GDT - Sharks @ FLAMES - Tues 22 March 2022

[travel_dude]

Sutter really should have called a time out after the 3rd goal.

The team was mad and had just finished routine that blew up in their faces.

This is like the losses in Anaheim we used to have.

Winning the game and somehow give it away.

Almost like we have some mental block.

 

Can't really put my finger on it.

At some point Sutter reverted to old lines and we got a little stale.

Need a third option.

 

[robrob74]

3 minutes ago, travel_dude said:

 

Goal 1 - nothing shot from the wall.  Not screened or tipped.

Goal 2 - on the goal line and left a big gap.

Goal 3 - terrible change left the players out of sorts, got a piece.

Goal 4 - not a lot of chance, but he stopped it.  Just trickled in once he snow angeled.

 

ya, I also wonder as it kind of reminds me of Buffalo too. A nothing game kind of, they played a bit better tonight than Buffalo, but we’re almost as sloppy? Maybe not quite though…

[travel_dude]

Overreaction perhaps, but we need to get Mangiapane going again.

Something just not right.

Mange seems to be off a bit, perhaps by not having Backlund.

Toffee seems to have lost his edge.

Maybe too many lines, not enogh time to adjust.

 

Top line

Mange-Backlund-Toffee

Coleman-Dube-Jarnkrok

4th line

 

Or should it be:

 

Coleman-Backlund-Dube

Mange-Jarnkrok-Toffee

[rocketdoctor]

Apart from the first 10 minutes we did not look engaged for large parts of this.

 

Went 2-0 up and thought it was going to be an easy night.

 

Go Flames Go!

 

[travel_dude]

I will say this.  The number of shots from the high slot and point that missed the net was extremely frustrating.  I can live with blocked shots, but not even being close to the net is bad.  Maybe someone snuck in and warped all of the sticks.

 

The turning point for me was the missed PS.  After that, the team only looked really dangerous in the last minutes of play.  Somehow, all that pressure and we didn't force them to take a penalty.  

 

Move on.  Sutter didn't even want to talk after the game, which means he was hopping mad.  Didn't want to talk about goaltending.  Or the frustrating to watch D-zone play on the 2 quick goals.

[taz89]

30 minutes ago, travel_dude said:

...  Sutter didn't even want to talk after the game, which means he was hopping mad.  Didn't want to talk about goaltending.  Or the frustrating to watch D-zone play on the 2 quick goals.

I would imagine Sutter was like this after the game:

 

[Sarasti]

Yeah this was a tough one.

Sharks are the new Anaheim curse.

One more chance to get a dub against them id prefer not to be swept in the season series.

 

The shots that missed the net really killed us as there were no second opportunities.

 

I think we missed close to 20 times and that, to me, is unacceptable.

 

Oh well. On to the next one.

[travel_dude]

6 minutes ago, Sarasti said:

Yeah this was a tough one.

Sharks are the new Anaheim curse.

One more chance to get a dub against them id prefer not to be swept in the season series.

 

The shots that missed the net really killed us as there were no second opportunities.

 

I think we missed close to 20 times and that, to me, is unacceptable.

 

Oh well. On to the next one.

 

They were always a tough matchup for us.  Doesn't matter if they are a playoff team or not.  Meier and Hertl and Couture are tough to play against.  Big team that doesn't allow much in the middle.  

[cross16]

Sharks have been tough this year because I think the Flames have played down to their level. Sharks don't really have the team that I think can hang with many for 60 mins but hey have enough that if you let them they can score goal in bunches. 

 

I would bet that is why Sutter was made. Flames weren't ready to go the full 60 mins in this one. 

[conundrumed]

2 hours ago, cross16 said:

Sharks have been tough this year because I think the Flames have played down to their level. Sharks don't really have the team that I think can hang with many for 60 mins but hey have enough that if you let them they can score goal in bunches. 

 

I would bet that is why Sutter was made. Flames weren't ready to go the full 60 mins in this one. 

The Sharks really jammed up the middle of the ice in the 3rd. Well played on their part. We need to adjust for that style. We will. Reimer made 10 bell saves to close it out, but we were terrorizing them.

Not concerned. Their 4th goal was a horrible bounce, it happens.

