The Three Game Tracker

[Ameter]

One note about the outside help: We're guaranteed to get it. The vast majority of the remaining games are west vs. west or east vs. east. Meaning that in any given game, one western team is going to get a loss (worst case an overtime loss). Since there are only 6 teams out of the 15 (counting the three division leaders and the three worst) who don't really matter if they win or lose, that leaves 9 teams vying for 5 playoff spots. We're going to get a lot of help down the stretch by default.

All we need to do is keep winning 2 out of every 3

[geos]

All we need to do is keep winning 2 out of every 3

I think you're right, but the clock needs to start now. 2 out of 3 from here in will give us 97 points. I don't think anyone is going with the old 92 point number anymore. I'd start the clock tonight and say 2 out of 3 here on will give us a good shot.

There are 11 teams in the West that can hit 90 points playing .500 hockey. It will not be 92 points. It will be 96, 97, 98.

If some teams get streaky though, you could see a playoffs where 100pts is the cut line. That'd be something for sure.

[altemo13]

There are 11 teams in the West that can hit 90 points playing .500 hockey. It will not be 92 points. It will be 96, 97, 98.

agreed, 96-98 seems to be the total that is needed to go to post season. Something that could help us is the tight Pacific Division ... all five are still in for the playoffs, but they will see each other a lot - Anaheim has 9 divisional games left, San Jose 10, Phoenix 8, Los Angeles 10 and Dallas even 11. It could help us if they steal points from each other - just hoping that there aren't too many OT/SO-games. Meanwhile, we still have games against Edmonton and Colorado, twice each.

[Ameter]

I think you're right, but the clock needs to start now. 2 out of 3 from here in will give us 97 points. I don't think anyone is going with the old 92 point number anymore. I'd start the clock tonight and say 2 out of 3 here on will give us a good shot.

There are 11 teams in the West that can hit 90 points playing .500 hockey. It will not be 92 points. It will be 96, 97, 98.

If some teams get streaky though, you could see a playoffs where 100pts is the cut line. That'd be something for sure.

And what you fail to realize is that the vast majority of games remaining are west vs west now, instead of west vs. east. By definition, half of the teams will lose their games.

[C_worthy]

And what you fail to realize is that the vast majority of games remaining are west vs west now, instead of west vs. east. By definition, half of the teams will lose their games.

Well, to be a bit more specific, we can expect that in the aggregate, teams playing each other will play to about a .550 or .560 pace (that reflects about how often games typically go to OT).

But you are right (and what geos is missing) is that the east-west games are all but done now (except for Chicago). The reason that almost all of the teams in the race were hot at the same time is that they haven't been playing each other every night. We are now at the point in the season where teams will be facing each other and simple math states that not everyone can remain hot.

If the Flames keep playing at .600+ - and certainly if they keep winning 2 out of 3 - then they will be in good shape.

The only way that the cut-off line could be 100 points would be if all of the non-playoff teams (say Edm, Col, Stl, CBJ and one other - let's say Min) basically lost every game from here on in. There are simply only so many points to be had, so the only way 8 teams are going to get at least 100 is if the rest of the teams just stop winning altogether (which is of course, certainly possible).

Despite the fact that everyone has been hot for the past few weeks, pushing the number up from 92 to 96, I am inlclined to think we might see it inch back down the rest of the way as the number of head-to-head games increases. My guess is that the final number turns out to be 94 or 95.

[kehatch]

Big win tonight. It was one that pushed us another point above the pace.

Thanks to back to back losses on behalf of the Flames St. Louis joins Edmonton and Colorado in the teams out of the playoff race. At least barring a major hot streak.

I still like Phoenix, Calgary, Nashville, Chicago, and LA for the final five spots. However, Dallas is putting some wins together, Anaheim and Minnesota are knocking at the door, and if Columbus does anything with their games in hand then they could still be in the running.

