Flames Defense

[robrob1974]

Goaltending in both locations. Really. What was the GAA for the fram team? NHL? Neither Ortio or Poulin were able to get the job done well in the AHL. Poulin and Gillies were the best of the bunch there.

I don't think you can pin goals against on either NHL defense or AHL defense. At even strength, goaltending at both levels was not great. I don't think that's on defense.

Even if you argue that defense played a part in goals against, the farm is fine. Defense prospects just starting pro careers are going to take time to become all around great players. Look at Kylington. The guy is 18 and already an awesome skater with good offense. He didn't look horrible in NHL action. With his skills, he could easily become another Brodie or better. Andersson already is a good shut down guy at the junior level,

The NHL club has the worst goal against for a reason. Goaltending. PK was bad, but again goaltending.

That's all on team defense in my point of view. When you're even strength goals against is bad there's a reason, the team isn't defending as a team. I believe it is both the goaltending and team defense.

It is not one or the other, it is both.

[conundrumed]

A big part of D is goaltending. Any dman will feed off the goalie. If the goalie is a total menace to everyone around him, even your 5 dman is going to play like a #2, it's just the psychology.

We just didn't have it this year. No one won the #1, imho that's a big deal.

It's not so much on the G, but on the coaching to say, "this is the guy, get used to it".

A revolving door got us exactly what we deserved this year, no consistency.

[jjgallow]

They can experiment sure. Either this season or in the preseason. But you could say that about any player. I personally don't see Nakladal succeeding in the top 4. He lacks the defensive skills to be successful there.

 

Agreed.  He's a good NHL role player, maybe a  bit more, at the AHL level.

[jjgallow]

Goaltending in both locations.  Really.  What was the GAA for the fram team?  NHL?  Neither Ortio or Poulin were able to get the job done well in the AHL.  Poulin and Gillies were the best of the bunch there.

 

I don't think you can pin goals against on either NHL defense or AHL defense.  At even strength, goaltending at both levels was not great.  I don't think that's on defense.  

 

Even if you argue that defense played a part in goals against, the farm is fine.  Defense prospects just starting pro careers are going to take time to become all around great players.  Look at Kylington.  The guy is 18 and already an awesome skater with good offense.  He didn't look horrible in NHL action.  With his skills, he could easily become another Brodie or better.  Andersson already is a good shut down guy at the junior level,  

 

The NHL club has the worst goal against for a reason.  Goaltending.  PK was bad, but again goaltending.

 

So we've been over this a few times, and when the numbers are crunched, the summary of where we arrive is:

 

Our goaltending's been bad.

Our Defence is Average, to Below-average (in terms of actual defensive coverage).

 

And, to varying degrees this basically holds true in the NHL, and AHL.

 

 

So, I'm ok with your paragraph about how it takes time to develop.   That's definitely a discussion that could be developed further.  But, it is in complete contradiction to your first sentence, where you outright blame everything on goaltending.

 

To blame everything on goaltenders, has always been one of the longest-standing follies of hockey fans.  Particularly fans who don't understand the game very well.   It's a Very close second to the infamous "fire the coach" chant.  I'm not accusing you of not understanding the game.  I'm quite sure that, in most ways, you do.   But I'm not convinced you understand this part.   And your arguement, if anything highlights that, by providing no reason to think otherwise, and, actually contradicting your own self.

 

The amount of goals this organization is letting in, in both the NHL and AHL, is quite frankly horrendous.  And concerning.

 

To answer that it is strictly a goaltending issue, is, for the sake of brevity, Highly unlikely.

[DirtyDeeds]

.......

 

The amount of goals this organization is letting in, in both the NHL and AHL, is quite frankly horrendous.  And concerning.

 

To answer that it is strictly a goaltending issue, is, for the sake of brevity, Highly unlikely.

However if it walks like a Skunk...

and it has a stripe down its back like a Skunk...

and if it smells like a Skunk,,,

 

It is likely a Skunk......

 

Everything points at goaltending as the major culprit. When we got better goaltending from them this season, we won more.... Goals against was worst in league and it got a lot closer to the rest of the teams when the goalies performed better.

 

What more do you need to know? 

 

Personally I think it is a Skunk... 

