Flames Defense

[conundrumed]

1 hour ago, travel_dude said:

 

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.  

I think you mentioned earlier td that they need to simplify and I agree 100%.

I noticed our PK box has gotten very small and instead of pressuring the puck on the outside we're giving them all of the room they want on the outside. In the St. Loo game, we rarely had a forward within 20' of their dmen, and we rarely pressured the puck carrier on the wall.

[cross16]

17 hours ago, The_People1 said:

 

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.

 

At last with Klimchuk, he has been hurt so while that is not an "excuse" its a reason. I think Klimchuk has turned a corner personally and is in line for a good season in the A so too soon to write him off, he just needs to stay healthy. Also there isn't anyone behind him yet that is a full time nhler. Some have played games but not very many. 

 

Porier on the other hand i'm no impressed with either. He has plateaued in the A and this year's camp he came in and showed no improvment and generally seemed disinterested in the process. He doens't have enough raw skill to play with a lack of desire and that's what i've seen from him.  He is becoming a really dissapointing pick and just makes that Jbow trade so, so horrible.

 

Feaster and co never really nailed that draft, not IMO anyway. The two picks i went WTF over were Porier and Kanzig and both basically look like lost causes. Really wish they had not intrusted Feaster with the early stages of the rebuild. I really think the Flames are 1-2 years behind where you would ideally want to be right now because of Feaster. 

[MAC331]

7 minutes ago, cross16 said:

 

At last with Klimchuk, he has been hurt so while that is not an "excuse" its a reason. I think Klimchuk has turned a corner personally and is in line for a good season in the A so too soon to write him off, he just needs to stay healthy. Also there isn't anyone behind him yet that is a full time nhler. Some have played games but not very many. 

 

Porier on the other hand i'm no impressed with either. He has plateaued in the A and this year's camp he came in and showed no improvment and generally seemed disinterested in the process. He doens't have enough raw skill to play with a lack of desire and that's what i've seen from him.  He is becoming a really dissapointing pick and just makes that Jbow trade so, so horrible.

 

Feaster and co never really nailed that draft, not IMO anyway. The two picks i went WTF over were Porier and Kanzig and both basically look like lost causes. Really wish they had not intrusted Feaster with the early stages of the rebuild. I really think the Flames are 1-2 years behind where you would ideally want to be right now because of Feaster. 

I would say both Klimchuk and Poirier need to adjust their thinking and their game in considering themselves no more than 3rd liners. Defining season for both I think, gut check time.

[conundrumed]

33 minutes ago, cross16 said:

 

At last with Klimchuk, he has been hurt so while that is not an "excuse" its a reason. I think Klimchuk has turned a corner personally and is in line for a good season in the A so too soon to write him off, he just needs to stay healthy. Also there isn't anyone behind him yet that is a full time nhler. Some have played games but not very many. 

 

Porier on the other hand i'm no impressed with either. He has plateaued in the A and this year's camp he came in and showed no improvment and generally seemed disinterested in the process. He doens't have enough raw skill to play with a lack of desire and that's what i've seen from him.  He is becoming a really dissapointing pick and just makes that Jbow trade so, so horrible.

 

Feaster and co never really nailed that draft, not IMO anyway. The two picks i went WTF over were Porier and Kanzig and both basically look like lost causes. Really wish they had not intrusted Feaster with the early stages of the rebuild. I really think the Flames are 1-2 years behind where you would ideally want to be right now because of Feaster. 

I'm hardly Feaster's biggest fan, the "I'm not here for a rebuild", were one of his many gems.

He was unorthodox, but Mony, Gaudreau, Gillies and Jankowski isn't a bad haul in his short stint.

Ahhh who am I kidding? He was a bombastic checking from behind.

[travel_dude]

Just now, JTech780 said:

That's the battle I was expecting from Elliott. He was fantastic in the shootout.

 

He was almost perfect in the game, even when the defense let him down.

Engelland with a weak pass to set up the first one.

Same crew out there when Brodie tries to clear the puck from the crease and knocks it in himself.

 

But you're right, I haven't seen a display like that in the shoot out since....Berra. 

[CheersMan]

11 minutes ago, JTech780 said:

That's the battle I was expecting from Elliott. He was fantastic in the shootout.

 

There's a fine line between winning and losing these days.  Nice Win!  We finally looked good tonight!

