So Where do we go from here? Analysis & Predictions

[cross16]

I think we need to get away from this idea that the 3m line is a shutdown line or out there to prevent goals. What line is not out there to prevent goals? IMO there is no such thing.

 

3m lines is used tactically because they can consistently drive play the other way and creating scoring chances despite who they play against. That is not a shutdown line, that is an offensive line, they just happen to be that fricken good. I think we need to adapt our thinking about how and why we even both labeling lines. IMO a shutdown line is a thing of the past. I honestly thing the only problem with the 3m line is Backlund has been snake bitten this year. His shooting % has dropped 4% and if that wasn't the case there are no complaints here. I think they could use a finisher on that line and someone who could shoot the puck but that's true of this whole team.

 

At the end of the day the depth of the Flames is just pretty much crap. You've got a struggling young player (mostly because he plays with crap) a rookie 3rd line center (tough positions) and then you've got 4 guys that really shouldn't be in the NHL on a good team. Hard for me to blame Gulutzan for this when the divide is so big. Why break up 2 excellent lines so you could make 3 lines that are probably average at best? It's too big a talent drop. 

 

To me the issue is why are the Flames so hell bent on keeping Lazar, Stajan, Brower, Stewart etc in the lineup when guys like Mangiapen and Klimchuk are in the minors but there is also no guarantee that fixes anything. 

[ABC923]

The unfortunate truth is that our forward pipeline is rather sparse.  Are Mangiapane and Klimchuk capable of pulling some nhl duties?  Sure.  Are they better than Lazar?  I'm not so sure.  And even if they are, that isn't a terribly high bar to clear.  Other prospects are even worse off.  Poirier and Shinkaruk are not likely to do much.  Maybe Foo will make it.  Not sure about Dube yet.  But when you compare our forward prospects to say our defense prospects, they are underwhelming.  Valimaki, Fox, Andersson and Kylington are all better prospect imo than any of our forwards.  It's one of the reasons I'm nervous for next season.  Who can realistically step up?  I doubt any can on the forward ranks, which means we are back to hoping guys like Bennett and Janko can progress their games without any of our other players regressing.  A hope and a prayer, really.

[cross16]

1 hour ago, ABC923 said:

The unfortunate truth is that our forward pipeline is rather sparse.  Are Mangiapane and Klimchuk capable of pulling some nhl duties?  Sure.  Are they better than Lazar?  I'm not so sure.  And even if they are, that isn't a terribly high bar to clear.  Other prospects are even worse off.  Poirier and Shinkaruk are not likely to do much.  Maybe Foo will make it.  Not sure about Dube yet.  But when you compare our forward prospects to say our defense prospects, they are underwhelming.  Valimaki, Fox, Andersson and Kylington are all better prospect imo than any of our forwards.  It's one of the reasons I'm nervous for next season.  Who can realistically step up?  I doubt any can on the forward ranks, which means we are back to hoping guys like Bennett and Janko can progress their games without any of our other players regressing.  A hope and a prayer, really.

 

Wouldn't say I disagree but my frustration comes from the lack of trying. Klimchuk is up for a game and looks good. Mangiapane up for a while and looks decent, probably needs work for sure, but he looked better than most of the guys playing right now.

 

Brouwer, Stajan, Lazar have all basically been crap all year, Stewart is crap and Hathaway is not going to provide you goals so why not try it another alternative? Maybe it doesn't work but I would say at least there is a chance it works. You KNOW it isn't going to work with what you are putting out there. I'm not sure when this organization is going to turn the corner into trusting it's young players more but it needs to happen soon. 

[travel_dude]

1 hour ago, cross16 said:

At the end of the day the depth of the Flames is just pretty much crap. You've got a struggling young player (mostly because he plays with crap) a rookie 3rd line center (tough positions) and then you've got 4 guys that really shouldn't be in the NHL on a good team. Hard for me to blame Gulutzan for this when the divide is so big. Why break up 2 excellent lines so you could make 3 lines that are probably average at best? It's too big a talent drop. 