The scoring differentials are starting to tell a bit of a story though and the playoff picture is starting to get a bit clearer.

BIG game in Chicago tomorrow. A loss by the Flames lets Chicago leap frog the Flames into 5th. A win gets the Flames into fourth and gives them a real chance of getting in the playoffs. More importantly it gets the Flames another 2-points and keeps them out of the hands of the Hawks.

[kehatch]

Big win tonight finishing the 3-game set with a requisite 4 of 6 points. A loss to Anaheim and Minnesota are big helps.

If my math is correct then the Flames are projecting 95-points, which if things hold will put them in a tie with Phoenix for 7th/8th. That means the games in hand are becoming less of an issue. If they can maintain the 4 out of 6 pace they will get 97 points which should (fingers crossed) be enough for a playoff spot.

Columbus, St. Louis, Colorado, and Edmonton are pretty much out. Vancouver and Detroit pretty much have their divisions locked up. San Jose looks pretty good in their division as well. Beyond that 8 teams are all in the running for 4 to 11. Crazy.

6 of the remaining 14 games are against teams in that race. 9 of them are against playoff contending teams. Obviously the six 4-point games are biggies but I won't call any of them must wins. Points are points and the Flames need to win as many of their remaining 14 as they can regardless of who they are against.

[Ameter]

just bumping this back near the top

[kehatch]

Not a great round getting only 2 out of a possible 6 points. Dropping a two goal lead against the Canucks, almost dropping a 3 goal lead against Dallas, and getting blanked by Phoenix doesn't help.

However, they are still 2 points up on the pace and in good shape to make the playoffs. 10-points are available against teams out of the race. If they can win those then they will need to find another 5 or so points somewhere.

The point being they are as much in the race now as they were yesterday. The next game is pretty important though. A home game against a team that just blanked you and the ability to avoid losing three straight. Still not a 'must win' game, but as close as you can get until they are fighting to mathematically be eliminated.

[DarthHenning]

We need to go 8-3 to be ok. Asuming our final game to Van is a loss that leaves us with 2 we can lose. Most likely the phoenix and SJS games. Hope not, but if we can win the rest, we're good.

[kehatch]

I am pretty bitter over the last game (ANA). Unbelievably bad officiating and a very selfish penalty by Bourque.

But the reality is over the past 5 games the Flames haven't been able to win against anybody but Colorado. They can't blame anyone but themselves.

With the out of town scoreboard being as unfriendly as it has been the Flames are in dire straights to make the playoffs.

[Flame111]

I am pretty bitter over the last game (ANA). Unbelievably bad officiating and a very selfish penalty by Bourque.

But the reality is over the past 5 games the Flames haven't been able to win against anybody but Colorado. They can't blame anyone but themselves.

With the out of town scoreboard being as unfriendly as it has been the Flames are in dire straights to make the playoffs.

I was screaming on that Bullstrawberry call on Bork. Out of my chair and screaming what's the call? 2 minutes for "PLAYING HOCKEY HARD" there was no elbow there, they was a hockey battle.

Sorry the refs have handed 4 points to the Ducks, they took a clean goal away from the Kings in their last game which would have had that one end 2-1 for the Kings in reg time and the whistles started blowing against the Flames right after Iggy put in the go ahead goal.

In OT we saw Gio take a high stick from Selanne with Blood flowing down his face, that should have been 4 minutes - No call.

Jbo took a brutal hook in OT - no call.

A borderline penalty shot awarded in OT - who calls a penalty shot in OT.

It was a bull game and the worst part is we play the Ducks AND the Refs again...

[geos]

Sorry the refs have handed 4 points to the Ducks, they took a clean goal away from the Kings in their last game which would have had that one end 2-1 for the Kings in reg time and the whistles started blowing against the Flames right after Iggy put in the go ahead goal.