[travel_dude]

However if it walks like a Skunk...

and it has a stripe down its back like a Skunk...

and if it smells like a Skunk,,,

 

It is likely a Skunk......

 

Everything points at goaltending as the major culprit. When we got better goaltending from them this season, we won more.... Goals against was worst in league and it got a lot closer to the rest of the teams when the goalies performed better.

 

What more do you need to know? 

 

Personally I think it is a Skunk... 

 

Peppy LaPue was in nets for most of the year.  

 

In 2015/16 Ortio was marginal in the AHL (9-9-0, .893 and 3.36 GAA) and a little better in the NHL (7-9-3 .903 amd 2.76 GAA).  If the number of shots against was insanely high, the SV% would be better.  Hiller was extremely bad in wins/SV%/GAA and Ramo was marginally better in wins/SV%/GAA.

 

Contrast to 2014/15, where the starters were both > .0910 and <= 2.60.  No Gio for the home stretch leading to playoffs, but still accounting for 20 more points.

 

By no means am I saying Ortio can't be an option for the Flames for 2016/17.  He had a miserable start to the season and a decent, but not great, finish.  Since March 1st, he won 3 games out of 14 against playoff bound teams.  He won 4 games against non-playoff teams.  He lost 3 games to non-playoff teams.

[kehatch]

However if it walks like a Skunk...

and it has a stripe down its back like a Skunk...

and if it smells like a Skunk,,,

It is likely a Skunk......

Everything points at goaltending as the major culprit. When we got better goaltending from them this season, we won more.... Goals against was worst in league and it got a lot closer to the rest of the teams when the goalies performed better.

What more do you need to know?

Personally I think it is a Skunk...

Agreed. The opposite is true as well. We have a top three of Giordano, Brodie, and Hamilton supported by some decent D for the bulk of the season. It's pretty obvious the primary issue wasn't our D.

[Cowtownguy]

I have been watching the Hawks series given the Flames are not in the playoffs. What amazes me is their overall play as a team when they put out serious effort. They can initiate a shooting gallery or shut things down when need be. When Crawford was hurt last night and came back to play in less than perfect condition, the Hawks did an incredible job of shutting down the Blues and keeping shots away from their net. As well, the puck carrier almost always has two options when passing the puck out of the defensive zone. Our goaltending was less than stellar this year, no doubt about it. Like everyone else here, I would like to see a change happen if it can happen. Having said that, let's not let the rest of the team off the hook like the greasers have done for years. They blamed several goalies for their problems and they still suck with decent goaltending and great offensive players (on paper anyways).

[robrob1974]

However if it walks like a Skunk...

and it has a stripe down its back like a Skunk...

and if it smells like a Skunk,,,

It is likely a Skunk......

Everything points at goaltending as the major culprit. When we got better goaltending from them this season, we won more.... Goals against was worst in league and it got a lot closer to the rest of the teams when the goalies performed better.

What more do you need to know?

Personally I think it is a Skunk...

Ol' Peppy was also quite enamoured with a cat that he thought was a skunk, if I remember correctly.

I think it's both, but I am a minority. The players also tried and lost while the goaltending got better. With better goaltending and 100% effort we are a boardering playoff team. The players we have are a good start to something, but we have all discussed to death about the holes on this team.

I see the play too, and I was not happy with the coverage in our own end most of the year. Plus, the team wasn't always coming out to play from the get go in a lot of games too. So for me, it is both. Right now, they're a slow starting team and they need goalies to keep it 0-0 until the legs get going. So sure, I guess it is all goaltending then.

[jjgallow]

Ol' Peppy was also quite enamoured with a cat that he thought was a skunk, if I remember correctly.

I think it's both, but I am a minority. The players also tried and lost while the goaltending got better. With better goaltending and 100% effort we are a boardering playoff team. The players we have are a good start to something, but we have all discussed to death about the holes on this team.

I see the play too, and I was not happy with the coverage in our own end most of the year. Plus, the team wasn't always coming out to play from the get go in a lot of games too. So for me, it is both. Right now, they're a slow starting team and they need goalies to keep it 0-0 until the legs get going. So sure, I guess it is all goaltending then.

 

Well said.   And you/we are the minority, but...large fan bases have always placed disproportional blame/credit on the netminder.  So I wouldn't be concerned about that.