 

 

So here's the problem. You have a 3rd line that is made up of two players struggling because they have played mostly with (insert name here).  When Mangiapane came up, he played with Janko and Hathaway.  When Klimchuk came up, he was limited to one game and 7 minutes.  The 3M line was kept together because they were great together.

No real experimentation to see if Frolik could move down to the 3rd line to spark them or even provide another type of player.  The only time it was broken up was during the Frolik injury and we got mostly Brouwer there.  There's a big problem right there.  

 

The obvious need was not addressed any time this season or the off-season.  A top 6 RW.  Get one (somehow) and you suddenly have options.  Maybe even have a decent enough player to help the 3rd line.  

 

7 minutes ago, cross16 said:

 

Wouldn't say I disagree but my frustration comes from the lack of trying. Klimchuk is up for a game and looks good. Mangiapane up for a while and looks decent, probably needs work for sure, but he looked better than most of the guys playing right now.

 

Brouwer, Stajan, Lazar have all basically been crap all year, Stewart is crap and Hathaway is not going to provide you goals so why not try it another alternative? Maybe it doesn't work but I would say at least there is a chance it works. You KNOW it isn't going to work with what you are putting out there. I'm not sure when this organization is going to turn the corner into trusting it's young players more but it needs to happen soon. 

 

I can;t even tell you what we have for depth.  No idea.  Haven't seen enough of it to comment.

I thought Andersson was better than Bart, Kulak and Stone during camp and looked good the game he played.

I thought Mangiapane looked good in his first game. 

Other than Klimchuk, did we even try anyone?

It takes a horrid start by Lack and and injury to Smith before we got an extended look at our tender depth.

 

It may not make a lot of sense to do it, but I think you have to turf the bottom 6 except for Janko and figure out what to do with Bennett.

The farm may be the only solution to this glut of crap players.  I include the new ones like Dube and Gawdin in that list.

See who plays the best and keep them up.

 

If we are eliminated early, then there is no reason to play any of the 4th line or anyone currently on the sideline.  What's the point?  Maybe give Lazar 3rd line RW and play it out?  Put Mangiapane or Poirier and let them go to town?

  

[robrob74]

 

Does this thin the lines too much? 

How long is Ferland out?

 

Gaudreau, Monahan, Bennett

Tkachuk, Backlund, xxx

Mangiapane, Jankowski, Frolik

Ferland/Brouwer, Stajan, Brouwer/Hathaway

 

i likes Ferland further down the depth chart because he made the depth deeper... 

[robrob74]

I don’t know!

 

[Cowtownguy]

20 minutes ago, robrob74 said:

 

Does this thin the lines too much? 

How long is Ferland out?

 

Gaudreau, Monahan, Bennett

Tkachuk, Backlund, xxx

Mangiapane, Jankowski, Frolik

Ferland/Brouwer, Stajan, Brouwer/Hathaway

 

i likes Ferland further down the depth chart because he made the depth deeper... 

 

19 minutes ago, robrob74 said:

I don’t know!

You two need to stop arguing like this. Take it to PM. 

[robrob74]

53 minutes ago, Cowtownguy said:

 

You two need to stop arguing like this. Take it to PM. 

 

?

 

the mobile site had a message I was going to reply to, and it saved  it twice, so I had to send something so it wouldn’t save it again...

[DirtyDeeds]

23 hours ago, tmac70 said:

With the season pretty much done, what's the order of business for next season. This club needs a forensic audit internal and players.

 

1) Remove the coaching staff, minute the season is done so should they.

2) Develop a plan. Decide what type of team you want hire acquire accordingly

3) Trades start by trading some of the old guard for the new system and let the cleansing begin.

4) So who stays, there needs to be a cleansing.

 

You create a new atmosphere by removing the old and stale. Ever one talks leadership I see very little on this team. Leaders put a team on their backs and pull them into the fight, time to move some letters and move forward. 