Kipper taking the night off in the first 5 minutes or Regehr being a slow moving pylon is what cost them the game. Don't give up 3 goals in the first 5 minutes and there is no OT, no call on Bourque, no anything. The Flames handed the Ducks 4 points on a silver platter with some of the worst hockey I've ever seen in those opening minutes. I mean Regehr was -2 and had drawn two lazy hooking calls 5 minutes in. The only reaosn he wasn't -3 is that he was in the box on the other goal!

A borderline penalty shot awarded in OT - who calls a penalty shot in OT.

Borderline penalty shot? Staois dived at his ankles! I think it should have been 2 minutes for tripping, but generally people think 4 on 3 is worse than a penalty shot so that really went in our favour.

The refs had nothing to do with the fact the Flames absolutely bombed in the first 5 minutes. If they didn't do that, there would be no problem with the refs. Sutter can look down his bench and see Regehr and Kipper were responsible for this loss. It wasn't the refs at all. Sure they didn't help late in the third, but the team should never have been in that situation anyway.

[UKFlamer]

2 minutes for "PLAYING HOCKEY HARD" there was no elbow there, they was a hockey battle.

He wasn't called for an elbow. He was called for interference, and that was correct.

And what is 'Playing hard hockey' ? is that code for being allowed to break the rules of the game? To me its just plain old cheating.

If you let people break the rules it will just lead to the idiotic thuggery of the late 80's and early 90's. They bought in new standards of play to stop that, because thats not hockey, thats just (Mod Edit) on ice.

[SheriforPM]

I am convinced now that Geos is a troll. I hate using that word and I had to push myself to do it. However, anyone who slams his so-called team as much as he does can't be cheering for them.

Any instance, and I mean ANY instance to hammer on this team, and he is all over it like a cheap suit.

When luck proves him right, which is actually very rarely, he is all over these boards telling anyone and everyone that we suck. It's our own fault, coaching, players and everyone on this team sucks.

At least the Don and DL have the guts to tell us what team they cheer for, and for that I respect them.

Geos, you have none. Zero, zilch, nada.............

[hurtin_albertan]

Kipper taking the night off in the first 5 minutes or Regehr being a slow moving pylon is what cost them the game. Don't give up 3 goals in the first 5 minutes and there is no OT, no call on Bourque, no anything. The Flames handed the Ducks 4 points on a silver platter with some of the worst hockey I've ever seen in those opening minutes. I mean Regehr was -2 and had drawn two lazy hooking calls 5 minutes in. The only reaosn he wasn't -3 is that he was in the box on the other goal!

Borderline penalty shot? Staois dived at his ankles! I think it should have been 2 minutes for tripping, but generally people think 4 on 3 is worse than a penalty shot so that really went in our favour.

The refs had nothing to do with the fact the Flames absolutely bombed in the first 5 minutes. If they didn't do that, there would be no problem with the refs. Sutter can look down his bench and see Regehr and Kipper were responsible for this loss. It wasn't the refs at all. Sure they didn't help late in the third, but the team should never have been in that situation anyway.

Not fair to blame Kipper geos. On the Ducks first goal, let me know how you make out next time you're in net, your defenseman gives the puck to Correy Perry in the corner, and he finds Ryan Getzlaf alone in the slot. When you're talking about the 9 or 10% of shots that goalies don't stop, that was exhibit A. On the second goal, I'll admit it squeaked in under his arm and he maybe should've had it, but Perry isn't 2nd in the league with 39 goals for no reason - the guy knows how to score. Again let me know how you do when Perry fires a backhand at you. Besides the Flames were on the PK, which certainly doesn't do Kipper any favours. Third goal, Bourque and Bouwmeester did a really nice job screening the goalie...problem is it was their OWN goalie. Kipper stops that shot every single time if he gets a look at it, not his fault that guys are standing in front of him when they should get the F out of the way. Look at his reaction, he clearly yelled at Bouwmeester, what's he supposed to do when he can't see the shot?

He wasn't called for an elbow. He was called for interference, and that was correct.

