Burn it Down?

[DirtyDeeds]

1 hour ago, Cowtownguy said:

I was thinking that they needed to be bag skated after the Montreal game. The problem was that the short-term schedule was quite hectic, and they needed the recuperation. 

Apparently they had a player only team meeting to discuss the performance in Montreal.

[tmac70]

33 minutes ago, DirtyDeeds said:

Apparently they had a player only team meeting to discuss the performance in Montreal.

Apparently they never showed up for that either

[TheFan99]

Just now, stubblejumper1 said:

 

What I found most appalling was the effort on the Penguins 9th goal.  Neal finally scores with a couple minutes left and the rest of the team can't even put in one last shift to close out the game.  They come out coasting and get scored on by a 40 year old career fourth liner (Matt Cullen).   It is 7nacceptable to hang the goalie out to dry in that situation.  

They just seem like they're not jacked to win. I know hes young but in post game interviews Chucky seems like hes pissed at the team, but is careful with his words. Inspiring speach produces a "Ya, lets do it, but whens payday" They're all good players, but will they sacrifice everything in them to win? 

[Heartbreaker]

6 hours ago, TheFan99 said:

I agree with a bag skate until they puke. If, they win its 7-5. There isnt any diving for pucks. The, team is just in disarray. Maybe, just too many millennials on the team. 

 

As Millennials are defined as a group of people born between 1981 and 1996, they currently monopolize the 22-37 age group. The only active players that would meet the GenX criteria are Kunitz (CHI), Marleau (TOR), Chara (BOS), Chimera (UFA), Thornton (SJS), Luongo (FLA), and Cullen (PIT). I don't think you'd get them all cheap, but I definitely think that for the right return, any of them could be had. Then you could round out the team with the harder working, and much more reliable GenZ kids that are getting waived or released. 

 

I like your thinking! 

Love. 

[travel_dude]

10 hours ago, tmac70 said:

Have to agree at this point. Was Smith to blame for a couple goals yes , but not all. Watch the replays its blown coverage, bad decisions by Dman and Forwards, the hardest working guy for the Flames was the goal light. Chucky makes a statement that "we will be better" after the MTL game, he must be having a hard time eating that statement.

 

At present this is not on BP he's pissed and right fully so. Is the WSH game  the make or break game of the year no however, Real men step up to adversity, let's see how the millennial's react to this challenge.

 

I really don't care whose fault it is on individual goals.  First goal Smith was crouched so low that there was almost room over his head to score.  He's staying in deep in his net always trying to cover the pass.  Crosby is the threat and he's directly in front of you.  The 2nd goal was a PP, and probably unstoppable unless you are out a lttle more to limit the distance between goalie and Hornqvist.  3rd goal went directly at SMith's blocker side, but the rebound came out the opposite side.  The rebound was the problem, better D coverage or not.

 

And that was the game in three shots.  You can't blame Smith for them, but you can say he could have played them better.  Maybe doesn't change the outcome, but maybe it changes momentum.  Make a great save on a PP, the team might rebound.  Make that early save on Crosby and the game doesn;t get away from you in 20 minutes.  Make two saves in the last minute of play and you only are down by 2.

 

MTL, COL, and NYR would have been blowouts the way Smith has been playing.  

 

 

[TheFan99]

1 hour ago, Heartbreaker said:

 

As Millennials are defined as a group of people born between 1981 and 1996, they currently monopolize the 22-37 age group. The only active players that would meet the GenX criteria are Kunitz (CHI), Marleau (TOR), Chara (BOS), Chimera (UFA), Thornton (SJS), Luongo (FLA), and Cullen (PIT). I don't think you'd get them all cheap, but I definitely think that for the right return, any of them could be had. Then you could round out the team with the harder working, and much more reliable GenZ kids that are getting waived or released. 

 

I like your thinking! 

Love. 

I saw that millenials were born between 1989-2000. Most of them are whiny little wimps that need constant cuddling. How, many millennials were on the last 4 cup winning teams? Zero. Once Crosby, Toews and Getzlaf retire its going to be millennial central. Did, u see that stick check last night? 1 body check a game.

