Flames Defense

[tmac70]

Our current struggles over the past few seasons, has been defense and defensive coverage. Goal tending is not our issue this year as even coaches and the talking heads agree. Unlike the offensive dman in the league the Doughy's, Keith's, Karlson's, Weber's, Ekblad they actually can play defense as well. Our dcore is offensively oriented and defensively challenged. Our GA average is directly aligned with how well our dman have played not our goalies. Reality check in place, average goal tending is not going to cover up how bad our defense is. This has been an issue for awhile but has been over looked based on offensive production, it has now been exposed.

[robrob74]

12 minutes ago, tmac70 said:

Our current struggles over the past few seasons, has been defense and defensive coverage. Goal tending is not our issue this year as even coaches and the talking heads agree. Unlike the offensive dman in the league the Doughy's, Keith's, Karlson's, Weber's, Ekblad they actually can play defense as well. Our dcore is offensively oriented and defensively challenged. Our GA average is directly aligned with how well our dman have played not our goalies. Reality check in place, average goal tending is not going to cover up how bad our defense is. This has been an issue for awhile but has been over looked based on offensive production, it has now been exposed.

 

I would say for some of us, it was exposed a few years ago, but that year we made the playoffs it was in spite of the numbers, while goalies made key saves atvthe most opportune times. I've been preaching team D as a problem the whole time, and that lies directly on our offensive D guys. 

 

Teams are going to check the #1 line harder and I wonder if the offense will struggle because of it. 

 

It'll be imperative for the team to play picture perfect D in order to get wins. Do we have the D to do it?

[cross16]

49 minutes ago, jjgallow said:

 

Hey cross, I agree with about 70% of this....so that's something.  I gave 3 examples (when two were needed), if you disagree with one of those Iginla, that's not the end of the world.  

 

Did we have what it took to upgrade our 14th overall?  I think you would agree that we did.  Or, simply draft Olli Maatta, etc.  That, in itself, would have made a massive difference for the fortunes of this team.  Maybe not then, or even last year.  But now, it would just be kicking in.

 

 

The 2nd top 10 pick is just icing on the cake, ensuring an almost perfect rebuild core.   Even if I'm wrong about it, upgrading our 14th would have made a massive difference.  

 

At that time, in a 2011 re-draft, Beartschi would have gone top 5.  End of story....disagree with Iggy, it was still possible.

 

I DO agree with you that top 10 picks are currently very hard to acquire, but that' due to about 3-4 very strong drafts in a row.  2012 was not seen that way, and Staal wasn't exactly traded one for one with that pick.   It was just one component of a larger deal.  Also, top 10 was just a figure.  11th would have been just as good too.  And we had lots of players with Varlamov's value or greater.    There were options.

http://www.prosportstransactions.com/hockey/DraftTrades/Years/2012.htm

 

I agree about the last few years of drafts.  But 2012 wasn't like that.  There was nothing stopping it from being like 2008:

http://www.prosportstransactions.com/hockey/DraftTrades/Years/2008.htm

 

in 2012 I would have stayed where they were and taken Cody Ceci so I got rt where you are coming from. Having said that pretty easy to go back I need time and amend history to fit a narrative. Jankowski still has a chance, and IMO a likely one, of being as good or better than Ceci or Matta. IMO Matta is pretty overrated and got exposed in the playoffs. 

 

I think it's silly that people actually believe that the Flames took jankowski becuae they wanted a centre for iggy. I man feaster wasn't a great GM but he was much better than that. Either way I'm done talking about the 2012 draft. I think jankowski was a solid pick and IMO will be as good a pro as almost anyone else they could have taken with that spot. Sure would a dman be better but you at he time a centre was a great and sound pick. No way for them to know that Monahan or Bennett was as going to be in the organization. 

[MAC331]

2 hours ago, robrob74 said:

 

I would say for some of us, it was exposed a few years ago, but that year we made the playoffs it was in spite of the numbers, while goalies made key saves atvthe most opportune times. I've been preaching team D as a problem the whole time, and that lies directly on our offensive D guys. 

 

Teams are going to check the #1 line harder and I wonder if the offense will struggle because of it. 

 

It'll be imperative for the team to play picture perfect D in order to get wins. Do we have the D to do it?