And what is 'Playing hard hockey' ? is that code for being allowed to break the rules of the game? To me its just plain old cheating.

If you let people break the rules it will just lead to the idiotic thuggery of the late 80's and early 90's. They bought in new standards of play to stop that, because thats not hockey, thats just (Mod Edit) on ice.

If you want to play that game then MacMillan should have been called for cross checking as soon as Bourque went to the crease and it would all be for not. Everybody knows that there is some amount of rule-breaking that goes on inside the crease as players battle for position. The post-lockout rules have reduced it, but you're still allowed to get away with a little bit and every player knows that. If I'm Bourque on that play and I see that Macmillan and I are allowed to trade cross checks un-penalized right in front of the ref, then by no means would I be expecting that the next guy to push in the battle would be going to the penalty box. There has to be a level of consistency from the refs for this to be fair to the players. You can't expect Bourque to be walking on eggshells when the refs had already dictated that a good amount of slack was going to be given.

[geos]

No, not completely fair to blame it all on Kipper, but 1 of the 3 was clearly his fault and I'd argue that 1st one (unscreened) was 50/50... an elite Kipper would have had it, as it often does. He wasn't very good.

If it was Dan Ellis, I'd say ya, that's the expectation level. But Kipper is supposed to be like top 3 in the league. That wasn't top 3 level play. So Kipper was playing bad by his standard.

If all we expect from Kipper is Ellis level play, then absolutely he was decent. I expect more from a well paid, previously high acheiving goalie in a key game though. That wasn't 100% effort. Kipper CAN play better and often does. He just didn't bother to last night.

[hurtin_albertan]

No, not completely fair to blame it all on Kipper, but 1 of the 3 was clearly his fault and I'd argue that 1st one (unscreened) was 50/50... an elite Kipper would have had it, as it often does. He wasn't very good.

If it was Dan Ellis, I'd say ya, that's the expectation level. But Kipper is supposed to be like top 3 in the league. That wasn't top 3 level play. So Kipper was playing bad by his standard.

If all we expect from Kipper is Ellis level play, then absolutely he was decent. I expect more from a well paid, previously high acheiving goalie in a key game though. That wasn't 100% effort. Kipper CAN play better and often does. He just didn't bother to last night.

Well personally I think your expectations are too high...you can't expect him to stop every single glorious opportunity he faces just because he's a good goaltender. Especially against the likes of Getzlaf and Perry. You're not giving these guys near enough credit...Again as I said, when Perry finds Getzlaf alone in the slot, he's going to find that hole just about every single time, and to try to argue that Kipper just should have had it gives zero credit to the fact that Getzlaf clearly had the advantage. I would argue that Kipper would have been lucky to stop it. No shame whatsoever on being beaten close range on a clean look by a player of Getzlaf's caliber. Rather, shame on you for being so ... "you" about it.

I'll agree that he probably could/should have had the second goal (I think that's the one you mean when you say 1 of the 3 was his fault), but to say it's his fault doesn't account for the fact that Regehr put him and the rest of the team in that position by taking the penalty. When Iginla puts a shot through a goalie, I usually wouldn't say he got lucky and blame the goalie for not stopping it, but rather give Iggy the credit because he's such a great goal-scorer.

EDIT: My mistake, it was Selanne, not Perry, with the backhander that squeaked through Kipper...same difference. Another legendary goal scorer. It's not that big a surprise that it got through Kipper.

[Flame111]

He wasn't called for an elbow. He was called for interference, and that was correct.

And what is 'Playing hard hockey' ? is that code for being allowed to break the rules of the game? To me its just plain old cheating.

If you let people break the rules it will just lead to the idiotic thuggery of the late 80's and early 90's. They bought in new standards of play to stop that, because thats not hockey, thats just retards on ice.