[MAC331]

7 hours ago, Heartbreaker said:

 

As Millennials are defined as a group of people born between 1981 and 1996, they currently monopolize the 22-37 age group. The only active players that would meet the GenX criteria are Kunitz (CHI), Marleau (TOR), Chara (BOS), Chimera (UFA), Thornton (SJS), Luongo (FLA), and Cullen (PIT). I don't think you'd get them all cheap, but I definitely think that for the right return, any of them could be had. Then you could round out the team with the harder working, and much more reliable GenZ kids that are getting waived or released. 

 

I like your thinking! 

Love. 

These facts do raise some real questions going forward for the mix of aging fans expectations and those being delivered not only by younger players but also a changing game.

If serious hitting and character are going to be removed from the game, matching up your players talents to carry out the systems or game plan become more important. All we are hearing now is analytics this and analytics that will dictate the future in sports. Give it 3 to5 years and we wont recognize the game anymore. Soccer on skates.

[tmac70]

3 hours ago, travel_dude said:

 

I really don't care whose fault it is on individual goals.  First goal Smith was crouched so low that there was almost room over his head to score.  He's staying in deep in his net always trying to cover the pass.  Crosby is the threat and he's directly in front of you.  The 2nd goal was a PP, and probably unstoppable unless you are out a lttle more to limit the distance between goalie and Hornqvist.  3rd goal went directly at SMith's blocker side, but the rebound came out the opposite side.  The rebound was the problem, better D coverage or not.

 

And that was the game in three shots.  You can't blame Smith for them, but you can say he could have played them better.  Maybe doesn't change the outcome, but maybe it changes momentum.  Make a great save on a PP, the team might rebound.  Make that early save on Crosby and the game doesn;t get away from you in 20 minutes.  Make two saves in the last minute of play and you only are down by 2.

 

MTL, COL, and NYR would have been blowouts the way Smith has been playing.  

 

 

Smitty has not been good and people's views differ. As I will agree with you some of the goals are soft, results could have differed. I am with Peter's with his analysis, Before you dissect the goal tending the effort in front of him has to be better. IMHO you have a bunch of players that talk a good game but when it comes to walking the talk its all hot air. Teams that put it on the line and buy in to this type of thinking win championships.

[travel_dude]

3 minutes ago, tmac70 said:

Smitty has not been good and people's views differ. As I will agree with you some of the goals are soft, results could have differed. I am with Peter's with his analysis, Before you dissect the goal tending the effort in front of him has to be better. IMHO you have a bunch of players that talk a good game but when it comes to walking the talk its all hot air. Teams that put it on the line and buy in to this type of thinking win championships.

 

IN other words, Peters doesn;t know what the goalie is.  Difficult to determine, except when comparing two goalies.  Does not want to throw in the towel because the other option is the backup.  I get that.  Good strategy if you feel the goalie can stop the majority of stops in an even game.  Check out Smith's comments from practice over in the Goaltending thread.     

[MAC331]

4 minutes ago, tmac70 said:

Smitty has not been good and people's views differ. As I will agree with you some of the goals are soft, results could have differed. I am with Peter's with his analysis, Before you dissect the goal tending the effort in front of him has to be better. IMHO you have a bunch of players that talk a good game but when it comes to walking the talk its all hot air. Teams that put it on the line and buy in to this type of thinking win championships.

Peters as to take on some of this. I can understand using October to see and know what you have with certain arrangements but eventually he has to settle in on who is best to play with who. We see confusion out there and I can understand why we got our pants kicked. I was trying to see who was playing with who and it seemed the lines and pairings were different almost every period. Time to make some decisions if we want some consistency out of the players.

[kehatch]

In the nhl.com lists of best players the Flames had 1 player in the top 50 (Gaudreau 35).  Washington had 5 (Ovechkin 5, Kuznetsov 27, Holtby 29, Karlsson 38, Backstrom 39).  The Flames didn't have anyone in the top 20 lists for C, D, or goal (Gaudreau was 12 on the wingers list).  Since the cap was introduced in 05/06 no team has won without being top loaded with talent.  These teams all had a top end C, and usually two.  Most had a top end goalie.  