We need a RW that will create some space for JG and SM and I think Chiasson can be that player. He has a nasty streak in him, is smart along the boards and supposedly he knows what to do in front of the net. If the opposition has to worry about him then JG will have more room to do his thing. Frolik plays a similar style to Backlund and I honest think they should stay together.

[ABC923]

It's such a shame that Poirier hasn't panned out as he appeared.  That injury really derailed him a couple years back; prior to that he was a hard nosed, in your face, play on the edge kind of guy with the potential to score.  If he could have kept that edge, we might have seen him up with the club this year in place of a guy like Chiasson.

[mrjohnnycanuck]

5 hours ago, jjgallow said:

 

 

At that time, in a 2011 re-draft, Beartschi would have gone top 5 (in what was considered a stronger draft).  End of story.

Am I reading this right? You mean if the 2011 Draft was redone in 2012 and not tomorrow right? Cuz if you think if that Draft was redone today and sven would go in the top 5 then your drinking the same sven kool aid as all the other idiot canuck fans out there.

 

JJ, I see where your going but it's just pure speculation on your part and what we armchair gm's do 5 years after the fact.

Also the 2012 Draft was not a good one. 

0 superstars 

2 or 3 elite players 

Only a hand full of good serviceable nhl players.

Besides, I still believe that the flames got the best player in the entire draft...Jon Gillies will be elite or a superstar in the nhl. 

 

[The_People1]

5 hours ago, ABC923 said:

It's such a shame that Poirier hasn't panned out as he appeared.  That injury really derailed him a couple years back; prior to that he was a hard nosed, in your face, play on the edge kind of guy with the potential to score.  If he could have kept that edge, we might have seen him up with the club this year in place of a guy like Chiasson.

 

Totals man. I had some high hopes for Poirier who was advertised as the next Brad Marchand but with size.  That's great because all Marchand lacks is size.  But it was too good to be true.  Poirier, touted also as the fastest skater in the draft, is actually not that fast.  Faster than the average skater but not elite fast or anything.  There's also no sand paper in his game.  No hits.  No rough stuff.  The goonery we are seeing from Tkachuk is what i expected from Poirier.  Almost like a David Perron or Alex Burrows type.  But no.  What a huge disappointment.

 

Poirier is in the final year of his current deal and i'm not even sure if we should bring him back.  He looks like a career AHLer and peaked in terms of development.

 

Speaking of his draft class, I believe Klimchuk is one of only 2 first round picks to have never played a single game in the NHL so far.  Another huge disappointment.  I remember calling the 2013 draft "The Most Important Draft In Flames History" and it's proving to be ya, it's big, in a disappointing way.  It means we got nothing for Iginla and Bouwmeester.

[The_People1]

9 hours ago, tmac70 said:

Our current struggles over the past few seasons, has been defense and defensive coverage. Goal tending is not our issue this year as even coaches and the talking heads agree. Unlike the offensive dman in the league the Doughy's, Keith's, Karlson's, Weber's, Ekblad they actually can play defense as well. Our dcore is offensively oriented and defensively challenged. Our GA average is directly aligned with how well our dman have played not our goalies. Reality check in place, average goal tending is not going to cover up how bad our defense is. This has been an issue for awhile but has been over looked based on offensive production, it has now been exposed.

 

That's a bit harsh but ya, i agree in principle.  I do believe Brodie and Giordano are top notch hybrid D in the NHL.  It's the middle of the order with Wideman and Hamilton that's really hurting us.  Wideman's defensive struggles have been well noted over the years.  Hamilton defends "okay" but what hurts us is when he has the puck.  He attempts some pretty dangerous passes and what's worse is they are unforced.  Like, the puck is bouncing on him in the defensive zone and feeling a forechecker coming, he bats a grounder across the front of our net to his D partner on the other side.  Cheese and rice, turn yourself around so you use your body to shield the puck from the forecheck.  Then, settle it down and use the back boards!  They should have taught this in Juniors!

 

Okay okay, he's 23 but i don't recall Giordano and Brodie this dumb with the puck at 23.  In fact, those two excelled at puck management and textbook at that age.  That's why they are top pairing Dmen now.  I just don't see how Hamilton can get to Giordano and Brodie starting from so far back.

