We are ̶A̶r̶e̶ ̶w̶e̶ a playoff bound team ̶?̶

[jjgallow]

20 hours ago, AlbertaBoy12 said:

Not necessarily, the top 4 teams are all original six teams, and the teams at the bottom arent traditional hockey markets, so them winning the cup has nothing to do with it.

 

Yes. That is....exactly the arguement I was making lol.  I am glad we are in agreement here

 

Original six are all big market teams.   Many, many other factors too, but yes, that's the idea.

 

20 hours ago, AlbertaBoy12 said:

For a canadian team to advance to the stanley cup final it would be a huge influx of money.

 

Absolutely.   The question is whether it would be worth the huge outflux required to get there.

 

It is... complicated.

 

Once again, why the list of the most profitable teams looks nothing like a list of stanley cup winning teams.

[jjgallow]

5 hours ago, MAC331 said:

Can you expand on why you think the Organization is not serious about winning or wanting a SC ? I would love to hear this.

 

I think I've been doing this, to an extent, in some of my other posts (see above).   I don't have the intention of creating a blow-out on here, so hopefully that is sufficient.   But, 1989 was a long time ago, and the Flames have made a lot of money since then.    

 

The only time the organization outlined a Clear goal of winning the cup, was 2003, and 2004.    This, after Losing Money due to incredibly poor performance in previous years, forcing them to go under a Serious rebuild, featuring Iginla and Co.  The "Young Guns".

 

But let me say, the 2004 cup run didn't happen because the organisation Wanted to rebuild. 

 

That rebuild happened...the 2004 cup run happened, because the fans Forced the organisation into a rebuild.

 

I don't see that same level of commitment from the organisation, or widespread influence from fans, in this current "rebuild".

[MAC331]

31 minutes ago, jjgallow said:

 

I think I've been doing this, to an extent, in some of my other posts (see above).   I don't have the intention of creating a blow-out on here, so hopefully that is sufficient.   But, 1989 was a long time ago, and the Flames have made a lot of money since then.    

 

The only time the organization outlined a Clear goal of winning the cup, was 2003, and 2004.    This, after Losing Money due to incredibly poor performance in previous years, forcing them to go under a Serious rebuild, featuring Iginla and Co.  The "Young Guns".

 

But let me say, the 2004 cup run didn't happen because the organisation Wanted to rebuild. 

 

That rebuild happened...the 2004 cup run happened, because the fans Forced the organisation into a rebuild.

 

I don't see that same level of commitment from the organisation, or widespread influence from fans, in this current "rebuild".

First let me say fans are along for the ride, they don't force organizations to do anything. I have had the pleasure of knowing some of the Flames owners and everyone of them wants a top performing team because the fans of Calgary deserve one, that is why they brought them here. This isn't always possible as teams go through cycles with quality players combined with enough experience and comradery to pull off winning a SC. A lot of this rest with GM's of the times and the scouting departments to assemble a winning culture and pipeline. This organization got away from this under the Sutter regimes, trade and win at all costs was there mode of operation, albeit with good intent and bad results. Now we are under the Burke regime with a new GM and a new coach wanting to establish a new style of play for the team. I have seen more good things happening the last 3 years than I have for quite some time but I don't think it ever became NOT about winning but winning does take time. There is no forcing it.

[Aggravator]

Are we playoff bound?  With the recent play from the horrid giveaways to the non-existant D men (yes wideman i am looking at you specifically) to the abysmal power play i can only say that Calgary's destiny this year is to the be the Leafs of the West.  That means last place.  Hooray!

[jjgallow]

6 hours ago, MAC331 said:

First let me say fans are along for the ride, they don't force organizations to do anything.

 

I have had the pleasure of knowing some of the Flames owners and everyone of them wants a top performing team because the fans of Calgary deserve one, that is why they brought them here. 

 

I appreciate the perspective, but would want to point out that a good portion of us on here have had interactions with the owners to varying degrees, including myself.   Yet, little or none of us are rich, despite their altruism you claim.   These are fantastic individuals, fantastic people, and wonderful contributors to the community and Calgary's economy (outside of hockey, for that matter).

 

But there's not a single one of them that doesn't know the value of a dollar and that is a 100% promise.  I've seen it, I've experienced it, and nobody with any closeness to them at all will tell you differently.

 

Your second sentence, at least to me, appears to directly contradict your first sentence.  But in any case, no matter how we word it, there is not a moment that goes by that the owners don't consider financials, no matter how great they are (and I'm not disputing that).   

