Who's to Blame?

[JTech780]

4 minutes ago, MAC331 said:

I took in the game last night and I agree with everyone GG and staff have some work to do yet however I think BT has some real serious work to consider. The intelligence level of some player either has to be improved or exchanged. Let me start with the most obvious Chiasson and Vey are not NHL caliber players. Hamilton and Bennett are not very smart players and by this they don't read the ice very well and what is happening around them well at all.

JTech mentioned in another thread a possible trade of Hamilton + for Hamonic NYI and Strome, if there is willingness I would do that deal ASAP. Hamonic is way more responsible in his full duties than Hamilton ever will be. The add for us could be Mangiapane perhaps but I would do it.

GG is definitely doing right by Tkachuk having him play with Backlund and Frolik, he will learn how to play the game in the right way from these two.

This brings me to Bennett, he seems lots with his efforts no matter where you put him. He certainly isn't a player I would want to be depending on any time soon. He needs to be on a limited shift 3rd line with Ferland and Versteeg who has the experience to help both these players be better.

I don't know what's going on with Bouma but a 4th line of Bouma, Stajan and Hathaway would be fine. If Bouma is out BT needs to get a 4th line LW type and not waste Ferland there.

Wideman, what else needs to be said about Wideman, he is a liability every time he steps on the ice. If we were to trade Hamilton for Hamonic it only fixes one hole with a better player.

If only BT could swing a deal for both Hamonic and Strome, this would possibly set this team up in a good way for the future.

Gaudreau, Monahan, Strome

Tkachuk, Backlund, Frolik

Ferland, Bennett, Versteeg (or Pribyl)

Bouma, Stajan, Hathaway

Giordano, Brodie

Jokipakka, Hamonic

Kulak, Engelland

Elliott, Johnson

I sure like the looks of this for the balance of the season and going forward.

 

You missed Brouwer.

[MAC331]

1 hour ago, JTech780 said:

 

You missed Brouwer.

Yes I did, put him back with Bennett. Good catch.

[cross16]

13 hours ago, jjgallow said:

 

Cross, you have more optimism for this team than I do for washed up undrafted prospects, and about the same level of justification

 

When, in your opinion, do you start looking at the coach and the GM, etc?  Call it however you like, find whatever way you want to measure improvement, there comes a point where it's inevitable, and we all know it.

 

Well to be fair I think the only reason it looks like i have optimism is in comparison to everyone else. I still don't think the Flames will make the playoffs and I didn't pick them to make the playoffs at the start of the season so it's not like i'm that high on them. I just think they are better than the results have been thus far. 

 

I also have looked at the coach and GM and am willing to place some blame accordingly for the slow start. There is no doubt that both have made errors but I look at it more holistically. Overal, Treliving has done a good job, with some faults, and so far we havn't seen enough of Gulutzan to say. I see some good things, I see some bad things but I think you need to get a coach 20 games to really work the kinks out and then see what he does. 20 games is usually how long it is going to take, IMO, for a team to fully embrace what a new coach is trying to get them to do and be able to execute it consistantly. 

The reason i'm not so pessemistic is I am seeing improvement in several key areas. Here is what I point to and where I see the improvement over last year. this is over the last 12 games and all 5 on 5 data:

 

Corsi F % - 3% improvment in Corsi F. They ae 9th best in the league versus 21st last year.

Fenwick F%- 1% high, 16th in the league versus 21st last year.

Shots Against - 2nd best versus 14th last year

Goals against - 1.67 versus 2.13 last year. yes despite all the doom and gloom about how the defence is terrible they are better than last year

Scoring chances F% - 17th versus 19th last year

Scoring chances against - 14.58 and 11th best versus 16.17 and 20th last year

High danger chances against - 6.67 and 9th best versus 7.98 and 20th last year

High Danger Chances For% - 14th versus 22nd last year.

 

So summarize, they are doing a much better job limiting chances and they have improved their ability to carry the play 5 on 5. I get lots will dismiss this data and thats fine but for me there is a positive trend here that suggests more wins are coming. Special teams has been the main problem and that is improving as well. I think what's really important to not is those 12 games were some really tough games too. Only 2 games out of their last 12 was against teams not in the playoffs last year (Ari and Ottawa) and including 2 against Chicago, St Louis, NYR and Washington. so almost half of it against teams i expect to be top 5 in the league this year. 