[xstrike]

One wonders if we should be going with an "offense is the best defence" strategy with the makeup of our D-core. I don't mean abandon defense, but defend as little as needed by managing the puck and keeping it out of our end. Problem with that is... our puck management hasn't been all that great either. Nevermind.

 

Let's try something different. So far I've been mostly happy with these defencemen: Brodie, Joki, Kulak

Gio's been a bit up a bit down. Engelland's been okay, at about a neutral.

Wideman (minus the PP goal), D. Hamilton, and Grossman... meh to bleh.

[tmac70]

9 hours ago, The_People1 said:

 

That's a bit harsh but ya, i agree in principle.  I do believe Brodie and Giordano are top notch hybrid D in the NHL.  It's the middle of the order with Wideman and Hamilton that's really hurting us.  Wideman's defensive struggles have been well noted over the years.  Hamilton defends "okay" but what hurts us is when he has the puck.  He attempts some pretty dangerous passes and what's worse is they are unforced.  Like, the puck is bouncing on him in the defensive zone and feeling a forechecker coming, he bats a grounder across the front of our net to his D partner on the other side.  Cheese and rice, turn yourself around so you use your body to shield the puck from the forecheck.  Then, settle it down and use the back boards!  They should have taught this in Juniors!

 

Okay okay, he's 23 but i don't recall Giordano and Brodie this dumb with the puck at 23.  In fact, those two excelled at puck management and textbook at that age.  That's why they are top pairing Dmen now.  I just don't see how Hamilton can get to Giordano and Brodie starting from so far back.

What really stands out this year is when the so called new style requires more defensive structure the worse it looks.I agree the weak part is the bottom 4 but Brodie and Gio look average at best. So if your elite look average and your average look poor is not a good combination. I was optimistic this season as was everyone, but reality is this doesn't look good. The premise was to offend fast and defend fast and we look slow as hell. Our best players each night are Brouwer , Frohlick and Stajan. What is glaring is average goal tending hasn't helped, last in PP, last in GA but also 4th in penalties, these systems don't work for this group. It is not that I don't think they get it, watching it appears these systems are not the best choice for this group. Really after 6 games and practice even one element should show improvements but it hasn't they regress.

[cccsberg]

On 2016-10-22 at 1:27 PM, cross16 said:

So you don't put Brodie in that same category as those guys? I would highly disagree with that and most of the new metrics will back me up. Brodie is a top end shutdown dman IMO. I think your reading too much into 1 game and forgetting how good Brodie and Gio have been the last few years. 

 

I dont disagre with adding to the D core and the flames do need a more stable top 4 option. I'd love Trouba but I would never trade Gio, Brodie or Hamilton for him.  

I would be willing to trade Hamilton for Trouba, though not sure that is what Winnipeg may be willing to take.  Hamilton is still young but he makes way too many unforced errors.  

 

Brodie is the best skater we have, plus the steadiest overall.  Gio the most physical and best offensively.  These two together are terrific, but with the varying, and sometimes awful pairs so far this season its been a disaster pretty much from our D overall.

[cccsberg]

On 2016-10-22 at 10:33 PM, jjgallow said:

 

I hold out a small amount of hope for Andersson, but not enough to change anything because it would be several years away.

 

A rebuild really should start with defence.

 

We did it backwards.

 

It's the one thing, unfortunately, that we share with the Oilers.

That's nonsense.  We DID rebuild with D, with veteran leadership to mentor them, the thing is we're now questioning those D as we still have problems.  I believe our D are coming along fine, with multiple prospects that are going to be ready to jump in this year or next.... (i.e. Kulak, Wotherspoon, Kylington, Andersson, Hickey. plus... down the road).

[cccsberg]

22 hours ago, jjgallow said:

 

Fair enough.   As in, what trading pieces did we have which would have been inconsequential in the long run?   I agree, it sounds like a paradox.   But we had two things in our favour which we could have but didn't capitalise on:

 

1.  The perceived weakness in the 2012 draft

2.  We had a Lot of trading pieces back then that we were reluctant to let go, because of our rebuild denial.   We ended up holding on too long, and getting a lot less for them.

 

Some of our trading pieces:

 

1.  Iginla (and a 2nd round pick).    We were right to trade him, but wrong to trade him for spare parts.  

     To save time:

    http://thehockeywriters.com/a-look-at-the-jarome-iginla-trade-three-years-later/

 

    Iginla was the kind of player you expect a top 10 draft pick for in return.  Maybe not on his own, maybe as a package.  