Pre Hire

 Stajan, Gio, Backs, Fro, Ferland, Mony JG, Benny, Hamilton and Brodie .

Post Hire

 Brower, Hammer, Janko, Hathaway, MT, Lazar, Kulak, Stone, Smith, Rittich, Verstig

 

The highlighted are players I consider keeping. I am on the fence with the underlined and would consider moving them or not extending next season.

BT is on the fence for me as well has been average in my books, I am fine with him staying nexrt season but if he can not make some hockey trades to retool this club, I remove him for someone that can.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Before they do any firing the team will to do the review of all players and coaching staff. Only after doing that, can they take everything and stir it up and decide what route they are going to go.

[JTech780]

After losing to Pittsburgh tonight, I watched a few of the post game interviews hoping to see players who were angry and disappointed to miss out on getting the win and that oh so important 2nd point. Instead there was a lot of back patting and "we played well tonight, and deserved 2 points", and that's coming from the so called leadership core Backlund, Brouwer and Gulutzan.

 

This feel good even though we lost attitude is exactly why we are on the outside of the playoff picture. This team just doesn't hate losing enough. The really good and great teams hate losing more than they like winning, and we don't seem to hate losing at all.

[travel_dude]

11 hours ago, JTech780 said:

After losing to Pittsburgh tonight, I watched a few of the post game interviews hoping to see players who were angry and disappointed to miss out on getting the win and that oh so important 2nd point. Instead there was a lot of back patting and "we played well tonight, and deserved 2 points", and that's coming from the so called leadership core Backlund, Brouwer and Gulutzan.

 

This feel good even though we lost attitude is exactly why we are on the outside of the playoff picture. This team just doesn't hate losing enough. The really good and great teams hate losing more than they like winning, and we don't seem to hate losing at all.

 

That's a little disturbing.  I feel that guys like Gaudreau are steaming inside.  Fierce competitors that get mad when the miss a shot or lose a game.  Why don't we have more of that?  If the coach is okay with a single point, then that is just wrong.  I remember him saying that getting it to overtime was a goal, since we were so good in OT.  Maybe we were, but we have lost 5/6 in OT.  5 points we gave away.  

[MAC331]

16 hours ago, cross16 said:

 

Wouldn't say I disagree but my frustration comes from the lack of trying. Klimchuk is up for a game and looks good. Mangiapane up for a while and looks decent, probably needs work for sure, but he looked better than most of the guys playing right now.

 

Brouwer, Stajan, Lazar have all basically been crap all year, Stewart is crap and Hathaway is not going to provide you goals so why not try it another alternative? Maybe it doesn't work but I would say at least there is a chance it works. You KNOW it isn't going to work with what you are putting out there. I'm not sure when this organization is going to turn the corner into trusting it's young players more but it needs to happen soon. 

Time to start looking towards next season.

[MAC331]

8 minutes ago, travel_dude said:

 

That's a little disturbing.  I feel that guys like Gaudreau are steaming inside.  Fierce competitors that get mad when the miss a shot or lose a game.  Why don't we have more of that?  If the coach is okay with a single point, then that is just wrong.  I remember him saying that getting it to overtime was a goal, since we were so good in OT.  Maybe we were, but we have lost 5/6 in OT.  5 points we gave away.  

I don't think it fair to say you "give" points away, someone is going to lose in OT.

[MAC331]

11 hours ago, JTech780 said:

After losing to Pittsburgh tonight, I watched a few of the post game interviews hoping to see players who were angry and disappointed to miss out on getting the win and that oh so important 2nd point. Instead there was a lot of back patting and "we played well tonight, and deserved 2 points", and that's coming from the so called leadership core Backlund, Brouwer and Gulutzan.

 

This feel good even though we lost attitude is exactly why we are on the outside of the playoff picture. This team just doesn't hate losing enough. The really good and great teams hate losing more than they like winning, and we don't seem to hate losing at all.

This is your own perception. I am sure everyone on this team knows their situation, throwing chairs around the room won't change what just happened. They have to keep the heads together and push forward for a better result next game.