 

This is a business.  Large sums of money are involved.   The money comes from the fans, 100%.    We may not knowingly drive the business, but money talks.   This organisation has been in financial trouble before, as has the city, and when revenues dropped off enough, these same owners that we love, looked very hard at moving the team.   They eventually decided to stay, and downsize the player salaries through a rebuild, because quite frankly, they had no other choice which made economic sense.

 

"Fans don't force organisations to do anything":     Tell that to:

The Atlanta Thrashers

The Hartford Whalers

The Original winnipeg jets (Arizona Coyotes)

The Quebec Nordiques

The Colorado Rockies

 

And Last, but Most importantly:   The #1 reason the organisation came here:

 

The Atlanta Flames.

 

 

ps....  Now look what you've done, lol...

[MAC331]

16 hours ago, jjgallow said:

 

I appreciate the perspective, but would want to point out that a good portion of us on here have had interactions with the owners to varying degrees, including myself.   Yet, little or none of us are rich, despite their altruism you claim.   These are fantastic individuals, fantastic people, and wonderful contributors to the community and Calgary's economy (outside of hockey, for that matter).

 

But there's not a single one of them that doesn't know the value of a dollar and that is a 100% promise.  I've seen it, I've experienced it, and nobody with any closeness to them at all will tell you differently.

 

Your second sentence, at least to me, appears to directly contradict your first sentence.  But in any case, no matter how we word it, there is not a moment that goes by that the owners don't consider financials, no matter how great they are (and I'm not disputing that).   

 

This is a business.  Large sums of money are involved.   The money comes from the fans, 100%.    We may not knowingly drive the business, but money talks.   This organisation has been in financial trouble before, as has the city, and when revenues dropped off enough, these same owners that we love, looked very hard at moving the team.   They eventually decided to stay, and downsize the player salaries through a rebuild, because quite frankly, they had no other choice which made economic sense.

 

"Fans don't force organisations to do anything":     Tell that to:

The Atlanta Thrashers

The Hartford Whalers

The Original winnipeg jets (Arizona Coyotes)

The Quebec Nordiques

The Colorado Rockies

 

And Last, but Most importantly:   The #1 reason the organisation came here:

 

The Atlanta Flames.

 

 

ps....  Now look what you've done, lol...

I stand corrected to a degree, if the fans don't come out and support the team then yes changes have to take place in order for these businessmen to protect their asset. There were times all Canadian teams were in jeopardy, we all heard the rumors. This isn't the case currently and we were more discussing the fans not liking the product on the ice and staying away, correct ? I have a hard time seeing that happen here in Calgary. 

[jjgallow]

1 hour ago, MAC331 said:

I stand corrected to a degree, if the fans don't come out and support the team then yes changes have to take place in order for these businessmen to protect their asset. There were times all Canadian teams were in jeopardy, we all heard the rumors. This isn't the case currently and we were more discussing the fans not liking the product on the ice and staying away, correct ? I have a hard time seeing that happen here in Calgary. 

 

It's a really good question what we were discussing lol...that's my fault.   I'll try and tie it back to the topic.

 

The question is whether we will make the playoffs.  I personally don't see it, but the point I'm raising is that, as fans, I'm surprised our bar isn't a little higher.   I see no reason why we have to go through so many seasons Knowing that we won't win the cup.   I think the question should be, for fans, when we'll be a contender.

 

If the rebuild were done right, I would expect to be a contender as early as next year.   But I don't believe that will be the case.  As much as it pains me to see it, I see a path of destruction where we enter re-re-builds....not as bad as Edmonton...but a similar idea.

 

Two Reasons for that:

 

1.  I don't believe the rebuild was done correctly (from the goaltender, to defense out), and I don't see the right combination of young core players to become a contender currently.

 

2.  I DO see the fans walking away from the product soon, partially because of the product but also because of our economy.  It is just Starting to trickle down to ticket sales, a trend which will probably continue in this economic cycle.    Panic sets in when average attendance drops below 17,000.   We may start seeing that in the Latter half of this season.   When that happens, the entire direction of the organisation changes.   It will start with lower ticket prices, but in the end, we may go back into a Forced rebuild.   The organisation may realize that the only way they can Afford to spend All of the CAP, is if they're routinely going deep in the playoffs.   If they arrive at this economic decision, and it IS slowly trending there....Combined with poor team performance... it is the Perfect Storm for a forced rebuild.    Of course I could be wrong.   The City is larger now.  But, jobs are scarcer, and ticket sales are Much higher.

http://www.hockeydb.com/nhl-attendance/att_graph.php?tmi=5090

 

 

So, in summary, I don't think we're making the playoffs.  But Really, I think the fans, and the organisation, should be aiming a lot higher than that.  Because 5 extra games Isn't worth all the fuss.   We need to be a competitive playoff team.