    But that should have been the price, rather than spare parts and late picks.

   

     For the record, I disagree with the writer that we were wrong to trade Iggy.  We Needed to trade him.  

     Even if it was for nothing (which is exactly what it looks like now).

 

     What did we get out of the trade?   We got Sean Monahan.  We got Sam Bennett.    We got a rebuild that we needed.

 

     But we could have actually Gotten something of value for Iggy too.   

 

     As an example:  We could have traded Iggy, and our 2nd round pick (Patrick Sieloff) for a top 10 2012 pick.

 

     We probably would have still ended up with Monahan/Bennett.    But we would have actually gotten a core player directly back for Iginla too.

 

 

2.  Sven Baertschi.    It was already painfully obvious that the Flames and Beartschi had issues with each other.  

                               Which I still don't get, because he's doing ok now.

                                   Baertschi was worth a fortune at the time.  Easily a top 10 pick on his own.  

                                   But LW isn't exactly where you want to start a rebuild anyway...it was never meant to be.

 

                                 We held on too long.  When we knew it wasn't working, at least here.  

                                 Instead of swapping troubled players, we could have just cut our losses and had a top 10 pick (defenceman).    

 

3.   Jay Bouwmeester.     Again, instead of acquiring quality in return, we pieced him out for spare parts.  We got no core players out of this.  

                                        Bouwmeester could have upgraded our 14th overall into a top 10, and So much more.  

                                       Players like this should not be pieced out.

                                       Would have preferred quality over quantity in this trade.

 

I could go on, but I think that's enough.

 

Essentially, it's a combination of holding onto the past too long, then piecing it out for less than its worth, and trading for short term solutions.  
Quantity of quality.  Building an army of mediocre prospects rather than having the foresight to go for the bluechips.

 

 

 

20:20 hindsight armchair GMing is so, so easy, and the added bonus is you ALWAYS work out looking like a genius.  Its a useless exercise.

 

However, perhaps you ARE a genius armchair GM.  If so, what moves should we make RIGHT NOW to get out of our funk and progress this team onto the the Stanley Cup within the next two years?  Specifics, please.

[cccsberg]

20 hours ago, tmac70 said:

Our current struggles over the past few seasons, has been defense and defensive coverage. Goal tending is not our issue this year as even coaches and the talking heads agree. Unlike the offensive dman in the league the Doughy's, Keith's, Karlson's, Weber's, Ekblad they actually can play defense as well. Our dcore is offensively oriented and defensively challenged. Our GA average is directly aligned with how well our dman have played not our goalies. Reality check in place, average goal tending is not going to cover up how bad our defense is. This has been an issue for awhile but has been over looked based on offensive production, it has now been exposed.

Wasn't going to argue about it, but you gave me such an easy target, I have to.  I agree to some extent, but I guess you haven't actually watched much of Karlsson's D play?  The definition of abysmal, Hamilton looks good beside him.

[cross16]

11 hours ago, The_People1 said:

 

Okay okay, he's 23 but i don't recall Giordano and Brodie this dumb with the puck at 23.  In fact, those two excelled at puck management and textbook at that age.  That's why they are top pairing Dmen now.  I just don't see how Hamilton can get to Giordano and Brodie starting from so far back.

 

This is where the critique against Hamilton can get frustrating. 

When he was 23, Giordano was in the AHL and a call up. Wasn't a full time NHLer until 27. At 23 Brodie was about to start his first full NHL season. At 23, Dougie Hamilton already has 2 40 plus point seasons under his belt. 

 

"starting so far back" doesn't make any sense. Sure Gio/Brodie were and are better at managing the puck but Hamilton is also much better at moving the puck and putting up points, but also to say that he can't improve isn't correct. At 23, Hamilton is already far better than what both Gio and Brodie were. 

[JTech780]

12 hours ago, The_People1 said:

 

Okay okay, he's 23 but i don't recall Giordano and Brodie this dumb with the puck at 23.  In fact, those two excelled at puck management and textbook at that age.  That's why they are top pairing Dmen now.  I just don't see how Hamilton can get to Giordano and Brodie starting from so far back.