 

However, to your point JJ if i'm wrong and this doesn't continue for sure you need to start looking at the coach and then the GM. Coach first for me becuase I think on paper this is a good team so I would look at him first, then GM so if we are towrads the 40-50 game mark of the season and this data doesn't pan out I have no problem admitting I was wrong. 

[DirtyDeeds]

After the 3rd period last night where we controlled the puck and kept them hemmed in their end for most of it... I will ease up on my criticism  however..

 

I am doubtful they can sustain that style and tempo of play against most teams except the bottom teams like Arizona.

 

It did show me that they are capable of higher level of play so if this is the result of the team coming together from the JH injury then great , we can enjoy some better hockey.

 

We still are struggling to score even the last couple of games won....  times like this we need the PP and PK working properly.

 

Now if we can get both Bishop Elliott playing well too we will be set in nets.

I see the D trying with better results, but still making errors(not just Wideman)

We need to find some more O. ... somewhere..

[travel_dude]

10 minutes ago, DirtyDeeds said:

After the 3rd period last night where we controlled the puck and kept them hemmed in their end for most of it... I will ease up on my criticism  however..

 

I am doubtful they can sustain that style and tempo of play against most teams except the bottom teams like Arizona.

 

It did show me that they are capable of higher level of play so if this is the result of the team coming together from the JH injury then great , we can enjoy some better hockey.

 

We still are struggling to score even the last couple of games won....  times like this we need the PP and PK working properly.

 

Now if we can get both Bishop playing well too we will be set in nets.

I see the D trying with better results, but still making errors(not just Wideman)

We need to find some more O. ... somewhere..

 

I didn't realize we traded for Bishop.  Just happen?  

 

The PP still sucks.  Need to stop just rolling out the same units over and over.  Adjust, measure and adjust.  Find the optimal. The PK looks better.  Still worry about teams that play a lot close to the goal line, though.

[JTech780]

11 minutes ago, DirtyDeeds said:

After the 3rd period last night where we controlled the puck and kept them hemmed in their end for most of it... I will ease up on my criticism  however..

 

I am doubtful they can sustain that style and tempo of play against most teams except the bottom teams like Arizona.

 

It did show me that they are capable of higher level of play so if this is the result of the team coming together from the JH injury then great , we can enjoy some better hockey.

 

We still are struggling to score even the last couple of games won....  times like this we need the PP and PK working properly.

 

Now if we can get both Bishop playing well too we will be set in nets.

I see the D trying with better results, but still making errors(not just Wideman)

We need to find some more O. ... somewhere..

 

I think the biggest change is going from a run and gun offense to more of a cycle game. 

 

I think as the team gets used to the cycle game and creating sustained pressure the team will be better for it long term. It used to drive me nuts the last few years that we were a one and done offense, get a shot, but there was no traffic and there was no one battling for rebounds. I think the offense will come as guys get more used to this style of offense.

 

This is the style of play that wins you games in the playoffs.

[DirtyDeeds]

5 minutes ago, travel_dude said:

 

I didn't realize we traded for Bishop.  Just happen?  

 

The PP still sucks.  Need to stop just rolling out the same units over and over.  Adjust, measure and adjust.  Find the optimal. The PK looks better.  Still worry about teams that play a lot close to the goal line, though.

Where the hell did that come from???

 

Thx

Now if we can get both Bishop Elliott playing well too we will be set in nets.

Fixed that mind Fart

[travel_dude]

3 minutes ago, DirtyDeeds said:

Where the hell did that come from???

 

Thx

 

 

Fixed that mind Fart

 

Just having some fun.  I knew what you meant.

[Carty]

Maybe it was just a Freudian slip...

 

For what it's worth, I was hoping that we would land Bishop last summer...

[MAC331]

2 hours ago, DirtyDeeds said:

After the 3rd period last night where we controlled the puck and kept them hemmed in their end for most of it... I will ease up on my criticism  however..

 

I am doubtful they can sustain that style and tempo of play against most teams except the bottom teams like Arizona.

 

It did show me that they are capable of higher level of play so if this is the result of the team coming together from the JH injury then great , we can enjoy some better hockey.

 

We still are struggling to score even the last couple of games won....  times like this we need the PP and PK working properly.

 

Now if we can get both Bishop Elliott playing well too we will be set in nets.

I see the D trying with better results, but still making errors(not just Wideman)

We need to find some more O. ... somewhere..

It isn't always about our team being unable to do something like scoring, Smith played a very good game for ARZ. The score could have been much higher for us given the high quality chances.

[DirtyDeeds]

10 minutes ago, Carty said:

Maybe it was just a Freudian slip...