 

6 minutes ago, travel_dude said:

 

He was almost perfect in the game, even when the defense let him down.

Engelland with a weak pass to set up the first one.

Same crew out there when Brodie tries to clear the puck from the crease and knocks it in himself.

 

But you're right, I haven't seen a display like that in the shoot out since....Berra. 

 

Leave it to you to single out Engelland in a negative way in a must have Win!

[travel_dude]

20 minutes ago, CheersMan said:

 

There's a fine line between winning and losing these days.  Nice Win!  We finally looked good tonight!

 

 

Leave it to you to single out Engelland in a negative way in a must have Win!

 

So, what would you think is reason they scored two goals on us that shouldn't have happened?  Want me to blame them on people not on the ice?  

 

It's a win.  We managed to hold them off in the third period enough to get a SO win.  If we are only scoring two goals ourselves, then we better be flawless in simple plays.

[CheersMan]

1 minute ago, travel_dude said:

 

So, what would you think is reason they scored two goals on us that shouldn't have happened?  Want me to blame them on people not on the ice?  

 

It's a win.  We managed to hold them off in the third period enough to get a SO win.  If we are only scoring two goals ourselves, then we better be flawless in simple plays.

 

Just tired of the Engelland bashing, that's all.  In 60 minutes, mistakes happen at times in every area of the ice, but you focus mainly on Engelland (Bouma, Bolilg).  Most others get passes it would appear.  Nice win!

[travel_dude]

14 minutes ago, CheersMan said:

 

Just tired of the Engelland bashing, that's all.  In 60 minutes, mistakes happen at times in every area of the ice, but you focus mainly on Engelland (Bouma, Bolilg).  Most others get passes it would appear.  Nice win!

 

You can ignore the comments if all you want is rainbows and unicorns.  Had we lost the game as a result of one of those two goal, would you be saying good game?  Bollig is where he belongs, so I guess I wasn't the only one that felt he was subpar.  

 

BTW, this is a goalie thread, and yes, Bouma has been subpar this season so far.  Tonight was the first time he actually made some good plays.  Strange that Backlund and Frolik cooled off after Bouma moved there.

[cross16]

That play was as much Brouwer's fault. wasn't a good pass, but it was equally as bad a job at trying to receive it so Engelland should not take full blame. 2 vets can't make a play like that. I thought Engelland was solid. Did a nice job upping his physical game which i thought helped slow down the Hawks forecheck and minimize any pressure to the inside. up until the last min of the game Elliott wasn't really foreced into any big saves because most of the shots were coming from outside the high danger areas.2nd goal was a bad bounce so not really sure why we are trying to assume blame there. Stuff like that happens.

 

Elliott was solid, but I do think the team deserves alot of credit. Really minimized the high quality chances against and allowed Elliott to just play. 

[MAC331]

2 hours ago, travel_dude said:

 

I would think that there was only so much that Brouwer could have done on that pass.  He was already covered on the half boards, so he would not have been able to do much with it.  Engelland was solid except for then and the dying minutes.  He defended well on the 4-3 by taking away the cross crease passes.  His slowness didn't expose the team very often, but honestly, both he and Brodie did better away from each other.  

 

Back to the topic of goaltending.  Elliott was about as solid as you could hope for.  When Kan scored, he hadn't faced a lot of shots.  When Brodie deflected the puck, there was only so much he could do.  The rest of the time he was in the right position.  He was dynamite in the shootout.  If I had a complaint, it would be on how he tracks shots off the boards.  In EDM, the boards are very lively, and created a scoring chance.  In CHI, they were not so lively, so none were as blatant.  But there was at least once where he lost the puck and got over just in time.  I think Jokipakka got just enough of the puck to keep it out.

That play with Engelland is what you get with him, if that was Brodie or Giordano they circle away and take the puck back behind the net so yeah bad play on his part. Elliott was solid for the most part, more like we all wanted to see. Good game to build on.

[travel_dude]

8 minutes ago, MAC331 said:

That play with Engelland is what you get with him, if that was Brodie or Giordano they circle away and take the puck back behind the net so yeah bad play on his part. Elliott was solid for the most part, more like we all wanted to see. Good game to build on.

 

And I'm not harping on about it.  Until we get better players, he's about the best of the worst.  Wideman makes far more mental mistakes.  Engelland has simplified his game, but these types of clearing attempts make me lose it.  Not just him.  Brodie tries the same thing at times on the backhand, but he has more success because it's harder to pick up the direction on a backhand.