 

I disagree with Brodie, it really hasn't been till last year and maybe the year before that Brodie has been responsible with the puck, before that I really questioned his hockey IQ because he was prone to making poor choices with the puck and turnovers. If I'm not mistaken Brodie still led the team in turnovers last year.

[travel_dude]

1 hour ago, cross16 said:

 

This is where the critique against Hamilton can get frustrating. 

When he was 23, Giordano was in the AHL and a call up. Wasn't a full time NHLer until 27. At 23 Brodie was about to start his first full NHL season. At 23, Dougie Hamilton already has 2 40 plus point seasons under his belt. 

 

"starting so far back" doesn't make any sense. Sure Gio/Brodie were and are better at managing the puck but Hamilton is also much better at moving the puck and putting up points, but also to say that he can't improve isn't correct. At 23, Hamilton is already far better than what both Gio and Brodie were. 

 

I am fine with Hamilton.  He makes mistakes, but every one does.  He is struggling to fit into GG system, which all players seem to be.  Can't single him out.  Watched Gio grab a guy from behind and wrestle him to the ground as defending.  Then takes an extra 2 for talking about it with the refs.  Brodie is overthinking the game and freezing the puck for too long.  Wideman is Wideman.  Who knows what he is doing out there some games.  Yokipakka is making mistakes, but has mostly been defending the right way.  He gets on the wrong side of a player at times, and loses position.

 

Unfortunately, GG keeps shifting around the pairs, so nobody gets comfortable.  Tonight, we get Gio-Wideman, Brodie-Engelland, and Joki-Hamilton.  Two bottom pairing guys on this team paired with the top D.  How did that work out before? 

[cross16]

4 minutes ago, travel_dude said:

 

Unfortunately, GG keeps shifting around the pairs, so nobody gets comfortable.  Tonight, we get Gio-Wideman, Brodie-Engelland, and Joki-Hamilton.  Two bottom pairing guys on this team paired with the top D.  How did that work out before? 

 

At the same time though, how did it work the other way?

 

I don't understand the criticism with Gulutzan moving around defensive pairings. People are acting like he is breaking up something that worked when in reality what he is doing is trying to find somethign that DOES work. Flames havn't found it for 2 years and Hartley keep hamering a square peg into a round hole, I give Gulutzan credit for  not sticking with status quo. 

 

On Hamilton, wI think where I will agree with People is I do think Hamilton is going to be the the type of dman you are likely going to have to live with some mistakes. Where I disagree with that he won't get any better, I think he will for sure, and 2 his upside warrants living with a few mistakes. 

[travel_dude]

5 minutes ago, cross16 said:

 

At the same time though, how did it work the other way?

 

I don't understand the criticism with Gulutzan moving around defensive pairings. People are acting like he is breaking up something that worked when in reality what he is doing is trying to find somethign that DOES work. Flames havn't found it for 2 years and Hartley keep hamering a square peg into a round hole, I give Gulutzan credit for  not sticking with status quo. 

 

On Hamilton, wI think where I will agree with People is I do think Hamilton is going to be the the type of dman you are likely going to have to live with some mistakes. Where I disagree with that he won't get any better, I think he will for sure, and 2 his upside warrants living with a few mistakes. 

 

The issue for me is that we are 6 games in and the pairing have changed as often as they have.  The systems take enough time to master, but Brodie plays LD some time, RD other times, and somewhere in between for PP and PK.  We have rotated in Grossman, Kulak and Wideman.  

 

What I am saying is that if you are implementing a new system, why do you add learning a new partner every game in the mix.

[MAC331]

2 minutes ago, cross16 said:

 

At the same time though, how did it work the other way?

 

I don't understand the criticism with Gulutzan moving around defensive pairings. People are acting like he is breaking up something that worked when in reality what he is doing is trying to find somethign that DOES work. Flames havn't found it for 2 years and Hartley keep hamering a square peg into a round hole, I give Gulutzan credit for  not sticking with status quo. 

 

On Hamilton, wI think where I will agree with People is I do think Hamilton is going to be the the type of dman you are likely going to have to live with some mistakes. Where I disagree with that he won't get any better, I think he will for sure, and 2 his upside warrants living with a few mistakes. 