[travel_dude]

1 hour ago, MAC331 said:

I don't think it fair to say you "give" points away, someone is going to lose in OT.

 

You play to get to OT, you are giving points away to the other teams, and possibly a 2nd point. 

We used to be unstoppable in OT.  Not so much anymore.   

[MAC331]

12 minutes ago, travel_dude said:

 

You play to get to OT, you are giving points away to the other teams, and possibly a 2nd point. 

We used to be unstoppable in OT.  Not so much anymore.   

Sometimes you hot sometimes you are not. We have the horses to do well with OT and should but lately we haven't capitalized on our chances. Last night I have no idea why Backlund thought it was time to take a skate around the net leaving his man wide open. We have all touch on the lack of scoring within the real game time and the reasons are even more pronounced.

[ABC923]

16 hours ago, JTech780 said:

After losing to Pittsburgh tonight, I watched a few of the post game interviews hoping to see players who were angry and disappointed to miss out on getting the win and that oh so important 2nd point. Instead there was a lot of back patting and "we played well tonight, and deserved 2 points", and that's coming from the so called leadership core Backlund, Brouwer and Gulutzan.

 

This feel good even though we lost attitude is exactly why we are on the outside of the playoff picture. This team just doesn't hate losing enough. The really good and great teams hate losing more than they like winning, and we don't seem to hate losing at all.

I would say there is a time and a place for everything.  We could certainly use some of that anger your talking about earlier in the season, but at this point I don't think it would be helpful.  The stakes are high, and guys are already gripping their sticks a bit too tightly.  And when, by all accounts, you outplayed your opponent for the most part, I think positive reinforcement is more useful.

As the old saying goes, when you're nearing the end of a slump you start losing games you deserve to win.  When nearing the end of a streak, you win a few games you deserve to lose.  Having the right attitude is important in both scenarios, and it (in my opinion) shouldn't be the same in all cases.

[Flyerfan52]

6 hours ago, ABC923 said:

I would say there is a time and a place for everything.  We could certainly use some of that anger your talking about earlier in the season, but at this point I don't think it would be helpful.  The stakes are high, and guys are already gripping their sticks a bit too tightly.  And when, by all accounts, you outplayed your opponent for the most part, I think positive reinforcement is more useful.

As the old saying goes, when you're nearing the end of a slump you start losing games you deserve to win.  When nearing the end of a streak, you win a few games you deserve to lose.  Having the right attitude is important in both scenarios, and it (in my opinion) shouldn't be the same in all cases.

The proper way is savor a win for a few minutes & regret the loss for the same. Then start working to win the next game.

Approaching the season in 7 or 10 game stretchs sounds good but not getting too high after a win or too low after a loss works better.

Every game is a new opportunity to build on a win or make up for a loss.

Both streaks & slumps end.

[MAC331]

12 hours ago, Flyerfan52 said:

The proper way is savor a win for a few minutes & regret the loss for the same. Then start working to win the next game.

Approaching the season in 7 or 10 game stretchs sounds good but not getting too high after a win or too low after a loss works better.

Every game is a new opportunity to build on a win or make up for a loss.

Both streaks & slumps end.

I agree FF, these guys have 82 games and a rigorous travel schedule to keep. People don't hear what they want or expect in these interviews and flip out.

[JTech780]

The other day on the morning show Warrener made a couple good observations or suggestions. The first one was that this team is missing a Brian Skrudland or Mike Keane type player and leader, that player that will do whatever it takes win and will make sure the rest of team is doing the same. I think they thought they were getting that with Brouwer, but it has been a complete disaster. The one problem with that is that the league has changed, teams don't look to that character guy to lead the team, teams are looking to the star players to be the leaders, which is another area where we lack.