 

For what it's worth, I was hoping that we would land Bishop last summer...

He was my first choice too.

[cross16]

I woudln't rule out Bishop as a Flame. Elliott certainly hasn't stepped as a starter and sure looks like Bishop will be a UFA come the summer. 

[Cowtownguy]

10 hours ago, MAC331 said:

Could be and perhaps GG has to use both Goalies the way STL did. Johnson has stepped up big time these last two games which tells me we have a potentially very good tandem.

I am impressed with Johnson. He seems very efficient in the net. Those posts seem to be his best friend. I am not sure if that is a bad thing because he is not stopping them, or a good thing because he covers the angles to effectively.

[jjgallow]

11 hours ago, cross16 said:

 

Well to be fair I think the only reason it looks like i have optimism is in comparison to everyone else. I still don't think the Flames will make the playoffs and I didn't pick them to make the playoffs at the start of the season so it's not like i'm that high on them. I just think they are better than the results have been thus far. 

 

 

Great post cross, thanks...and that little touch of negativity warms my heart

 

So....Gaudreau out 4-6 weeks.... that will have an impact.  But who do we blame?

 

Changes the whole blaming dynamic, lol....

[Carty]

9 minutes ago, jjgallow said:

So....Gaudreau out 4-6 weeks.... that will have an impact.  But who do we blame?

 

Staal...

 

[jjgallow]

Fair enough lol,

 

It will be interesting to see how this turns out.   Gaudreau is our leading offense but also a major suspect defensively.
 

Depending on what the Flames are made of, it could provide an opportunity to finally align with the "system" and be functional (out of necessity).

 

Or, it could assure our spot among the bottom of the NHL teams.

 

Personally, this is why "making the playoffs if we fire on all cyclinders" isn't an acceptable goal for me.   Rare is the season where a team gets to fire on all cylinders.  And when it happens, they should be competing for the cup.

[The_People1]

No to Ben Bishop for me.  He's going to cost upwards $8 mil on the open market.  He is getting outplayed by Vasilevskiy by most statistical measures.  Jon Gillies should at least backup next season and we need an old vet to ease his transition into a full time starter.  If Chad Johnson continues to outplay Elliott, then bring back Johnson next season as the starter and play Gillies behind him.  Gillies has every potential to be as good as Ben Bishop in 2 to 4 years.

[The_People1]

On 17/11/2016 at 8:56 AM, cccsberg said:

How about Krueger?

 

No.  I wouldn't rule out Krueger in a year or two but we don't gut the coaching staff today for him.

 

On 17/11/2016 at 9:50 AM, MAC331 said:

Hamilton and Bennett are not very smart players and by this they don't read the ice very well and what is happening around them well at all.

 

Ya I've been saying it since summer.  Sam Bennett's vision, passing, and patience to allow a play to develop, are all questionable.  He is not Doug Gilmour at all who was one of the best play makers in the game.  He took a hit to hang onto the puck long enough for passing options to open up because he could see plays developing ahead of time.  Gilmour also used Gretzky's office a lot to buy time.

 

Bennett's strength continues to be bringing the puck into the danger areas in front of the net as quickly as possible with his head down not looking and not caring who else is open.  But they are rarely caught off guard at the NHL level and Bennett is not big enough to play smash mouth "stop me if you can" hockey.   He doesn't bring pucks to the front of the net with consistent authority and unstoppabiliy like a Corey Perry.

 

But ya, just not smart. There are other options but he can't see them. He is too focused on individualism.  He is too used to his OHL days where teammates gave him the puck and he did everything himself.  Bennett is going the way of RNH, all speed through the neutral zone and then gives you nothing once he enters the offensive zone.

 

So sad.  He should move to the wing for the rest of he season and really learn to see the game as a winger first.  Then when he plays C again, he'll know to look for the wingers.

 

[MAC331]

20 minutes ago, The_People1 said:

 

No.  I wouldn't rule out Krueger in a year or two but we don't gut the coaching staff today for him.

 

 

Ya I've been saying it since summer.  Sam Bennett's vision, passing, and patience to allow a play to develop, are all questionable.  He is not Doug Gilmour at all who was one of the best play makers in the game.  He took a hit to hang onto the puck long enough for passing options to open up because he could see plays developing ahead of time.  Gilmour also used Gretzky's office a lot to buy time.