Both are higher risk than just flipping the puck high and out.  

[MAC331]

17 hours ago, travel_dude said:

 

And I'm not harping on about it.  Until we get better players, he's about the best of the worst.  Wideman makes far more mental mistakes.  Engelland has simplified his game, but these types of clearing attempts make me lose it.  Not just him.  Brodie tries the same thing at times on the backhand, but he has more success because it's harder to pick up the direction on a backhand.

Both are higher risk than just flipping the puck high and out.  

Yes the failed attempts to clear the puck out drives everyone crazy, I'm sure. I have nothing more to say about Engelland, his play is satisfactory IMO and I like having him on the ice for other reasons as well. I see GG played Brodie with Hamilton last night at times and I would love to see them become a pairing. Let Giordano make what he can out of Wideman's play for now.

On the goaltending, Elliott has started to resemble what we all wanted his last few games.

[kehatch]

I also like Giordano with Wideman and Brodie with Hamilton. Wideman is playing much better offensively and Brodie/Hamilton makes sense. 

 

I am hoping Jokipakka gets paired with Engellend for a competent third pairing. 

 

Grossman was okay last night, but I think Jokipakka is leaps and bounds a better player, and thst trumps size everytime. 

[travel_dude]

2 hours ago, kehatch said:

I also like Giordano with Wideman and Brodie with Hamilton. Wideman is playing much better offensively and Brodie/Hamilton makes sense. 

 

I am hoping Jokipakka gets paired with Engellend for a competent third pairing. 

 

Grossman was okay last night, but I think Jokipakka is leaps and bounds a better player, and thst trumps size everytime. 

 

Have we seen that yet?  Engelland has surprised me, but I don't like him paired with Brodie.  They play better apart.  My concern with Wideman/Gio is the minutes.  Perhaps a suitable alternative would be the pairs as you suggest, but Brodie takes some of his minutes with Gio.  Wideman gets the PP minutes in its place:

 

Gio-Wideman (Gio 24 mins - Wideman 20, Brodie for 4 minutes)

Brodie-Hamilton (18-20 minutes)

Jokipakka-Engelland (12-15 mins)

 

PP - Gio, Wideman, Hamilton, Yokipakka/4th forward

PK - Gio, Brodie, Engelland, Yokipakka/Hamilton

 

 

[MAC331]

4 hours ago, kehatch said:

I also like Giordano with Wideman and Brodie with Hamilton. Wideman is playing much better offensively and Brodie/Hamilton makes sense. 

 

I am hoping Jokipakka gets paired with Engellend for a competent third pairing. 

 

Grossman was okay last night, but I think Jokipakka is leaps and bounds a better player, and thst trumps size everytime. 

Jokipakka should be the one we want to gain the most experience this season. I think they should drop Grossmann and go with Kulak as the extra.

[kehatch]

2 hours ago, MAC331 said:

Jokipakka should be the one we want to gain the most experience this season. I think they should drop Grossmann and go with Kulak as the extra.

 

That would be my preference as well. Running with 8 D doesn't make a lot of sense, and Grossman is a distance 8 in terms of my ranking for the D. That said, the coaching staff doesn't appear to agree with me so we shall see I guess. 

[cross16]

I dont' think the original plan was to run with 8 day but I think Kulak forced their hand. I thikn he made the team out of camp and its tough to send a guy like that down who has done everything you've asked, especially when you try and stress as an organization that there is opporunity. I get the answer would be to either not sign Grossman or to send Gossman down but keep in mind Grossman is the only D that has a history in Gulutzan (excluding Engelland who I don't count becuase that was forever ago). I think any coach wants to trust in his D and the Flames play in the preaseason and first few games sure wouldn't give him alot of faith or trust. I think the Flames wanted a Vet LH D and I think Gulutzan appreciates having someone he knows and can trust while he develops trust in others. Especially considering how much he stressed that they had to get better in the goals against department. 

 

I'l be surprised if they carry 8 dman the whole season but for now I think it makes alot of sense. 