 

Gaudreau is an elite offensive talent.  But he isn't that elite.  Last season he was 18 in scoring and that was his best offensive season.  Monahan is an elite goal scorer, but again, not that elite (tied for 27 in goals last season).  If we are going to win with these guys at the top they are going to have to do more then be good offensively.  But right now they are liabilities defensively and bring very little else to the table.  It goes beyond that.  Our D isn't even strong on paper anymore and our goal is a mess.  What we have (on paper) is good forward depth, and that isn't performing.  

 

If the Flames want to win with our current roster we need to figure out how to win in other ways.  Until our top guys commit to playing a certain way, the coaches figure out how to balance our line ups, and we get some solid goal tending we aren't going to be a great (or even good) team.  I am starting to seriously question if we have the right roster makeup to deliver on any of that.  

[tmac70]

1 minute ago, travel_dude said:

 

IN other words, Peters doesn;t know what the goalie is.  Difficult to determine, except when comparing two goalies.  Does not want to throw in the towel because the other option is the backup.  I get that.  Good strategy if you feel the goalie can stop the majority of stops in an even game.  Check out Smith's comments from practice over in the Goaltending thread.     

I read it listened to it, I have not issue with. He knows he has to be better but so also do 22 other players. So we played 2 solid defensive games this year, BOS, NSH how many goals were scored, Yeah 1. We can play the style required to be a good team, but its inconsistent, my questions is why. What drives me over the edge is when the players especially our captain consistently make post game remarks as they were the better club, we didn't show up!! So why the Blockchain is that? For me the WSH game is not a must win its a character test.

[flames-fan-in-jets-land]

2 minutes ago, kehatch said:

In the nhl.com lists of best players the Flames had 1 player in the top 50 (Gaudreau 35).  Washington had 5 (Ovechkin 5, Kuznetsov 27, Holtby 29, Karlsson 38, Backstrom 39).  The Flames didn't have anyone in the top 20 lists for C, D, or goal (Gaudreau was 12 on the wingers list).  Since the cap was introduced in 05/06 no team has won without being top loaded with talent.  These teams all had a top end C, and usually two.  Most had a top end goalie.  

 

Gaudreau is an elite offensive talent.  But he isn't that elite.  Last season he was 18 in scoring and that was his best offensive season.  Monahan is an elite goal scorer, but again, not that elite (tied for 27 in goals last season).  If we are going to win with these guys at the top they are going to have to do more then be good offensively.  But right now they are liabilities defensively and bring very little else to the table.  It goes beyond that.  Our D isn't even strong on paper anymore and our goal is a mess.  What we have (on paper) is good forward depth, and that isn't performing.  

 

If the Flames want to win with our current roster we need to figure out how to win in other ways.  Until our top guys commit to playing a certain way, the coaches figure out how to balance our line ups, and we get some solid goal tending we aren't going to be a great (or even good) team.  I am starting to seriously question if we have the right roster makeup to deliver on any of that.  

See I think for the most part the team isnt nearly as bad as the record shows, even at .500 hockey 10 games in. What I cant get around is if you look at the first Preds game and the Boston game versus the Habs and Penguins games you would think it was two completely different teams. How does a team play so differently with the same lineup? Regardless of who sits, whos in net, whos lined with who, nothing will change unless that issue is addressed, and to be honest, I have no idea how you teach players to want and care.

[MAC331]

6 minutes ago, flames-fan-in-jets-land said:

See I think for the most part the team isnt nearly as bad as the record shows, even at .500 hockey 10 games in. What I cant get around is if you look at the first Preds game and the Boston game versus the Habs and Penguins games you would think it was two completely different teams. How does a team play so differently with the same lineup? Regardless of who sits, whos in net, whos lined with who, nothing will change unless that issue is addressed, and to be honest, I have no idea how you teach players to want and care.

I think all the experimenting and changes have led to the problem. These players want to win as much as we want to see them win. We tend to forget this to fast.