Once upon a time in a hockey galaxy far, far away hockey players earned respect and played the toughest game in the world. In that time Bobby Orr entered the NHL and in his rookie season dropped the gloves and beat the heck out of anyone who challenged him. It is why to this day you still have a few old timers claim that Orr not Gretzky is the greatest player of all time because Orr did it all - he was the complete player.

Jarome Iginla is the only player left in the NHL that is a reminder of the complete hockey player of the Golden Era of hockey, tough, durable, willing to fight and highly skilled.

If you think hockey in the 80s and 90s was "idiotic thuggery" you just called out 70 years of NHL hockey and thousands of players. Guess Bobby Orr was a thug, Bobby Clarke an idiot, Phil Esposito, Bobby Hull (who to this day is still considered by most the best LW to ever play the game) another idiot thug - Guy Lafleur, Larry Robinson, Darryl Sittler all retards on ice.

You are a joke buddy with no sense of the history of this game or any experience or perspective on how dramatically it has been changed by Bettman.

I guarantee that you are under 35, probably under 30 and never saw live games in the 80s, 70s. Your comment that these great players all who played prior your 'new and improved' sterile new NHL are little more than 'retards on ice' speaks volumes about who you are as a fan of the game. You want ballerinas on ice go to the Ice Capades.

I barely recognize the game I grew up watching anymore and the very thought of ref deciding a playoff spot on that baby level of aggression between two players BOTH partaking in it makes me want to stop watching hockey.

[hurtin_albertan]

I barely recognize the game I grew up watching anymore and the very thought of ref deciding a playoff spot on that baby level of aggression between two players BOTH partaking in it makes me want to stop watching hockey.

This, a million times over. I'm running out of patience with the "new NHL". The officiating is a disaster. And not just for the Flames, I'm not a conspiracy theorist.

[UKFlamer]

The new NHL isnt a disaster. This game is supposed to be about speed, strength and skill, not violence and intimidation. Players need to play by the rules. Yes, officials need to be consistant and call it both ways, and those in charge of discipline need to administer it properly, but its only ever the players who are to blame when they break the rules and are called for it.

[UKFlamer]

I barely recognize the game I grew up watching anymore and the very thought of ref deciding a playoff spot on that baby level of aggression between two players BOTH partaking in it makes me want to stop watching hockey.

PLease, stop watching. The less people involved in the game, in any way, who feel that violence and cheating is acceptable, the better.

[Flame111]

PLease, stop watching. The less people involved in the game, in any way, who feel that violence and cheating is acceptable, the better.

Non-Contact hockey here we come... 2 mins for checking...

10 game suspensions for dropping the gloves or fighting - HERE WE COME...

Nice one bud. Nothing can be more violent than fighting or a crushing check into the boards, so come right out here and say you want to ban fighting in hockey, go for it - hypocrite.

Why don't YOU stop watching hockey and go watch soccer. Those diving clowns and ballerinas are more for you and your high and mighty moral attitude. The game was played for a century just fine before the need to transform it into a faster more "entertaining" game for people like you.

Whatever... The game has already had its heart cut out, why not go all the way and take out checking, and any contact of the stick on another player and of course full and total ban on fighting...

Maybe we should even take the skates off them and play field hockey on soft grass with a tennis ball, that will take the speed down and should pretty much insure we have all the potential for "violence" gone.

[UKFlamer]

Why would it need to be non contact? check legally and there wont be a problem. Why cant people get that in to their heads? Fighting, yeah, suspend them. Its not needed (and much of it cant even be called fighting, just two pillocks poncing about). If you want to watch fights, pick a sport where thats the purpose of it, there are plenty to choose from.

Your a dinosaur and your brand of hockey is thankfully being killed off. Thuggery replaced with skill, oh the outrage.

I bet your one of these people that think enforcers are a necessary part of the game yet cannot fathom the ludicrousy of the concept.

[tachaudh]

Isn't this thread about the 3-game tracker? Looks like we're getting a little derailed here.