 

Agreed. The opposite is true as well. We have a top three of Giordano, Brodie, and Hamilton supported by some decent D for the bulk of the season. It's pretty obvious the primary issue wasn't our D.

 

So....I'm a Huge Hamilton fan.  One of the best trades the Flame ever made.

 

But...if we're talking about defensive coverage....at his stage of development....is he...even in the conversation ...at all...yet?

 

Honestly....I am Extremely happy we have him, but I saw him as a defensive liability this year...even near the end after massive improvement.   I believe he will get there.  But I would Not use him as an arguement to defend our defensive coverage this year.

I have been watching the Hawks series given the Flames are not in the playoffs. What amazes me is their overall play as a team when they put out serious effort. They can initiate a shooting gallery or shut things down when need be. When Crawford was hurt last night and came back to play in less than perfect condition, the Hawks did an incredible job of shutting down the Blues and keeping shots away from their net. As well, the puck carrier almost always has two options when passing the puck out of the defensive zone. Our goaltending was less than stellar this year, no doubt about it. Like everyone else here, I would like to see a change happen if it can happen. Having said that, let's not let the rest of the team off the hook like the greasers have done for years. They blamed several goalies for their problems and they still suck with decent goaltending and great offensive players (on paper anyways).

 

Exactly.   It concerns me when I see people say things like a top goaltender would "help us to be an average team", or help us "probably get a playoff spot".

 

It alarms me....when people's imaginations stop there....with satisfaction.

[travel_dude]

Well said.   And you/we are the minority, but...large fan bases have always placed disproportional blame/credit on the netminder.  So I wouldn't be concerned about that.

 

 

So....I'm a Huge Hamilton fan.  One of the best trades the Flame ever made.

 

But...if we're talking about defensive coverage....at his stage of development....is he...even in the conversation ...at all...yet?

 

Honestly....I am Extremely happy we have him, but I saw him as a defensive liability this year...even near the end after massive improvement.   I believe he will get there.  But I would Not use him as an arguement to defend our defensive coverage this year.

 

Exactly.   It concerns me when I see people say things like a top goaltender would "help us to be an average team", or help us "probably get a playoff spot".

 

It alarms me....when people's imaginations stop there....with satisfaction.

 

We get it.  You are right and everyone else is wrong.  I for one got annoyed watching the Flames play a brilliant game, only to see big Buff score with less than 2 minutes on a gimme.  Or seeing Hiller let in 3 goals on 5 shots.  Or watch Weise get a hatty against us as well as Byron score a shorty.

 

Blame the forwards if you like.  They can't always score 4 goals a game to make up for 3 GA.  11th on league scoring should result in a better league standing.

 

Blame the defense if you like.  It seems after the defense tightened things up, the wins still weren't coming.

 

The Oilers are nowhere near what the Flames are.  Goaltending would not help them alone.  They need too much.  I don't see any reason to use them as an example of why good goaltending doesn't fix things.

[cccsberg]

Agreed.  He's a good NHL role player, maybe a  bit more, at the AHL level.

Not sure what you've got against Nakladal. He came up and played very well. An upgrade on D.

[kehatch]

Not sure what you've got against Nakladal. He came up and played very well. An upgrade on D.

 

I think he played pretty well in a limited call-up.  The question is whether he could do that over a full season on a playoff bound team.  We see a lot of players look good in short call-ups but fail to handle a full competitive season.  His season reminded me a bit of Derek Smith's.  Lots of supporters since he came out of nowhere and showed he could play the game.  But at the end of the day he is an AHLer.  

 

That said, this is his first season on North American ice and he at least proved he can play the game at the top level.  I would love to see him back on a small short term contract to see if he can take another step.  He can play the 5/6/7 spot or play well in the AHL if someone passes him.  

[MAC331]

I think he played pretty well in a limited call-up.  The question is whether he could do that over a full season on a playoff bound team.  We see a lot of players look good in short call-ups but fail to handle a full competitive season.  His season reminded me a bit of Derek Smith's.  Lots of supporters since he came out of nowhere and showed he could play the game.  But at the end of the day he is an AHLer.  

 

That said, this is his first season on North American ice and he at least proved he can play the game at the top level.  I would love to see him back on a small short term contract to see if he can take another step.  He can play the 5/6/7 spot or play well in the AHL if someone passes him.  