 

The second point that he made was that this team needs to do a better job of bringing in past players who live in the city into the team to be around the players. Warrener's example was that just about every player on this team could learn a ton from a guy like Lanny McDonald on and off the ice. I have noticed that aside from Conroy and Gelinas that this team doesn't do a good job of keeping past players around the organization. It doesn't even have to be in management roles, it could be in a part time skills or associate coach or something like, call it whatever you want, but let's get more former Flames around the team and the building.

[travel_dude]

10 minutes ago, JTech780 said:

The other day on the morning show Warrener made a couple good observations or suggestions. The first one was that this team is missing a Brian Skrudland or Mike Keane type player and leader, that player that will do whatever it takes win and will make sure the rest of team is doing the same. I think they thought they were getting that with Brouwer, but it has been a complete disaster. The one problem with that is that the league has changed, teams don't look to that character guy to lead the team, teams are looking to the star players to be the leaders, which is another area where we lack.

 

The second point that he made was that this team needs to do a better job of bringing in past players who live in the city into the team to be around the players. Warrener's example was that just about every player on this team could learn a ton from a guy like Lanny McDonald on and off the ice. I have noticed that aside from Conroy and Gelinas that this team doesn't do a good job of keeping past players around the organization. It doesn't even have to be in management roles, it could be in a part time skills or associate coach or something like, call it whatever you want, but let's get more former Flames around the team and the building.

 

Skills coaches alone would help.  Weak efforts on breakaways and shoot outs.

Poor execution of PP's.

Inability to get point shots on net.

Players struggling with faceoffs.

Skating with and without the puck.

Passing.

 

It's like we have a bunch of junior players that don't know how o deal with NHL presure when the have the puck.

We are not a fast team, but we look desperately slow unless we are looking to score a shortie.

 

I can't say if the style of play preached is the cause or whether they can;t execute the style with any speed.

 

 

[MAC331]

5 minutes ago, JTech780 said:

The other day on the morning show Warrener made a couple good observations or suggestions. The first one was that this team is missing a Brian Skrudland or Mike Keane type player and leader, that player that will do whatever it takes win and will make sure the rest of team is doing the same. I think they thought they were getting that with Brouwer, but it has been a complete disaster. The one problem with that is that the league has changed, teams don't look to that character guy to lead the team, teams are looking to the star players to be the leaders, which is another area where we lack.

 

The second point that he made was that this team needs to do a better job of bringing in past players who live in the city into the team to be around the players. Warrener's example was that just about every player on this team could learn a ton from a guy like Lanny McDonald on and off the ice. I have noticed that aside from Conroy and Gelinas that this team doesn't do a good job of keeping past players around the organization. It doesn't even have to be in management roles, it could be in a part time skills or associate coach or something like, call it whatever you want, but let's get more former Flames around the team and the building.

I wouldn't disagree with the need for a Skrudland or Keane type player only because we have a number of lead by example types. I think Tkachuk has some potential in this capacity but also a guy like Gallagher MON could help. I also agree Brouwer was who BT thought might help I this regard, maybe to some degree he helped but not visably. 

The Flames Alumni is actually quite well organized here in Calgary but like anything else you want the guys you hired doing the job.

I keep going back to the team not being at that developed stage to be consistent winners. The young core is still young and with Bennett not working out the task becomes even harder, You couple that with not a great support group in your veteran players the you get what we have currently.

I would say BT with a few savy trades this offseason could get this corrected.

[cross16]

16 minutes ago, JTech780 said:

The other day on the morning show Warrener made a couple good observations or suggestions. The first one was that this team is missing a Brian Skrudland or Mike Keane type player and leader, that player that will do whatever it takes win and will make sure the rest of team is doing the same. I think they thought they were getting that with Brouwer, but it has been a complete disaster. The one problem with that is that the league has changed, teams don't look to that character guy to lead the team, teams are looking to the star players to be the leaders, which is another area where we lack.