[Cowtownguy]

8 hours ago, Heartbreaker said:

 

As Millennials are defined as a group of people born between 1981 and 1996, they currently monopolize the 22-37 age group. The only active players that would meet the GenX criteria are Kunitz (CHI), Marleau (TOR), Chara (BOS), Chimera (UFA), Thornton (SJS), Luongo (FLA), and Cullen (PIT). I don't think you'd get them all cheap, but I definitely think that for the right return, any of them could be had. Then you could round out the team with the harder working, and much more reliable GenZ kids that are getting waived or released. 

 

I like your thinking! 

Love. 

Correct. we are now dealing with generation I or generation Z that are supposedly characterized by "bulldozing parents". Their parents bulldoze any challenges or obstacles in their way. I am not sure that I buy that sort of generational research, but that is what is claimed to be taking place. Suicides are significantly higher for this group. I am not sure that I believe this is a generational effect or just a reflection of our overall society trajectory. 

[flames-fan-in-jets-land]

1 minute ago, MAC331 said:

I think all the experimenting and changes have led to the problem. These players want to win as much as we want to see them win. We tend to forget this to fast.

There were a few examples against the Pens where I players wanted to win it sure didnt appear that way.

I can forgive BP somewhat for the line juggling. 1) it's still early. 2) Games like the Pens game, eventually you gotta start trying anything to get some sort of spark. How much youll learn once its 6-0 I dont know but  werent these boards critical of GG for not being line flexible?

[flames-fan-in-jets-land]

2 minutes ago, Cowtownguy said:

Correct. we are now dealing with generation I or generation Z that are supposedly characterized by "bulldozing parents". Their parents bulldoze any challenges or obstacles in their way. I am not sure that I buy that sort of generational research, but that is what is claimed to be taking place. Suicides are significantly higher for this group. I am not sure that I believe this is a generational effect or just a reflection of our overall society trajectory. 

I have to disagree, from a hockey player stanpoint anyway. I'm pretty sure any player that expects to be coddled wouldn't make it to draft worthy status. If they do then a long line of coaches,teammates,scouts, etc arent doing their job.

[tmac70]

16 minutes ago, MAC331 said:

Peters as to take on some of this. I can understand using October to see and know what you have with certain arrangements but eventually he has to settle in on who is best to play with who. We see confusion out there and I can understand why we got our pants kicked. I was trying to see who was playing with who and it seemed the lines and pairings were different almost every period. Time to make some decisions if we want some consistency out of the players.

See and we disagree on this as well. These players have all played top level hockey for years, All Peter's is doing is trying to create a spark of some sort with anyone, unfortunate he is trying to burn wet wood. How many line up changes pairing changes mid game did we see in the NSH, BOS game, none. This roster has been below average on its play this year with the exception of 2 possibly 3 games. What I see is lazy poor decision and piss poor commitment to what is necessary to win. This club is and acts like your typical millennial's, I showed up that should be good enough pay me. Some of these guys make $81,000 a game to play 18- 20 minutes. Rookies make $9,000.00 a game for 8-10 minutes. Sigh, and all  that is required is that you be put 110% in for 30-45 seconds a time, Blockchain me. Its to bad pay could not be based on effort, they would all starve. 

[MAC331]

35 minutes ago, tmac70 said:

See and we disagree on this as well. These players have all played top level hockey for years, All Peter's is doing is trying to create a spark of some sort with anyone, unfortunate he is trying to burn wet wood. How many line up changes pairing changes mid game did we see in the NSH, BOS game, none. This roster has been below average on its play this year with the exception of 2 possibly 3 games. What I see is lazy poor decision and piss poor commitment to what is necessary to win. This club is and acts like your typical millennial's, I showed up that should be good enough pay me. Some of these guys make $81,000 a game to play 18- 20 minutes. Rookies make $9,000.00 a game for 8-10 minutes. Sigh, and all  that is required is that you be put 110% in for 30-45 seconds a time, Blockchain me. Its to bad pay could not be based on effort, they would all starve. 