The only thing I see with Hamilton needing improvement on is his reaction time in the middle zone to turn around and get back. He should improve with experience. The new system work will improve along with everyone else.

[cross16]

Just now, travel_dude said:

 

The issue for me is that we are 6 games in and the pairing have changed as often as they have.  The systems take enough time to master, but Brodie plays LD some time, RD other times, and somewhere in between for PP and PK.  We have rotated in Grossman, Kulak and Wideman.  

 

What I am saying is that if you are implementing a new system, why do you add learning a new partner every game in the mix.

 

Depends on what side of the argument you fall on but for me I find that most people overrate the impact of Chemistry. You shouldn't need chemistry to operate at a basic level, you need chemistry to maximize your potential, but not for basics. And the obvious other questions, is why stick with something that isn't working? 

 

IMO, for the betterment of the team Brodie and gio need to be split up. so yes when you split up the way its been the last few seasons its probably going to take a little while to find something that sticks. Part of the reason I thikn the Flames should have cut down sooner in training camp and spent more time working on this, rather then seeing who was going to make the team. 

 

 

[jjgallow]

3 hours ago, cccsberg said:

20:20 hindsight armchair GMing is so, so easy, and the added bonus is you ALWAYS work out looking like a genius.  Its a useless exercise.

 

However, perhaps you ARE a genius armchair GM.  If so, what moves should we make RIGHT NOW to get out of our funk and progress this team onto the the Stanley Cup within the next two years?  Specifics, please.

 

So, while you make a valid point, I should also remind you that you are "Completing the Cycle" on here.

 

The interweb being around for a while now, Some of us have been armchairing for an extended length of time and seen more than one contender and rebuild cycle come and go.

 

It went like this:

 

2010 and earlier:   Armchairers:   "We need to rebuild.   We've made irreparable mistakes and it is time to start over"

                              Voice of Reason:   "It is easy for you to call these mistakes in your armchair.  

                                                            "This is a blip.   Have faith in the professionals.  We need to win now"                                              

                                        "armchair GMing is so, so easy, and the added bonus is you ALWAYS work out looking like a genius. "

                                        "Its a useless exercise."

 

 

2011:   Armchairers:   "Why on earth did we trade down in the draft when we should be rebuilding?

                                     " Why is the GM talking about Jankowski and Iggy on the same line?"

            Voice of Reason: "Iggy is in incredible shape and has clearly stated that he will be with the organisation for many years to come."

                                       " You are not listening.  Jankowski, as clearly stated by Feaster, is likely the greatest player in this whole draft. "

                                       "We need centers."

                                      "This is not something we can pass up."

 

            Armchairers:  "But wouldn't we start a rebuild with our goaltending and defence?"

            Voice of Reason:   "Now you're not making any sense at all, you are impossible to reason with."
                                           "Kipper has Clearly stated an intent to stay in Calgary.   He is still young.  Not to mention Leland Irving."

                                          "Bouwmeester is still very young.  That's 30 minutes right there, and then just look at this Giordano kid"

                                          "We already have a rebuild on defence. "  

                                           "Do you have any idea how long it would take for those prospects to develop anyway?"

                                          "We would literally Still be rebuilding in 2016 if we did that"

             Armchairers:  "Wouldn't a rebuild take that long anyway, and won't even Gio be old by then, let alone Kipper and Bouwmeester?"

             Voice of Reason:   "There is no point in trying to talk sense into you.  You are getting way ahead of yourself.  "

                                          "We can talk about this in a few years, you will see."

 

2012:      Professionals:   "We need to blow it up, and we always meant to. 

                                         "But in a way that will provide exciting hockey and be entertaining for the fans."

               Armchairers:   "Isn't that what we said last year?  Why didn't we..."

              Voice of Reason:  "Don't Even.   You're not listening.  It was the plan, we have a plan, this is a time for positivity. "

                                           "And we're still going to win now."

                                           "Feaster is a mastermind, he will actually be able to rebuild while keeping the team competitive"

 

2013:      Professionals:  "We never liked Feaster"

               Armchairers:    "We didn't either"

              Voice of Reason:  "Lets not dwell on the past"

                            

2014-2015:   More of the above, repeating in nauseating cycles

 

2016:     Professionals:   "We didn't like ...  Anyone.   They're all fired.   The goalies too.  Great things coming."