 

This was a terrific segment. Would highly recommend listening to the podcast on it as I thought Warrener did a great job driving home how important this part of the game is. I know we spend alot of time talking about the leadership of captains and coaches but I thought Warrener was great at explaining that its more than that. Coaches are limited in how much they can do so you need those players, that can play, but also can help younger players and others with finer points of the game. He gave multiple examples of times in his career where it was a player, not a coach, who would call a team out for an unaccetable effort and he seemed to make the point that it's more effective. I'm of the beelif that great teams hold each other accountable and it's not always from the coach so I really enjoyed the segment. Thought it was very eye opening. Not sure how much I agree with him on the older players hanging around type of idea but I don't have enough experience to say he's wrong.

 

Also gave a hilarious moment when he went on a mini rant about how the Flames have no one to show Bennett/Monahan the ropes and where is that veteran center that can help them out. Peter Klein responded with "well Stajan is there" and put the focus back on Monahan/Bennett for not being good enough. Long pause from Warrerer.... and then something like "i'm going to let you think about that statement and get back to me Klein" as it was one of the stupidest things he'd ever heard. 

[MAC331]

18 minutes ago, cross16 said:

 

This was a terrific segment. Would highly recommend listening to the podcast on it as I thought Warrener did a great job driving home how important this part of the game is. I know we spend alot of time talking about the leadership of captains and coaches but I thought Warrener was great at explaining that its more than that. Coaches are limited in how much they can do so you need those players, that can play, but also can help younger players and others with finer points of the game. He gave multiple examples of times in his career where it was a player, not a coach, who would call a team out for an unaccetable effort and he seemed to make the point that it's more effective. I'm of the beelif that great teams hold each other accountable and it's not always from the coach so I really enjoyed the segment. Thought it was very eye opening. Not sure how much I agree with him on the older players hanging around type of idea but I don't have enough experience to say he's wrong.

 

Also gave a hilarious moment when he went on a mini rant about how the Flames have no one to show Bennett/Monahan the ropes and where is that veteran center that can help them out. Peter Klein responded with "well Stajan is there" and put the focus back on Monahan/Bennett for not being good enough. Long pause from Warrerer.... and then something like "i'm going to let you think about that statement and get back to me Klein" as it was one of the stupidest things he'd ever heard. 

It is all relevant, players have to respect and play for each other or there is just to much individualism. I appreciate that BT tried with players like Brouwer, Versteeg, Jagr and Stajan and I'm sure they helped in some ways. I think Hudler did more to help Gaudreau and Monahan than anything these guys have done.

BT needs to be very calculating towards the needs of this team this offseason.

[conundrumed]

23 hours ago, cross16 said:

 

This was a terrific segment. Would highly recommend listening to the podcast on it as I thought Warrener did a great job driving home how important this part of the game is. I know we spend alot of time talking about the leadership of captains and coaches but I thought Warrener was great at explaining that its more than that. Coaches are limited in how much they can do so you need those players, that can play, but also can help younger players and others with finer points of the game. He gave multiple examples of times in his career where it was a player, not a coach, who would call a team out for an unaccetable effort and he seemed to make the point that it's more effective. I'm of the beelif that great teams hold each other accountable and it's not always from the coach so I really enjoyed the segment. Thought it was very eye opening. Not sure how much I agree with him on the older players hanging around type of idea but I don't have enough experience to say he's wrong.

 

Also gave a hilarious moment when he went on a mini rant about how the Flames have no one to show Bennett/Monahan the ropes and where is that veteran center that can help them out. Peter Klein responded with "well Stajan is there" and put the focus back on Monahan/Bennett for not being good enough. Long pause from Warrerer.... and then something like "i'm going to let you think about that statement and get back to me Klein" as it was one of the stupidest things he'd ever heard. 

I love Warrener. He's such a no BS guy and doesn't worry about hurting feelings.

My favourite part of between periods at pre-season games is the autograph signings alumni guys. They're so easy to talk to and when they close the signing area at the start of the next period you can move away and still talk to them for half a period, such good guys.

Warrener, Otto, Macoun, I mean you!!

Current players are hard to talk to because they're young and awkward. The alumni guys, wow, they're mature and out-going to talk with.