[travel_dude]

1 hour ago, conundrumed said:

The Sharks really jammed up the middle of the ice in the 3rd. Well played on their part. We need to adjust for that style. We will. Reimer made 10 bell saves to close it out, but we were terrorizing them.

Not concerned. Their 4th goal was a horrible bounce, it happens.

 

In some way, we need a game like that to send a message.  The goalie let the team down a bit, but you can't play that crappy in front of him on those goals.  Marky has a bad one now and then.  Shilly was really mad after the tying goal, which he should be.  An OT win would be okay, but just gives the players an out they didn't deserve.

 

Live and learn.  We will see a team or two that jams up the middle.  Solve the problem.

[conundrumed]

30 minutes ago, travel_dude said:

 

In some way, we need a game like that to send a message.  The goalie let the team down a bit, but you can't play that crappy in front of him on those goals.  Marky has a bad one now and then.  Shilly was really mad after the tying goal, which he should be.  An OT win would be okay, but just gives the players an out they didn't deserve.

 

Live and learn.  We will see a team or two that jams up the middle.  Solve the problem.

Take your lumps and learn.

I'd have taken Marky out after the spear. Too unglued.

[robrob74]

4 hours ago, cross16 said:

Sharks have been tough this year because I think the Flames have played down to their level. Sharks don't really have the team that I think can hang with many for 60 mins but hey have enough that if you let them they can score goal in bunches. 

 

I would bet that is why Sutter was made. Flames weren't ready to go the full 60 mins in this one. 

the flames had it in their end for the first ten minutes and got up 2-0. Then Markstrom let them back in with an iffy goal. That changed the whole complexion  of the game and even though the flames went up 3-1, once the Flames got there, they seemed to stop playing their game. They stopped doing what worked. You can credit the Sharks fine, but the Flames also stopped going there and took it easy the rest of the way. And maybe they aren’t willing to play that game against a non playoff team, but if they aren’t willing to play that game, they’re going to have another ride awakening in the playoffs when that part of the ice will be completely shut off to them. We’ve seen this in years past. While it’s been mostly different this year, the games like that one last night have been tough on the Flames, and I’m sure teams will take note or have already done so. 

[Sarasti]

3 hours ago, robrob74 said:

the flames had it in their end for the first ten minutes and got up 2-0. Then Markstrom let them back in with an iffy goal. That changed the whole complexion  of the game and even though the flames went up 3-1, once the Flames got there, they seemed to stop playing their game. They stopped doing what worked. You can credit the Sharks fine, but the Flames also stopped going there and took it easy the rest of the way. And maybe they aren’t willing to play that game against a non playoff team, but if they aren’t willing to play that game, they’re going to have another ride awakening in the playoffs when that part of the ice will be completely shut off to them. We’ve seen this in years past. While it’s been mostly different this year, the games like that one last night have been tough on the Flames, and I’m sure teams will take note or have already done so. 

 

Sutter preaches details, and rightfully so.

They got away from that in this one and it cost them.

 

Could have been a different outcome if not for some wild goals from SJ but imo the loss lies with the team.

They simply didn't play as well as they could have outside of the first half of the first and last bit of the third.

 

Like some have said the Sharks deserve credit where its due though.

[The_Tribal Chief]

Honesty I think Monahan is Having Troubles With Range of motions after his hip Surgery now im no Doctor but Matt Chapman had a Hip surgury and he is a toron Bluejay and he says this year he feels he has alot bet range of motion then he did last year now i could be wrong but that is what i think is happening to Sean Monahan he is struggling with range of motion after the surgry

[robrob74]

15 hours ago, The_Snowbear said:

Honesty I think Monahan is Having Troubles With Range of motions after his hip Surgery now im no Doctor but Matt Chapman had a Hip surgury and he is a toron Bluejay and he says this year he feels he has alot bet range of motion then he did last year now i could be wrong but that is what i think is happening to Sean Monahan he is struggling with range of motion after the surgry

and this is why I think he needed time to recover. I think he could’ve come back too soon. They. Could’ve had him on IR and possibly had options to sign or trade for someone to pick up the slack, or if not, have Ruzicka play instead, and give more flexibility in cap space come the TDL…This is why I don’t like the guy. He’s taking up space and actually hurting the team more by playing through injuries and pain… 

[travel_dude]

9 hours ago, robrob74 said:

and this is why I think he needed time to recover. I think he could’ve come back too soon. They. Could’ve had him on IR and possibly had options to sign or trade for someone to pick up the slack, or if not, have Ruzicka play instead, and give more flexibility in cap space come the TDL…This is why I don’t like the guy. He’s taking up space and actually hurting the team more by playing through injuries and pain… 

 

I'm not really sure if that was the answer or not.  Can't just get cap relief because you don't want to play him.  He was "recovered" by NHL standards.  Perhaps they could have evaluated him mid-season and determined that shutting him down was the only answer, but I am not convinced he's suffering from the rehab or surgery.  It's not like he missed games.  