I agree, we shouldn't get all gaw gaw over Nakladal. He played a consistent game, has a good shot and held his own.

[jjgallow]

Not sure what you've got against Nakladal. He came up and played very well. An upgrade on D.

 

Never said I had anything against the guy.

[MAC331]

We get it.  You are right and everyone else is wrong.  I for one got annoyed watching the Flames play a brilliant game, only to see big Buff score with less than 2 minutes on a gimme.  Or seeing Hiller let in 3 goals on 5 shots.  Or watch Weise get a hatty against us as well as Byron score a shorty.

 

Blame the forwards if you like.  They can't always score 4 goals a game to make up for 3 GA.  11th on league scoring should result in a better league standing.

 

Blame the defense if you like.  It seems after the defense tightened things up, the wins still weren't coming.

 

The Oilers are nowhere near what the Flames are.  Goaltending would not help them alone.  They need too much.  I don't see any reason to use them as an example of why good goaltending doesn't fix things.

The blame game could go full circle for this season however we all know it starts with better goaltending for next season. Our defense and the defense personel will be advanced with some gained experience with each other heading into next season. This should bode well for us.

[jjgallow]

We get it.  You are right and everyone else is wrong.  I for one got annoyed watching the Flames play a brilliant game, only to see big Buff score with less than 2 minutes on a gimme.  Or seeing Hiller let in 3 goals on 5 shots.  Or watch Weise get a hatty against us as well as Byron score a shorty.

 

Blame the forwards if you like.  They can't always score 4 goals a game to make up for 3 GA.  11th on league scoring should result in a better league standing.

 

Blame the defense if you like.  It seems after the defense tightened things up, the wins still weren't coming.

 

The Oilers are nowhere near what the Flames are.  Goaltending would not help them alone.  They need too much.  I don't see any reason to use them as an example of why good goaltending doesn't fix things.

 

It's not about right or wrong, it's about defending the flames by pointing out basically average performance, or slightly above average, or slightly below.  Like 11th overall in scoring.

 

11th overall at anything... is good.   If we're looking to be a contender...it's....still a problem.  And you're talking about offense....our biggest strength.

 

Our defensive coverage is  below average.

 

Between the two....sorry, but I didn't see a lot of "brilliant" games this year.

 

Yes, our goaltenders let us down.   And that will get addressed.  

 

A year from now, we will be looking back on next season.   With any luck, we'll be looking back on a season with better goaltending.   What will you be saying then?   Will you be content, a year from now?   From what you are saying now, goaltending is our only real problem.

[MAC331]

It's not about right or wrong, it's about defending the flames by pointing out basically average performance, or slightly above average, or slightly below.  Like 11th overall in scoring.

 

11th overall at anything... is good.   If we're looking to be a contender...it's....still a problem.  And you're talking about offense....our biggest strength.

 

Our defensive coverage is  below average.

 

Between the two....sorry, but I didn't see a lot of "brilliant" games this year.

 

Yes, our goaltenders let us down.   And that will get addressed.  

 

A year from now, we will be looking back on next season.   With any luck, we'll be looking back on a season with better goaltending.   What will you be saying then?   Will you be content, a year from now?   From what you are saying now, goaltending is our only real problem.

Every year is different, all this team can do and should do is look ahead into next season.

[travel_dude]

It's not about right or wrong, it's about defending the flames by pointing out basically average performance, or slightly above average, or slightly below.  Like 11th overall in scoring.

 

11th overall at anything... is good.   If we're looking to be a contender...it's....still a problem.  And you're talking about offense....our biggest strength.

 

Our defensive coverage is  below average.

 

Between the two....sorry, but I didn't see a lot of "brilliant" games this year.

 

Yes, our goaltenders let us down.   And that will get addressed.  

 

A year from now, we will be looking back on next season.   With any luck, we'll be looking back on a season with better goaltending.   What will you be saying then?   Will you be content, a year from now?   From what you are saying now, goaltending is our only real problem.

 

Let me start by saying "better" goaltending is not what I am after.  We had better goaltending in 2014/15 and it only took us so far.

If we had better than league average or elite goaltending coming in, then yes I would be happy.  Does it fix all the problems with the Flames?  