You are correct we disagree with what is going on but that is nothing new. LOL

[kehatch]

1 hour ago, flames-fan-in-jets-land said:

See I think for the most part the team isnt nearly as bad as the record shows, even at .500 hockey 10 games in. What I cant get around is if you look at the first Preds game and the Boston game versus the Habs and Penguins games you would think it was two completely different teams. How does a team play so differently with the same lineup? Regardless of who sits, whos in net, whos lined with who, nothing will change unless that issue is addressed, and to be honest, I have no idea how you teach players to want and care.

 

Any team can look good against any other team in short stretches. The worst team in the league can dominate the best once in awhile. The difference between bad, good, and great teams isn't measured over a 2 game stretch. Consistency is the measuring stick. The Flames don't have it. 

 

Do I think the team is terrible? No. I think they are decent and if they can get mediocre goal tending they will compete for a playoff spot. But they aren't a team ready to compete for a cup and they are severely limited in options to improve the roster. 

[The_People1]

16 hours ago, TheFan99 said:

I agree with a bag skate until they puke. If, they win its 7-5. There isnt any diving for pucks. The, team is just in disarray. Maybe, just too many millennials on the team. 

 

Certainly different motivational strategies for different generations.  

 

Bag skate was for men in the 80s and 90s.  Then came video game era of the 90s and early 2000s. To motivate the 2010s and beyond... have to give nonstop positive reinforcement, create a culture that embraces fun, offer lots of perks at practice, give them lots of time for personal projects, give back to the community, etc.

[The_People1]

35 minutes ago, kehatch said:

 

Do I think the team is terrible? No. I think they are decent and if they can get mediocre goal tending they will compete for a playoff spot. But they aren't a team ready to compete for a cup and they are severely limited in options to improve the roster. 

 

Ya I agree.

 

What do you think about trading Giordano?  Is that where a retool needs to begin?  And would you prescribe a year or two of stocking up picks to rebuild the depth and farm (a.k.a. not quite tanking but just focused on amassing high picks)?

[kehatch]

Just now, The_People1 said:

 

Ya I agree.

 

What do you think about trading Giordano?  Is that where a retool needs to begin?  And would you prescribe a year or two of stocking up picks to rebuild the depth and farm (a.k.a. not quite tanking but just focused on amassing high picks)?

 

Giordano is the only top D we have. Trade him and your not even decent anymore. I don't see the ownership signing off on staying a cap team burning through Gaudreau, Monahan, Lindholm, Neal, etc contracts while icing a poor team and stockpiling draft picks.

 

As long as we have those guys under contract we are going to be trying to put the best team possible on the ice. That will include trading away futures (within reason) to do it. That also includes keeping your captain and best D. 

[tmac70]

1 minute ago, The_People1 said:

 

Certainly different motivational strategies for different generations.  

 

Bag skate was for men in the 80s and 90s.  Then came video game era of the 90s and early 2000s. To motivate the 2010s and beyond... have to give nonstop positive reinforcement, create a culture that embraces fun, offer lots of perks at practice, give them lots of time for personal projects, give back to the community, etc.

I sat  with Tim Hunter ( former flame) who is now head coach of junior club and asked if coaching has changed His answer  and is Direct quote is its like baby sitting now not coaching. The heavy handed method doesn't work, these kids fold like a cheap tent when or if they face any adversity. He said they are just rattled cause they can't even make toast to eat, they have no idea. Sit them down cut them or bench them the fold its parents agents and grandparents rath

[The_People1]

1 minute ago, kehatch said:

 

Giordano is the only top D we have. Trade him and your not even decent anymore. I don't see the ownership signing off on staying a cap team burning through Gaudreau, Monahan, Lindholm, Neal, etc contracts while icing a poor team and stockpiling draft picks.

 

As long as we have those guys under contract we are going to be trying to put the best team possible on the ice. That will include trading away futures (within reason) to do it. That also includes keeping your captain and best D. 

 

Right that's the ideal path forward but like you said, we have no more futures to trade.  Who is worth anything in our system that can get us what we need, ie stud goaltending, stud C, and more RHS RD upgrades?  The sane strategy is to draft those missing pieces ourselves.  

 

Something has to give because as much as ownership doesn't want to ice a poor team, that's what we kind of have right now.

 

And best D, how many more years is left in the tank?