[MAC331]

34 minutes ago, jjgallow said:

 

It's a really good question what we were discussing lol...that's my fault.   I'll try and tie it back to the topic.

 

The question is whether we will make the playoffs.  I personally don't see it, but the point I'm raising is that, as fans, I'm surprised our bar isn't a little higher.   I see no reason why we have to go through so many seasons Knowing that we won't win the cup.   I think the question should be, for fans, when we'll be a contender.

 

If the rebuild were done right, I would expect to be a contender as early as next year.   But I don't believe that will be the case.  As much as it pains me to see it, I see a path of destruction where we enter re-re-builds....not as bad as Edmonton...but a similar idea.

 

Two Reasons for that:

 

1.  I don't believe the rebuild was done correctly (from the goaltender, to defense out), and I don't see the right combination of young core players to become a contender currently.

 

2.  I DO see the fans walking away from the product soon, partially because of the product but also because of our economy.  It is just Starting to trickle down to ticket sales, a trend which will probably continue in this economic cycle.    Panic sets in when average attendance drops below 17,000.   We may start seeing that in the Latter half of this season.   When that happens, the entire direction of the organisation changes.   It will start with lower ticket prices, but in the end, we may go back into a Forced rebuild.   The organisation may realize that the only way they can Afford to spend All of the CAP, is if they're routinely going deep in the playoffs.   If they arrive at this economic decision, and it IS slowly trending there....Combined with poor team performance... it is the Perfect Storm for a forced rebuild.    Of course I could be wrong.   The City is larger now.  But, jobs are scarcer, and ticket sales are Much higher.

http://www.hockeydb.com/nhl-attendance/att_graph.php?tmi=5090

 

 

So, in summary, I don't think we're making the playoffs.  But Really, I think the fans, and the organisation, should be aiming a lot higher than that.  Because 5 extra games Isn't worth all the fuss.   We need to be a competitive playoff team.

I think where this team goes will rest with the gradual maturing of this core. From the net out has been fixed to a large degree with Elliott and Johnson leading into Gilles and a few others. Our defensive pipeline is a very good line so I'm not sure what your concern is there. As for our forwards, we should be encouraged that Tkachuk has joined the team a year in advance. If he can be an answer for top line RW with Gaudreau and Monahan eventually this season we are way ahead of the game for 2017/18. We have a number of talented LW and RW players on the edge of being able to come in and contribute. I don't see an Edmonton scenario here at all but you seem to like being a doomsday believer.

Canadians support hockey and whether you want to believe it or not their is and always will be a lot of money in Calgary.

[jjgallow]

1 hour ago, MAC331 said:

I think where this team goes will rest with the gradual maturing of this core. From the net out has been fixed to a large degree with Elliott and Johnson leading into Gilles and a few others.

 

Well, last year we were 30th in the league for goals againt, and this year we're 29th.  So...technically, we're improving lol.  But "fixed" is a bit of a stretch, I would say. 

 

Gillies is struggling, and injured again.   Parsons is struggling.   Ortio is actually climbing up the leaderboard in the SHL...oh...wait...

 

1 hour ago, MAC331 said:

Our defensive pipeline is a very good line so I'm not sure what your concern is there.

 

Last year, we got on big debates on here where I was told our Defence at the NHL level was solid.  Less of that this year.

I like Kylington.   Andersson has potential....  Neither are sure bets.   A long way from it.  

Even if they turn out, their prime is years away.  Our current core will be past their prime by then.

 

That part of the rebuild, we did backwards (building forwards before defence.  Edmonton made the same mistake).

 

1 hour ago, MAC331 said:

As for our forwards, we should be encouraged that Tkachuk has joined the team a year in advance.

 

I would say discouraged...it shows short term thinking and a lack of emphasis on proper development.

 

1 hour ago, MAC331 said:

If he can be an answer for top line RW with Gaudreau and Monahan eventually this season we are way ahead of the game for 2017/18. We have a number of talented LW and RW players on the edge of being able to come in and contribute. I don't see an Edmonton scenario here at all but you seem to like being a doomsday believer.