[MAC331]

38 minutes ago, cross16 said:

I dont' think the original plan was to run with 8 day but I think Kulak forced their hand. I thikn he made the team out of camp and its tough to send a guy like that down who has done everything you've asked, especially when you try and stress as an organization that there is opporunity. I get the answer would be to either not sign Grossman or to send Gossman down but keep in mind Grossman is the only D that has a history in Gulutzan (excluding Engelland who I don't count becuase that was forever ago). I think any coach wants to trust in his D and the Flames play in the preaseason and first few games sure wouldn't give him alot of faith or trust. I think the Flames wanted a Vet LH D and I think Gulutzan appreciates having someone he knows and can trust while he develops trust in others. Especially considering how much he stressed that they had to get better in the goals against department. 

 

I'l be surprised if they carry 8 dman the whole season but for now I think it makes alot of sense. 

It is ok for now while he experiments with pairings and lines. He has said he only wants 1 extra forward and 1 extra defenseman but he has the room to carry 2 defensemen and 1 forward for now. Not a huge deal.

[conundrumed]

15 hours ago, kehatch said:

 

That would be my preference as well. Running with 8 D doesn't make a lot of sense, and Grossman is a distance 8 in terms of my ranking for the D. That said, the coaching staff doesn't appear to agree with me so we shall see I guess. 

I wonder about that though, because it depends what you want out of your Dmen. You don't expect Grossman to be like Brodie or Hamilton.

Grossman said in an interview during the final cuts process that he's just going to play the way he plays and not try to adjust anything.

That sounds like something his coach told him he wants imo.

If you want a big, intimidating guy on D, if that's the M.O. the coach sees as missing, it's Grossman over Kulak 10 out of 10 times.

Don't get me wrong, I really like Kulak. But the coach wants certain things available to him, Grossman is not as terrible as he's being portrayed if he could be treated with what you'd expect him to be, he is that.

Simple, heavy game on the low lines, protect your goalie.

 

 

[kehatch]

7 hours ago, conundrumed said:

I wonder about that though, because it depends what you want out of your Dmen. You don't expect Grossman to be like Brodie or Hamilton.

Grossman said in an interview during the final cuts process that he's just going to play the way he plays and not try to adjust anything.

That sounds like something his coach told him he wants imo.

If you want a big, intimidating guy on D, if that's the M.O. the coach sees as missing, it's Grossman over Kulak 10 out of 10 times.

Don't get me wrong, I really like Kulak. But the coach wants certain things available to him, Grossman is not as terrible as he's being portrayed if he could be treated with what you'd expect him to be, he is that.

Simple, heavy game on the low lines, protect your goalie.

 

 

 

I take the better player over the bigger player every time.  But like I said (and you said) the coaches may not see it that way.  At least not for 82 games of the year.  

[conundrumed]

4 minutes ago, kehatch said:

 

I take the better player over the bigger player every time.  But like I said (and you said) the coaches may not see it that way.  At least not for 82 games of the year.  

Give me a scenario, I'll tell you which I prefer.

Grossman hasn't cost us any games.

Caps Sunday, is Engelland going to deal with Winnik?

I'm guessing Grossman.

Let's go to Anaheim and make Perry's next pick his last.

That's Grossman, let's stop plowing him under.

He's on our roster.

 

[travel_dude]

11 hours ago, conundrumed said:

Give me a scenario, I'll tell you which I prefer.

Grossman hasn't cost us any games.

Caps Sunday, is Engelland going to deal with Winnik?

I'm guessing Grossman.

Let's go to Anaheim and make Perry's next pick his last.

That's Grossman, let's stop plowing him under.

He's on our roster.

 

 

Two plays by Grossmann that directly led to goals, in the same game.  In game 1 of the season.  There's really no way to tell what Yokipakka would have been like, but a loss in game one certainly set us up for a series of adjustments that contributed to losses.  Yokipakka is not that much of a wimp compared to Grossmann.  Grossman can only hit players he can catch.  

 

He's on the roster because the coach didn't want to carry 14 forwards.  He was signed to get us as close to the cap limit as possible to maximize placing Smid on LTIR.  He will be on this team for depth.  There's a strong chance Wideman and Engelland will be traded come TDL.

[JTech780]

3 minutes ago, travel_dude said:

 

There's a strong chance Wideman and Engelland will be traded come TDL.

 

Where is the faith, these guys won't be traded because we will be a playoff team at TDL and we will need all hands on deck.

[MAC331]

Just now, JTech780 said:

 

Where is the faith, these guys won't be traded because we will be a playoff team at TDL and we will need all hands on deck.

I think they will ride out Engelland but BT likely has his eyes peeled for any opportunity to trade Wideman for anything.