 

Bennett's strength continues to be bringing the puck into the danger areas in front of the net as quickly as possible with his head down not looking and not caring who else is open.  But they are rarely caught off guard at the NHL level and Bennett is not big enough to play smash mouth "stop me if you can" hockey.   He doesn't bring pucks to the front of the net with consistent authority and unstoppabiliy like a Corey Perry.

 

But ya, just not smart. There are other options but he can't see them. He is too focused on individualism.  He is too used to his OHL days where teammates gave him the puck and he did everything himself.  Bennett is going the way of RNH, all speed through the neutral zone and then gives you nothing once he enters the offensive zone.

 

So sad.  He should move to the wing for the rest of he season and really learn to see the game as a winger first.  Then when he plays C again, he'll know to look for the wingers.

 

Bennett may be best as a LW from here on, we will have to see. Jankowski will be ready to next season and I would like to see him start at the 3rd line level. later this season or next season see how Tkachuk works on RW with Monahan and Gaudreau with Bennett joining Backlund and Frolik.

[conundrumed]

19 minutes ago, MAC331 said:

Bennett may be best as a LW from here on, we will have to see. Jankowski will be ready to next season and I would like to see him start at the 3rd line level. later this season or next season see how Tkachuk works on RW with Monahan and Gaudreau with Bennett joining Backlund and Frolik.

Sam needs some time at LW I think is all.

But he'll be a Center.

[MAC331]

3 minutes ago, conundrumed said:

Sam needs some time at LW I think is all.

But he'll be a Center.

I'm not so sure anymore.

[conundrumed]

Just now, MAC331 said:

I'm not so sure anymore.

Faith. lol

He will. He's young.

[MAC331]

Last 3 games have been good ones for the team. Silver lining with Gaudreau out is we may find out what Bennett and Monahan are made of. The aggressive style is back and looking good.

 

[cccsberg]

On 2016-11-18 at 3:20 PM, MAC331 said:

Bennett may be best as a LW from here on, we will have to see. Jankowski will be ready to next season and I would like to see him start at the 3rd line level. later this season or next season see how Tkachuk works on RW with Monahan and Gaudreau with Bennett joining Backlund and Frolik.

Concerns on Bennett are well-deserved, but I still believe he will make the adjustment as he grows and realizes he needs to mature his game.  He still brings a level of dynamic play that we don't see in Monahan, for instance which is really key for the future.  I would like to see Monahan on RW with Gaudreau and ?(not sure here), not Bennett.  Gaudreau is effective in driving play like a Centre so Bennett would be duplication and not the most effective use of assets.  

 

The next closest guy that could develop into an impact player is Jankowski, who we hopefully will see next game.  He should not be rushed, but hopefully will stick and start to show his true potential, which is still developing.  Backlund is solid as usual, and Stajan has played much better this year than the last couple so the focus really is on the youngsters, and that is just going to take time.... 

 

This season is still in a state of flux, with player development just as key as the focus on the playoffs, which is still within arm's length.  Getting ALL the guys on the same page, and pulling together as a team are really important and we'll see over the next 20 games or so if that continues to develop.

[MAC331]

5 minutes ago, cccsberg said:

Concerns on Bennett are well-deserved, but I still believe he will make the adjustment as he grows and realizes he needs to mature his game.  He still brings a level of dynamic play that we don't see in Monahan, for instance which is really key for the future.  I would like to see Monahan on RW with Gaudreau and ?(not sure here), not Bennett.  Gaudreau is effective in driving play like a Centre so Bennett would be duplication and not the most effective use of assets.  

 

The next closest guy that could develop into an impact player is Jankowski, who we hopefully will see next game.  He should not be rushed, but hopefully will stick and start to show his true potential, which is still developing.  Backlund is solid as usual, and Stajan has played much better this year than the last couple so the focus really is on the youngsters, and that is just going to take time.... 

 

This season is still in a state of flux, with player development just as key as the focus on the playoffs, which is still within arm's length.  Getting ALL the guys on the same page, and pulling together as a team are really important and we'll see over the next 20 games or so if that continues to develop.

I think we will find out some answers on a lot of these questions as the season progresses. I have no doubt Bennett can become a very good C and I think he needs to be flanked by these veterans so he learns. Monahan is as fundamentally sound a player as I have seen in a long time, he is a C and should stay there. He is like an Yzerman, nothing flashy simply does all the necessary things well. The element for the JG/SM line IMO is another threat that the opposition has to concern themselves with so the others can do their thing.

I think people will be surprised at how much potential Jankowski has in his game now and for the future,