguy said:
I didn't like Hamilton either, and I was suspicious when Boston let him go. They were trying to move him when we tried to trade Iggy the first time.
There are your advanced statistics again. What constitutes a hit in statistical terms? At times, it seems to me they consider a touch to be a hit.
As a lot can see, I am not a stats guy. I used to think it was fun to work out averages, but later I realized that stats and what I see don’t always correlate.
-
1
-
-
4 minutes ago, travel_dude said:
It's funny how some players evoke such criticism.
Hamilton had a terrible 1st year, but was paired eventually with Gio.
Many hated his defensive game, while other praised it.
The trade was panned by some because we missed out on Barzal.
Bennett has one good season mostly playing with Backlund and/or Frolic.
Other years has played with less skill; Granlund, Janko, Hathaway, Brouwer, Lazar.
Some give him slack, while other are almost writing him off.
2 coaches are blamed for his usage.
Hamonic has an had season in NY, plays 49 games.
Comes to CGY and is paired with Brodie, who is playing on a side he doesn't prefer.
Hamonic has a bad season, but the pair was a disaster.
The trade was panned by some because we gave up a lotto pick and other picks.
Some think he is garbage, while other are "wait and see".
That's where our own bias comes in. I mean, I hated Hamilton. One would say, "why? He scored points." It was the trade at the time, on top of him being too soft. I hate when guys shy away from an obvious hit opportunity. It doesn't allow the other player to know you're there. I guess there's puck pursuit, but I feel if you're not getting a body on, the players are so good in the NHL that it's easy enough to keep the play going. I just found him soft.
But with Hamonic, for some reason, even though I hated the trade, I am still willing to give him the time to get back into his game. Maybe it's the way he plays? Seeing that he's the only defender we have that seems to care about our goalies, probably helps his case for me.
I don't think we need to fight or be a bruising team. But I want a team that finishes checks. It says we have some of the most hits in the league, so I guess that I seem to be wrong.
The Official Calgary Flames "New Arena" thread
in Flames Talk
Posted
That’s the thing though, if Calgary wants to be the hub for Olympic sport training, how many of those facilities need updating, or new ones? Are they in good shape?
Winning an Olympic bid can help maintain what is already there, can it not?