• Possession? - No, but it should lead to giving up less quality rebounds.  
• PK - Yes.  Hard to have a good PK if you have unacceptable goaltending.  
• PP - No, except it helps to eliminate shorthanded goals.
• Defensive zone coverage?  No, but we have taken steps to solve that and removing Wideman, Smid and Russell seem to have made some differences.

Only some of these are improved by bringing in competent goaltending.  But every one of them is influenced negatively by bad goaltending.  Zone coverage is a product of having sub-standard goaltending.  Teams that have little faith in a goalie tend to block shots more.  

 

Our defense is good to very good right now.  If a simple mistake always ends up resulting in a goal, then we will never go anywhere.  Every team makes those mistakes, but better ones have goalies that stop the puck.

[jjgallow]

Our defense is good to very good right now.  If a simple mistake always ends up resulting in a goal, then we will never go anywhere.  Every team makes those mistakes, but better ones have goalies that stop the puck.

 

Ok, I can work with a lot of your last post.   Except, this part above.

 

I get the importance of goaltending.   But, when you finish last in the league for goals against, and your farm team is following suit....

 

"Our defense is good to very good right now" is not a reasonable statement, imho, no matter who you have in net.   You can say we have good offensive defensemen.  You could argue that we have a bright future on defense (and I would disagree, currently), but if you come out of this season happy with our defensive coverage, that's honestly a Really hard sell.   I hope you can at least appreciate that, given our league-worst outcome.

 

IMHO, my guess on next season:

 

• We will improve out goaltending
• It will still not be elite, and thus you will still not be "happy"
• We will have a better season next year, and it Might even include a post-season.  
•       But it will leave many unfulfilled.  Including me, and you.
• From our conversation right now, I'm assuming you will blame this on a lack of "Elite Goaltending"
• However, more likely, the post-mortem will be more complex, pointing at just a bit too much "average"....Everywhere

 

And that....is my fear, because out of all the positions, Defense is the hardest one for an organization to bring from Average to Elite (and takes the longest).  Goaltending can change overnight.  We saw that with Kipper.   Offense develops quickly.   Defense requires initiatives at the organizational, team system, coaching, and development levels, as well as trades (GM) in many cases.

[travel_dude]

Ok, I can work with a lot of your last post.   Except, this part above.

 

I get the importance of goaltending.   But, when you finish last in the league for goals against, and your farm team is following suit....

 

"Our defense is good to very good right now" is not a reasonable statement, imho, no matter who you have in net.   You can say we have good offensive defensemen.  You could argue that we have a bright future on defense (and I would disagree, currently), but if you come out of this season happy with our defensive coverage, that's honestly a Really hard sell.   I hope you can at least appreciate that, given our league-worst outcome.

 

IMHO, my guess on next season:

 

• We will improve out goaltending
• It will still not be elite, and thus you will still not be "happy"
• We will have a better season next year, and it Might even include a post-season.  
•       But it will leave many unfulfilled.  Including me, and you.
• From our conversation right now, I'm assuming you will blame this on a lack of "Elite Goaltending"
• However, more likely, the post-mortem will be more complex, pointing at just a bit too much "average"....Everywhere

 

And that....is my fear, because out of all the positions, Defense is the hardest one for an organization to bring from Average to Elite (and takes the longest).  Goaltending can change overnight.  We saw that with Kipper.   Offense develops quickly.   Defense requires initiatives at the organizational, team system, coaching, and development levels, as well as trades (GM) in many cases.

 

No, I said above average to elite.

 

If you think we have average defense, then I have no idea how to respond to that.  If you think we have no depth, ditto.

 

The best goaltending we had in Stockton was Gillies and that lasted for all of 7 games.  The rest was a mixed bag of cast-offs, rookies, and Ortio.  None of their performances were overwhelming.  Ortio was as bad in the AHL as he was in the NHL.  He started off horribly and improved somewhat.  Poulin was as bad at the AHL level (but overall better).  

 

The NHL club had league worst GA for a big reason; goaltending.  The goals against dropped off when the goalie had a good game.