              Voice of Reason:  "Are you Happy now?"

              Armchairers:  "But didn't Hartley win coach of the year?"

              Voice of Reason:  "Are you seriously never happy?  Will nothing Ever make you happy?"

 

             Armchairers:   "So, like...is there any chance that this was all an elaborate joke....

                                     "and you actually Did build up our defence in 2011 but didn't tell anyone?:

            Voice of reason:  "That's it"

            Voice of reason:   "armchair GMing is so, so easy, and the added bonus is you ALWAYS work out looking like a genius. "

                                        "Its a useless exercise."

 

            Armchairers:  "Yeah, I guess"

            Voice of reason:  "That's right"

 

2018:          Professionals:  "We're rebuilding and it's going to be exciting"

 

             Armchairers Wife:  "Seriously"?

[Carty]

31 minutes ago, jjgallow said:

 Armchairers Wife:  "Seriously"?

 

Sounds like maybe you are speaking from experience...  

[travel_dude]

43 minutes ago, cross16 said:

 

Depends on what side of the argument you fall on but for me I find that most people overrate the impact of Chemistry. You shouldn't need chemistry to operate at a basic level, you need chemistry to maximize your potential, but not for basics. And the obvious other questions, is why stick with something that isn't working? 

 

IMO, for the betterment of the team Brodie and gio need to be split up. so yes when you split up the way its been the last few seasons its probably going to take a little while to find something that sticks. Part of the reason I thikn the Flames should have cut down sooner in training camp and spent more time working on this, rather then seeing who was going to make the team. 

 

 

 

I don't dispute the idea of splitting up Gio and Brodie.  Where I have the problem is implementing new systems and not giving them time to work through it.  If one pair isn't able to work through it, why start swapping them around after one game?  It's like using the line blender after the first period.  

 

The basics seem to be the problem right now.  If we were beyond that, I would say look for chemistry.  How do you measure results if you constantly change things up?  You set a line, see what is working/not working and adjust.  See how that adjustment works.  If that doesn't help, then start moving the pieces around.  

 

Anyway, I hope they find a solution.  The PK started off looking good, but something happened and it became less effective.  It didn't even look the same.  Was that execution or design?  

 

The PP still looks a mess.  The point guys are standing in one spot and backing off to pressure.  They end up making a risky pass to hold the zone.  The forwards are feeding the points instead of keeping the puck down low.  

[The_People1]

2 hours ago, JTech780 said:

 

I disagree with Brodie, it really hasn't been till last year and maybe the year before that Brodie has been responsible with the puck, before that I really questioned his hockey IQ because he was prone to making poor choices with the puck and turnovers. If I'm not mistaken Brodie still led the team in turnovers last year.

 

Brodie's mistakes over his early career is vastly different than the ones Hamilton is making right now. Brodie use to pick his spots wrong, try too hard, over estimate his own abilities, etc. Even when it comes to Giordano's early years, it was similar to Derek Smith who we had recently.  Just simple text book bottom pairing Dman who understands the game and plays it safe.  Off the glass and out.  Use the boards.  Reliable plain and simple.  Giordano gave me a feeling like he could probably coach one day because he was so sound technically... another close comparable was Andrew Ference's early years with the Flames.  Totally stable and textbook hockey.

 

Hamilton, on the other hand, is failing at elementary levels.  ie. Puck is bouncing on him so he panics and sends a bouncer across the front of our own goalie to his D partner on the other side.  Why would you do something so dangerous?  Why not use the back boards? 

 

Honestly, red flags went up for me last season on Hamilton when i would see him at the point on the PP run out of options... but with time, uncontested and all day to do something with the puck, instead dumps the puck into an open corner.  Absolutely baffling nonsensical decision making with the puck.  Who at this level of hockey would play the point on the PP and dump pucks into an open corner to nobody in particular?  This happened several times over the course of the season.

 

When i say Hamilton is "starting so far back", i mean it from an intuition level.  I actually think Hamilton defends decently for an offensive Dman and uses his size well at the right times.  His X's and O's have been helped by GG's system.  All in all, what scares me about Hamilton is not when he is defending or his play away from the puck.  It's actually when he has the puck.  Makes me cringe but every now and then, he flashes elite abilities with the puck so it makes you wonder.