 

I do think they should have waived Ritchie at least to give us cap flexibility.  No options now unless they put him on IR.  And there is still nothing to suggest that he is suffering.  Ineffective?  Yes, in most of his game.  But he's winning faceoffs, so that part is working for him.  Does he shoot like Ritchie at times?  Yes, but he does get a textbook shot away now and then.  Not scoring, but still strong.

[cross16]

 

9 hours ago, robrob74 said:

and this is why I think he needed time to recover. I think he could’ve come back too soon. They. Could’ve had him on IR and possibly had options to sign or trade for someone to pick up the slack, or if not, have Ruzicka play instead, and give more flexibility in cap space come the TDL…This is why I don’t like the guy. He’s taking up space and actually hurting the team more by playing through injuries and pain… 

 

This is not an option no. If a player is healthy to play and passes the physicals he has to play or at the very least stay on the active roster. The only option the Flames would have had was to healthy scratch him this entire time if they were adamant he needed more recovery time but that doesn't gain you cap relief. 

 

I mean i get the idea to sit him down and actually think it could be a positive in the long run but I still don't think he is playing that poorly. He had a tough game sure but everyone does, but I don't think he's played bad hockey at all since about the 20 game mark. 

[conundrumed]

11 minutes ago, cross16 said:

 

 

This is not an option no. If a player is healthy to play and passes the physicals he has to play or at the very least stay on the active roster. The only option the Flames would have had was to healthy scratch him this entire time if they were adamant he needed more recovery time but that doesn't gain you cap relief. 

 

I mean i get the idea to sit him down and actually think it could be a positive in the long run but I still don't think he is playing that poorly. He had a tough game sure but everyone does, but I don't think he's played bad hockey at all since about the 20 game mark. 

If Carpenter is in tonight, I hope no one expects much. He is Richardson, pretty much. I'd have preferred just keeping Rozie up. But my understanding is that they want him to work on his game speed.

Carpenter is a 4th line guy that is unlikely to elevate beyond that. With Rozie, the potential is there to move up.

At the end of the day, I guess the most important thing is to keep buliding chemistry with Pelletier, I hope.

As for Mony, I haven't had a problem with his game play. Looch has been struggling mightily imo.

[flames for life]

42 minutes ago, cross16 said:

 

 

This is not an option no. If a player is healthy to play and passes the physicals he has to play or at the very least stay on the active roster. The only option the Flames would have had was to healthy scratch him this entire time if they were adamant he needed more recovery time but that doesn't gain you cap relief. 

 

I mean i get the idea to sit him down and actually think it could be a positive in the long run but I still don't think he is playing that poorly. He had a tough game sure but everyone does, but I don't think he's played bad hockey at all since about the 20 game mark. 

I can’t say he is playing horribly, but he is not playing well.  On a scale of 10, I think he is about a 5-6, as opposed to his normal.  Was he rushed too soon; too hard to surmise.  What I will say is my observation is that because he is not playing to standard, he tries to compensate, and gets neutralized or gets called as a deficit.  I think Monaghan has to spend this summer reinventing himself in order to regain a better role in the nhl.  If not, he may find himself on the outside looking in.

[travel_dude]

24 minutes ago, conundrumed said:

If Carpenter is in tonight, I hope no one expects much. He is Richardson, pretty much. I'd have preferred just keeping Rozie up. But my understanding is that they want him to work on his game speed.

Carpenter is a 4th line guy that is unlikely to elevate beyond that. With Rozie, the potential is there to move up.

At the end of the day, I guess the most important thing is to keep buliding chemistry with Pelletier, I hope.

As for Mony, I haven't had a problem with his game play. Looch has been struggling mightily imo.