 

Every team has to overcome shortcomings.  Here is the top three for the Flames:

 

Goaltending - without good goaltending, you are at best an average team

PK - starts with a good goalie

Coaching - making the right goalie choice at the right time; knowing how a goalie plays against other teams, sensing a streak (cold or hot) 

[cccsberg]

I think he played pretty well in a limited call-up.  The question is whether he could do that over a full season on a playoff bound team.  We see a lot of players look good in short call-ups but fail to handle a full competitive season.  His season reminded me a bit of Derek Smith's.  Lots of supporters since he came out of nowhere and showed he could play the game.  But at the end of the day he is an AHLer.  

 

That said, this is his first season on North American ice and he at least proved he can play the game at the top level.  I would love to see him back on a small short term contract to see if he can take another step.  He can play the 5/6/7 spot or play well in the AHL if someone passes him.  

 

I agree, we shouldn't get all gaw gaw over Nakladal. He played a consistent game, has a good shot and held his own.

Fully agree, he paid his dues in the AHL, came up and has been consistent and steady, an upgrade over the guys he replaced.  We shouldn't be gaw gaw over him but he doesn't deserve the "AHL player" or "Derek Smith-like" comparisons either.  Give credit where credit is due.

Never said I had anything against the guy.

Except you consistently talk him down and dismiss him as an effective player, even if his play is just the opposite.

[cccsberg]

Ok, I can work with a lot of your last post.   Except, this part above.

 

I get the importance of goaltending.   But, when you finish last in the league for goals against, and your farm team is following suit....

 

"Our defense is good to very good right now" is not a reasonable statement, imho, no matter who you have in net.   You can say we have good offensive defensemen.  You could argue that we have a bright future on defense (and I would disagree, currently), but if you come out of this season happy with our defensive coverage, that's honestly a Really hard sell.   I hope you can at least appreciate that, given our league-worst outcome.

 

IMHO, my guess on next season:

 

• We will improve out goaltending
• It will still not be elite, and thus you will still not be "happy"
• We will have a better season next year, and it Might even include a post-season.  
•       But it will leave many unfulfilled.  Including me, and you.
• From our conversation right now, I'm assuming you will blame this on a lack of "Elite Goaltending"
• However, more likely, the post-mortem will be more complex, pointing at just a bit too much "average"....Everywhere

 

And that....is my fear, because out of all the positions, Defense is the hardest one for an organization to bring from Average to Elite (and takes the longest).  Goaltending can change overnight.  We saw that with Kipper.   Offense develops quickly.   Defense requires initiatives at the organizational, team system, coaching, and development levels, as well as trades (GM) in many cases.

jjg, I can appreciate a lot of what you say.  

 

Certainly, the focus on getting to "average" is probably only going to get the team to average results.  The Flames as a team need to aim higher.  One of the great things from last year is the Flames were exceptional in a couple of areas.  Firstly, the overall effort and hard work, and secondly, the "never quit" attitude that fuelled a lot of comeback wins.  They also were at or near the top in a couple other items, like PP chances against.... These are all intangibles but frankly, are pretty crucial to LT success.  All these areas slumped this year, at least relative to the league as a whole.  The team needs to continue strong in those areas while continuing to build to exceptional in other, primary areas, like offence, defence, GAA and Special Teams.

 

The other thing I agree with is the team defence wasn't all that great in defensive zone coverage this year, which has been clearly shown in a couple FN articles (e.g. D coverage of great D offences?) and just eye-balling the myriad of D lapses this season.  I'd say the actual D were average to above average overall in defensive zone coverage.  

 

To that end I'd like to know, what do you see as the ideal 7-man D in the NHL?  Many, many on here seem to think high-scoring, offensively gifted, puck-moving D is ideal and any departure from that is not only bad, but a type of D from an earlier age that should be avoided at pretty much all costs (e.g. Engelland).  

 

So here's the scenario.  

• Right now with Giordano, Brodie and Hamilton we have what many would call three #1D (albeit Hamilton still adjusting).  All three guys are pretty fast, good to great-skating, excellent passing, puck-moving D that jump into the offence at a moment's notice, if not lead it into the zone. And they can score, adding a significant element to their team's overall offence.  Defensively they are all pretty solid with coverage and positioning, but not too physical nor what I would call great along the boards or in front of the net.  All three could easily be a #1D on a LOT of NHL teams.  
• In our prospect pool we have at least three additional guys that play and sound and look a LOT like our current top 3, those being Kylington, Andersson and Hickey.  Let's assume for a minute all three continue to progress and grow and make it to the NHL Flames in two to three years, and are able to contribute to the same extent as our current top 3 D are, both defensively and offensively.  Since we still have our current top 3 D, we'd end up with a top 6 D all in the same mold of puck-moving, offensively-gifted, D-positioning  "#1-type" Defensemen.