 

Edmonton had all those pieces too.   See above.   Nobody's saying doomsday, unless you think everything since 2004 has been a doomsday.  I'm saying, more of the same, with a potential dropoff.     When you're 29th in goals against in the league...it's pretty hard to fall off a cliff.  Even if the teams does get forced into a re-rebuild (which could actually make for very interesting, exciting, and cheaper hockey).

 

I likes my rebuilds, and I likes my cups.   You're seeing the glass half empty and envisioning a doomsday, whereas I would welcome it and be interested.

 

1 hour ago, MAC331 said:

Canadians support hockey and whether you want to believe it or not their is and always will be a lot of money in Calgary.

 

Ok....that seems like an understandably emotional response.   As per above, we've just gone over the economic cycles and what has Already happened here in the past.   I can't predict the future but some rough times for the organisation isn't out of the question and might not be the worst thing for the fans.

 

Canadians support Playoff hockey.

 

I would actually welcome a scenario where the Flames are only economically viable as a top tier NHL team that regularly goes deep in the playoffs.   It's happened before and I wouldn't mind if it happened again.

[MAC331]

34 minutes ago, jjgallow said:

 

Well, last year we were 30th in the league for goals againt, and this year we're 29th.  So...technically, we're improving lol.  But "fixed" is a bit of a stretch, I would say. 

 

Gillies is struggling, and injured again.   Parsons is struggling.   Ortio is actually climbing up the leaderboard in the SHL...oh...wait...

 

 

Last year, we got on big debates on here where I was told our Defence at the NHL level was solid.  Less of that this year.

I like Kylington.   Andersson has potential....  Neither are sure bets.   A long way from it.  

Even if they turn out, their prime is years away.  Our current core will be past their prime by then.

 

That part of the rebuild, we did backwards (building forwards before defence.  Edmonton made the same mistake).

 

 

I would say discouraged...it shows short term thinking and a lack of emphasis on proper development.

 

 

Edmonton had all those pieces too.   See above.   Nobody's saying doomsday, unless you think everything since 2004 has been a doomsday.  I'm saying, more of the same, with a potential dropoff.     When you're 29th in goals against in the league...it's pretty hard to fall off a cliff.  Even if the teams does get forced into a re-rebuild (which could actually make for very interesting, exciting, and cheaper hockey).

 

I likes my rebuilds, and I likes my cups.   You're seeing the glass half empty and envisioning a doomsday, whereas I would welcome it and be interested.

 

 

Ok....that seems like an understandably emotional response.   As per above, we've just gone over the economic cycles and what has Already happened here in the past.   I can't predict the future but some rough times for the organisation isn't out of the question and might not be the worst thing for the fans.

 

Canadians support Playoff hockey.

 

I would actually welcome a scenario where the Flames are only economically viable as a top tier NHL team that regularly goes deep in the playoffs.   It's happened before and I wouldn't mind if it happened again.

Wouldn't we all. I lived in Saskatchewan for 10 years and when all you have for professional sports is one team you come to appreciate you at least have that. I like to support the local team and I'm sure I am not alone.

[jjgallow]

27 minutes ago, MAC331 said:

Wouldn't we all. I lived in Saskatchewan for 10 years and when all you have for professional sports is one team you come to appreciate you at least have that. I like to support the local team and I'm sure I am not alone.

 

Well...if you come from Saskatchewan...I have to give you a pass

[robrob74]

3 hours ago, jjgallow said:

 

Well, last year we were 30th in the league for goals againt, and this year we're 29th.  So...technically, we're improving lol.  But "fixed" is a bit of a stretch, I would say. 

 

Gillies is struggling, and injured again.   Parsons is struggling.   Ortio is actually climbing up the leaderboard in the SHL...oh...wait...

 

 

Last year, we got on big debates on here where I was told our Defence at the NHL level was solid.  Less of that this year.

I like Kylington.   Andersson has potential....  Neither are sure bets.   A long way from it.  

Even if they turn out, their prime is years away.  Our current core will be past their prime by then.

 

That part of the rebuild, we did backwards (building forwards before defence.  Edmonton made the same mistake).

 

 

I would say discouraged...it shows short term thinking and a lack of emphasis on proper development.

 

 

Edmonton had all those pieces too.   See above.   Nobody's saying doomsday, unless you think everything since 2004 has been a doomsday.  I'm saying, more of the same, with a potential dropoff.     When you're 29th in goals against in the league...it's pretty hard to fall off a cliff.  Even if the teams does get forced into a re-rebuild (which could actually make for very interesting, exciting, and cheaper hockey).