 

The bolded all day long.  I expect that you will see Lucic with reduced minutes tonight, to keep him fresh for the BOA game tomorrow.  Carpenter is Going to be there to take some of the minutes on the PK, so that Backlund or Lindholm or Mangiapane can be fresher.  Carpenter lead the Hawks in PK time.  I don't have a problem with our PK, in fact it has been great.  Having another option is key, especially if Backlund takes a customary cheap penalty during the game.

 

I was a little disappointed that we gave up cap flexibility to keep Ritchie on the roster.  No option to bring up a D or use Ruzie in even a limited role.  We have 3 extra RHS's now, but none of them are options for the 3rd line at C.  

[robrob74]

I’m not too sore on losing Richardson but if Carpenter is the same player then why give up the pick and lose a similar player? Would Ritchie have been claimed? Maybe they still prefer the size? I don’t think Ritchie is good enough and even though he has size, he’s not quite punishing as you’ll like a player like him to be. Maybe his game doesn’t get him into the position to play that way as often as he could?

[robrob74]

2 hours ago, cross16 said:

 

 

This is not an option no. If a player is healthy to play and passes the physicals he has to play or at the very least stay on the active roster. The only option the Flames would have had was to healthy scratch him this entire time if they were adamant he needed more recovery time but that doesn't gain you cap relief. 

 

I mean i get the idea to sit him down and actually think it could be a positive in the long run but I still don't think he is playing that poorly. He had a tough game sure but everyone does, but I don't think he's played bad hockey at all since about the 20 game mark. 

I dunno, everyone outside of Tampa was up in arms about how long it took Kucherov to recover from a similar surgery. Maybe Monahan was worse, or not as bad, we’d never know. But to me it sounds like it’s up to the player in these instances on whether they can go or not. If it were up to doctors Monahan should have been out last year for the whole season instead of possibly making his injury worse and prolonged rehab or adverse affects… I understand the bureaucracy around the situation, how could Monahan be ok to play if he couldn’t tie his own skates?

[cross16]

2 hours ago, flames for life said:

I can’t say he is playing horribly, but he is not playing well.  On a scale of 10, I think he is about a 5-6, as opposed to his normal.  Was he rushed too soon; too hard to surmise.  What I will say is my observation is that because he is not playing to standard, he tries to compensate, and gets neutralized or gets called as a deficit.  I think Monaghan has to spend this summer reinventing himself in order to regain a better role in the nhl.  If not, he may find himself on the outside looking in.

 

You certainly wouldn't put his game tape on not question but I think he deserves credit for how he's adjusting his game. In the last 30 games he is been solid defensively at 5 on 5 and has very solid defensive metrics. He hasn't' done anything offensively which is the problem especially given what is supposed to be his strength. 

 

I don't think his play is hurting the team though is all i'm saying. Could be better, could be a lot worse too. 

[cross16]

23 minutes ago, robrob74 said:

I dunno, everyone outside of Tampa was up in arms about how long it took Kucherov to recover from a similar surgery. Maybe Monahan was worse, or not as bad, we’d never know. But to me it sounds like it’s up to the player in these instances on whether they can go or not. If it were up to doctors Monahan should have been out last year for the whole season instead of possibly making his injury worse and prolonged rehab or adverse affects… I understand the bureaucracy around the situation, how could Monahan be ok to play if he couldn’t tie his own skates?

 

Because taking a player off of LTIR is different than putting him on it. To put a player on LTIR Monahan would have had to fail a physical or the club's doctor would have to deem he is unable to play for a period of 10 games or 24 days and that is required to be submitted to the league when the request. However, in the CBA there is nothing specified in terms of when a player has to come off of LTIR. it just says "when fit to play" but there is no specifics nor is there mechanisms for the league to challenge when a player is healthy. They can challenge a player being placed on LTIR but not if he is on there "too long".  That was the controversy in Tampa because I think it was very likely Kucherov was ready to play before the playoffs but Tampa was able to stash him on LTIR. Different situation with Monahan.

 

Flames could potentially have healthy scratched him or managed his work load better (something Sutter is alluding to today) but they just don't get cap relief for it. 

 

Also food for thought, Kucherov surgery was Dec 23rd and he returned May 15th (Practicing for 2 weeks prior)

Monahan had surgery May 12th and was in training camp late September. No games until October. It's the same time frame.