QUESTION:  Is THAT your ideal NHL defence that the Flames should be working towards, or are there other elements that are currently present, or perhaps missing that are CRUCIAL to a successful NHL D corps?  You can give examples, please.

[jjgallow]

No, I said above average to elite.

 

If you think we have average defense, then I have no idea how to respond to that.  If you think we have no depth, ditto.

 

 

I direct copy and pasted your quote, not sure how you're finding a way to debate what you said but I have to assume it is a miscommunication.    combined with a tendency to argue.

 

Yeah so I'll say it again, when you finish last in the league for goals against, and your farm team follows suit...

 

Then yes, "average defense" is hardly a negative evaluation when speaking in terms of defensive coverage itself.  I know you see some big scorers on our blue line but that's quite frankly not part of the discussion.  That's offense.

 

So we can go over the analysis, and the breakdown, and the stats, and we have done all that, and Most who've done this, have ended up saying, yes, we have work to do with our defensive coverage that goes beyond goaltending.   Our current defensive coverage is Not going to get us where we really want to be.

 

But at the end of the day, we shouldn't even need to do that.  When you finish Last in the league, in goals against, and your farm team follows suit, you need to look at your defense.  No matter what you think if your goalies.    If you don't, you're left looking a bit silly, to be frank.   If that leaves you speechless, then we can just both be speechless together.    

[jjgallow]

jjg, I can appreciate a lot of what you say.  

 

Certainly, the focus on getting to "average" is probably only going to get the team to average results.  The Flames as a team need to aim higher.  One of the great things from last year is the Flames were exceptional in a couple of areas.  Firstly, the overall effort and hard work, and secondly, the "never quit" attitude that fuelled a lot of comeback wins.  They also were at or near the top in a couple other items, like PP chances against.... These are all intangibles but frankly, are pretty crucial to LT success.  All these areas slumped this year, at least relative to the league as a whole.  The team needs to continue strong in those areas while continuing to build to exceptional in other, primary areas, like offence, defence, GAA and Special Teams.

 

The other thing I agree with is the team defence wasn't all that great in defensive zone coverage this year, which has been clearly shown in a couple FN articles (e.g. D coverage of great D offences?) and just eye-balling the myriad of D lapses this season.  I'd say the actual D were average to above average overall in defensive zone coverage.  

 

To that end I'd like to know, what do you see as the ideal 7-man D in the NHL?  Many, many on here seem to think high-scoring, offensively gifted, puck-moving D is ideal and any departure from that is not only bad, but a type of D from an earlier age that should be avoided at pretty much all costs (e.g. Engelland).  

 

So here's the scenario.  

• Right now with Giordano, Brodie and Hamilton we have what many would call three #1D (albeit Hamilton still adjusting).  All three guys are pretty fast, good to great-skating, excellent passing, puck-moving D that jump into the offence at a moment's notice, if not lead it into the zone. And they can score, adding a significant element to their team's overall offence.  Defensively they are all pretty solid with coverage and positioning, but not too physical nor what I would call great along the boards or in front of the net.  All three could easily be a #1D on a LOT of NHL teams.  
• In our prospect pool we have at least three additional guys that play and sound and look a LOT like our current top 3, those being Kylington, Andersson and Hickey.  Let's assume for a minute all three continue to progress and grow and make it to the NHL Flames in two to three years, and are able to contribute to the same extent as our current top 3 D are, both defensively and offensively.  Since we still have our current top 3 D, we'd end up with a top 6 D all in the same mold of puck-moving, offensively-gifted, D-positioning  "#1-type" Defensemen.

QUESTION:  Is THAT your ideal NHL defence that the Flames should be working towards, or are there other elements that are currently present, or perhaps missing that are CRUCIAL to a successful NHL D corps?  You can give examples, please.

 

Thanks ccsberg,    I'm forced to respond in essay format....  but short answer:  You need both.  Offense/Defense, these days.  Often in the same player.  Agreed.   But having an offensive defenceman, doesn't mean you have both.