 

I likes my rebuilds, and I likes my cups.   You're seeing the glass half empty and envisioning a doomsday, whereas I would welcome it and be interested.

 

 

Ok....that seems like an understandably emotional response.   As per above, we've just gone over the economic cycles and what has Already happened here in the past.   I can't predict the future but some rough times for the organisation isn't out of the question and might not be the worst thing for the fans.

 

Canadians support Playoff hockey.

 

I would actually welcome a scenario where the Flames are only economically viable as a top tier NHL team that regularly goes deep in the playoffs.   It's happened before and I wouldn't mind if it happened again.

 

I don't think it is a goaltending issue. Last year sure, the goalies were a large part of the problem, but I also think it didn't matter who was in net because the mistakes made were just too bad to get through.

 

We see it this year too, where these mistakes happen are the key to our "downward spiral." Too bad, but mistakes are killing us just as much as the pk, and the pp needs to offset those goals against and that isn't happening. 

[MAC331]

16 hours ago, robrob74 said:

 

I don't think it is a goaltending issue. Last year sure, the goalies were a large part of the problem, but I also think it didn't matter who was in net because the mistakes made were just too bad to get through.

 

We see it this year too, where these mistakes happen are the key to our "downward spiral." Too bad, but mistakes are killing us just as much as the pk, and the pp needs to offset those goals against and that isn't happening. 

Some people can't live with the mistakes and believe they are avoidable. The same people want a win every time their team steps on the ice. It is the players that have to eliminate their own mistakes in order to get better. Yes it is painful watching our team right now but there are no shortcuts.

[robrob74]

1 hour ago, MAC331 said:

Some people can't live with the mistakes and believe they are avoidable. The same people want a win every time their team steps on the ice. It is the players that have to eliminate their own mistakes in order to get better. Yes it is painful watching our team right now but there are no shortcuts.

 

Mistakes are going to happen. For me, it is where they happen that make them so bad. 

 

Make a simple play. Play basic hockey sometimes. Adjust, and do things differently but go back to what worked sometimes. It's easy to stop Gaudreau, everyone knows now, the book is out. Also, clog the flames up and you get turnovers and pounce. It is what I mean by change it sometimes. Gaudreau can carry it in 1/5th the time and end up with better results, because they did something different those other 4 times. 

 

Then you have all the penalties we take. 

[AlbertaBoy12]

11 hours ago, robrob74 said:

 

Mistakes are going to happen. For me, it is where they happen that make them so bad. 

 

Make a simple play. Play basic hockey sometimes. Adjust, and do things differently but go back to what worked sometimes. It's easy to stop Gaudreau, everyone knows now, the book is out. Also, clog the flames up and you get turnovers and pounce. It is what I mean by change it sometimes. Gaudreau can carry it in 1/5th the time and end up with better results, because they did something different those other 4 times. 

 

Then you have all the penalties we take. 

Thats the big problem right now the players arent makign the simple plays and they are forcing the plays that arent there.

But at the same time our Defensive coverage 5 on 5 has been way better, we are keeping them to outside for the most part.

[travel_dude]

21 hours ago, robrob74 said:

 

Mistakes are going to happen. For me, it is where they happen that make them so bad. 

 

Make a simple play. Play basic hockey sometimes. Adjust, and do things differently but go back to what worked sometimes. It's easy to stop Gaudreau, everyone knows now, the book is out. Also, clog the flames up and you get turnovers and pounce. It is what I mean by change it sometimes. Gaudreau can carry it in 1/5th the time and end up with better results, because they did something different those other 4 times. 

 

Then you have all the penalties we take. 

 

I would disagree on the Gaudreau comments.  Last year he lead the team in successful carry-ins.  This year not so much.  It's not so much that the book is out on him as much as it is having to backtrack.  Two forwards standing at the blueline draws two defenders.  He's not going to be able to do much in that case.  Chip it in?  The forwards are not moving.  Carry it in?  Five against one.  Come back and take another try or chip in?  Better chance of either being picked off or having a couple more options.

 

I agree that the team needs to mix it up.  Not just Gaudreau.  Stretch passes to a stationary forward?  Little chance of success.

It's difficult to stop Gaudreau when the team is moving.  He has pass options.  He can skate in a phone booth.  Early on, he was struggling with puck control (bounces, timing off), but he looks better every game.  

 

The power plays look dismal.  I don't mind the concept of 4 forwards, but you need to use Gaudreau down low, not on the point.