 

I guess, to answer that we have to go back to what the topic is, and what "defense" means.  Is it a position?   A responsibility?  A system?

 

The start of this topic (no offense to anyone) was an eery reminder of what I fear we see defense as, and what you confirmed in much of your reflective quote above.

 

This topic was started with the subject line "Defense", followed by a list of the top Flames point producers.

http://fans.flames.nhl.com/community/topic/21053-flames-defense

 

By my understanding of defense, it is hard for me to post on here, without being "off topic" given that direction.    Yet, the thread is frighteningly popular. My own thoughts on what a team "should" look like, maybe don't matter that much.   But, everyone else's visions of a  5-forward team, or the future of hockey, maybe aren't the most relevant either.

 

So the first question you need to ask, is what we want.

 

I really, honestly, truly....want a Stanley cup in Calgary.    That's it, that's all.    But that's NOT what everyone else necessarily wants.

 

Many on here want Entertainment.   They want to be entertained, they're often willing to pay for it.  They want entertainment consistently.  

 

They want entertainment....  win or lose.  Effort.  Excitement.  Red lights, Fire.

 

And, I get it.  I really do.   My needs might also be more complex, if I was a season ticket holder, or otherwise financially invested.   

 

 

But when it comes to the Stanley Cup....Sometimes, you don't get to have both.   And, we have to at least recognize, that they are Not the same thing.

 

• Los Angeles has NOT been an exciting team over the last 5 years.  But, they are one of the Only teams that plays into summer.
• Boston is NOT an exciting team.  But they Do have a recent cup and Often succeed Post-season.
• Chicago Can sometimes be an exciting team.   And, possibly, the team that many on here model the Flames after.   

But, we may be modelling ourselves after some of chicago's weaknesses, instead of their strengths, and definitely the exception to the rule in terms of playoff success.

 

So...ok...we can talk about Chicago.  Not about my ideal D lineup.  Say we talk about the last Stanley Cup winner.   (because if we talked about LA, or Boston, there ...just ...wouldn't be anything to compare)

 

So...for example:  Doug Hamilton.  He is NOT a top 4 defenceman on an NHL contender right now.   He has the potential, and I think he will reach it.   But he just Isn't defensively responsible in that role.  Yet.   We all bank him in.  I've been guilty of it too.   We're getting ahead of ourselves.   The blackhawks have nobody, never did have anybody, who was this much of a defensive project.   We need to realize, while I support it, we're taking on a lot here.   And Los Angeles, or Boston?  NOT A CHANCE.

 

Compare that, to, say, Duncan Keith.    We do not have a Single player that does, defensively, what Duncan Keith does.  People seem to think, that because Gio and Brodie put similar (or even better) points up, that they are better defensemen.   They are clearly not, defensively better, and Nobody outside of this City thinks they are.   We sometimes like to kid ourselves.   And it holds us back.  We have nobody like him defensively.  Period.  Not in the NHL, not in the development system, not anybody we've drafted.

 

Seabrook....Defensively, I would say the same, to only a slightly lesser degree.    At times, Gio could compare.   Unfortunately, Gio is getting older.  And yes, offensively, we've got lots to talk about.  But..that's only half the game.

 

 

The famous comparison:   Too often on here, it is said:

Keith+Seabrook   = Brodie+ Gio.

 

No.  Offensively, maybe.   Defensively, Brodie/Gio lack the size, sense, system, and play to be compared.    They compare in offensive categories only.  They are OK defensively.  But for the minutes they take up, we would need a much deeper supporting cast of defense than we do.

 

And our prospect pool?   All offense.  Even the defencemen.   Or, B-C grade defensemen.

 

 

So....to be honest....gaps can be filled in, yes.  But we need those Top D, who are all things.  Offensive, Defensive, at a world class level.  And if you have to favour one over the other, Defensive Still wins more cups.   And probably will continue to.

 

 

I believe there are lots of areas to get us from bad to average, but in terms of getting from Average to Elite, this is the area the Flames will need to focus on the most.

 

Yes, we have some offense now.  Even there, probably not enough.   Because....the Truth is....when we actually start playing a system and take defense seriously.....

 

Other teams are going to stop playing their backups against us.

 

Only then will we even know how much offense we really have.