 

Getting back to the original question.  We can be a playoff team when the top line begins to look like a top line.  Moving Chaisson off it is a start.  Fixing the pairings to something that works is key.  I don't care if Wideman plays at this point.  I care that they balance the D-men to fit skills and ability to play extended minutes.  Brodie-Engelland is an experiment I hope ends soon.  Engealland is far better off with Kulak.  If you are going to play Brodie on LD, then play him with Wideman.  Put Dougie on the top pair where he can show he is a top pair d-man or at least grow into it. 

[robrob74]

37 minutes ago, travel_dude said:

 

I would disagree on the Gaudreau comments.  Last year he lead the team in successful carry-ins.  This year not so much.  It's not so much that the book is out on him as much as it is having to backtrack.  Two forwards standing at the blueline draws two defenders.  He's not going to be able to do much in that case.  Chip it in?  The forwards are not moving.  Carry it in?  Five against one.  Come back and take another try or chip in?  Better chance of either being picked off or having a couple more options.

 

I agree that the team needs to mix it up.  Not just Gaudreau.  Stretch passes to a stationary forward?  Little chance of success.

It's difficult to stop Gaudreau when the team is moving.  He has pass options.  He can skate in a phone booth.  Early on, he was struggling with puck control (bounces, timing off), but he looks better every game.  

 

The power plays look dismal.  I don't mind the concept of 4 forwards, but you need to use Gaudreau down low, not on the point.

 

Getting back to the original question.  We can be a playoff team when the top line begins to look like a top line.  Moving Chaisson off it is a start.  Fixing the pairings to something that works is key.  I don't care if Wideman plays at this point.  I care that they balance the D-men to fit skills and ability to play extended minutes.  Brodie-Engelland is an experiment I hope ends soon.  Engealland is far better off with Kulak.  If you are going to play Brodie on LD, then play him with Wideman.  Put Dougie on the top pair where he can show he is a top pair d-man or at least grow into it. 

 

I understand what you are saying, but there needs to be a change in the approach is what I am saying. 

 

I thiught the gameplan was suppose ro be to move up as a unit? You would think that would mean no standing around at the other team'a blue line and having options. 

[travel_dude]

6 minutes ago, robrob74 said:

 

I understand what you are saying, but there needs to be a change in the approach is what I am saying. 

 

I thiught the gameplan was suppose ro be to move up as a unit? You would think that would mean no standing around at the other team'a blue line and having options. 

 

That's what we've been told.  I am still waiting to see it.  I have no problem with JH or Brodie carrying the puck in.  The problem is once there, there is nobody else there.  There, they're wasting their opportunities.

[robrob74]

12 hours ago, travel_dude said:

 

That's what we've been told.  I am still waiting to see it.  I have no problem with JH or Brodie carrying the puck in.  The problem is once there, there is nobody else there.  There, they're wasting their opportunities.

 

Did I make a mistake on my there, they're and their usage?

[travel_dude]

7 hours ago, robrob74 said:

 

Did I make a mistake on my there, they're and their usage?

 

No, was just being funny.  In my previous sentence, I used "there" three times.

[robrob74]

10 hours ago, travel_dude said:

 

No, was just being funny.  In my previous sentence, I used "there" three times.

 

Haha, awesome! 

[CheersMan]

Three 7-game segments done.  7 pts from the target.

 

[travel_dude]

Not to worry about the 95 point threshold for the Pacific.  It's looking more like 85-87.

[MAC331]

10 hours ago, travel_dude said:

Not to worry about the 95 point threshold for the Pacific.  It's looking more like 85-87.

We are starting to play better as a team and would need to get on a healthy run of wins. This will require both our PK and PP to perform in a huge way real soon.

[travel_dude]

19 minutes ago, MAC331 said:

We are starting to play better as a team and would need to get on a healthy run of wins. This will require both our PK and PP to perform in a huge way real soon.

 

One step forward, two back.  We look like world beaters one game and a tired bunch of losers the next.  In every game we win, PP has had no impact, other than to kep the other team in it.  Those games have balanced officiating and usually a good PK execution.  What I find distressing is that after a win, we substitute out the wrong players.

 

No problem with Jokipakka in, but Kulak out was a mistake.  Wiseman/Brodie can look stable one game but one of them gets burnt every game.  

 

But the Pacific will be up and down all year, so we have a chance.  We have to keep winning at 2/3 until JG gets back.  Well ok, we have to get back to 500 hockey first.  If nothing changes between now and January, then the coaches will be gone.  At least one if not all.  The PP is just too horrid right now.  You can only fault the players so much. Even a middling coach should be able to put together a few set plays that will work once per game.