GDT - FLAMES @ Black Hawks - Sunday 8 January 2023 - 5:00pm MDT

[travel_dude]

31 minutes ago, Thebrewcrew said:

OT continues to be a major issue.

 

The Flames have now played the 31st and 32nd place teams in the league and have 1 of 4 pts. They're not in a spot to be giving up points to those clubs.

Every team loses to everyone.

We just seem to be really good at failing at the wrong times.

 

Were the vets the only ones not at fault?

Two of their goals scored on the PP.

All goals against scored with vets on the ice.

4th line benched for basically half the game.

 

 

Sutter is praising players one game then running them down the next.

Bets on who gets benched?

Won't be Lucic or Lewis.

 

[tmac70]

11 hours ago, travel_dude said:

Funny, Sutter blames the young guys preparation for the game.

He did say the goaltending for us sucked, which is why he made the change.

The two guys on the ice in the loss were the vets.

He did mention guys that have been in the league from 1-6 years never prepared right. Similar to the CLB game to many no shows for my liking. Sutters displeasure with the younger players is they never prepare correclty. Some may get stuck in the nastelgic atmosphere of CHI, plus not being able to practice and prepare before hand. We have to look at the facts todays generation need to be coddled at every stage of life. We wonder why he never plays younger guys is becasue they need their diapers changed. This is work not a holiday and it appears we have to many travelers and not wariors on this club. Simlar to the CLB game these are MUST wins and this club laid an egg both games. To be a championship team you have train, think and work like champions, we have to many chumps on this club. I have said for years its an attitude mind set with this group. We don't know what goes on behind closed doors and I don't always agree with Sutters approach to the younger guys. However, his role is to win games and ice a team that he feels will do that. If Sutter felt or thought that player A would be a better option he would insert him, for anyone that thinks its out of spite I disagree. We all get emotonal that Ruzie isn't in the top 6 or another player isn't inserted in there. Ruzie has been invisible for over a month now, Phillips was irrelevant when he played, those are facts. This organization hasn't got time nor the ability to wait for you to find your game, you have one shot to make an impression if you can't see ya.  I agree with everyone Lucic is a boat anchor and should be down to the 4th line, however what should be more concerning is nobody has stepped up and forced Sutter to make the change. 

[travel_dude]

16 minutes ago, tmac70 said:

He did mention guys that have been in the league from 1-6 years never prepared right. Similar to the CLB game to many no shows for my liking. Sutters displeasure with the younger players is they never prepare correclty. Some may get stuck in the nastelgic atmosphere of CHI, plus not being able to practice and prepare before hand. We have to look at the facts todays generation need to be coddled at every stage of life. We wonder why he never plays younger guys is becasue they need their diapers changed. This is work not a holiday and it appears we have to many travelers and not wariors on this club. Simlar to the CLB game these are MUST wins and this club laid an egg both games. To be a championship team you have train, think and work like champions, we have to many chumps on this club. I have said for years its an attitude mind set with this group. We don't know what goes on behind closed doors and I don't always agree with Sutters approach to the younger guys. However, his role is to win games and ice a team that he feels will do that. If Sutter felt or thought that player A would be a better option he would insert him, for anyone that thinks its out of spite I disagree. We all get emotonal that Ruzie isn't in the top 6 or another player isn't inserted in there. Ruzie has been invisible for over a month now, Phillips was irrelevant when he played, those are facts. This organization hasn't got time nor the ability to wait for you to find your game, you have one shot to make an impression if you can't see ya.  I agree with everyone Lucic is a boat anchor and should be down to the 4th line, however what should be more concerning is nobody has stepped up and forced Sutter to make the change. 

 

Generalizations about the younger generations are just that.  General.  I am not of that young era, so I don't know what they feel or how they prepare.

It's BS that the young guys weren't ready; the entire team was too casual to start the game.  First shift by Hubey and they were crap.

Hubey, Lindholm and Kadri were one for every goal against.  At least one of them was.  You could assign blame to each of them for lost coverage.

Markstrom was weak on all three goals, but they decided to play for a bit.  Hung out to dry but he didn't help.

 

It makes no matter to me how many minutes a guy plays.  But to blame them when they sat most of the 2nd and 3rd periods is dumb.

Digest what the sequence was that lead to the goal.  Coach them.  

 

I realize that he didn't specifically mention players, but the 1-6 reference implies it's not vets 28 and up.

I saw poor play up and down the lineup.

[robrob74]

32 minutes ago, travel_dude said:

 

Generalizations about the younger generations are just that.  General.  I am not of that young era, so I don't know what they feel or how they prepare.

It's BS that the young guys weren't ready; the entire team was too casual to start the game.  First shift by Hubey and they were crap.

Hubey, Lindholm and Kadri were one for every goal against.  At least one of them was.  You could assign blame to each of them for lost coverage.

Markstrom was weak on all three goals, but they decided to play for a bit.  Hung out to dry but he didn't help.

 

It makes no matter to me how many minutes a guy plays.  But to blame them when they sat most of the 2nd and 3rd periods is dumb.

Digest what the sequence was that lead to the goal.  Coach them.  

 

I realize that he didn't specifically mention players, but the 1-6 reference implies it's not vets 28 and up.

I saw poor play up and down the lineup.

👍🏼👍🏼👍🏼

[tmac70]

1 hour ago, travel_dude said:

 

Generalizations about the younger generations are just that.  General.  I am not of that young era, so I don't know what they feel or how they prepare.

It's BS that the young guys weren't ready; the entire team was too casual to start the game.  First shift by Hubey and they were crap.

Hubey, Lindholm and Kadri were one for every goal against.  At least one of them was.  You could assign blame to each of them for lost coverage.

Markstrom was weak on all three goals, but they decided to play for a bit.  Hung out to dry but he didn't help.

 

It makes no matter to me how many minutes a guy plays.  But to blame them when they sat most of the 2nd and 3rd periods is dumb.

Digest what the sequence was that lead to the goal.  Coach them.  

 

I realize that he didn't specifically mention players, but the 1-6 reference implies it's not vets 28 and up.

I saw poor play up and down the lineup.

I believe I did state it was a collective lose, in that they did this in CLB as well. So lets go down your rabbit hole. In essence your stating as are many others ( I can understand to a point) that Sutter has no idea what he doing? That its just the younger crowd that gets the short end, they should be granted a spot until they figure it out. This is pro hockey at the highest level. Sutter played Toffoli and Pearson when he was in LA played as younger players, it pokes holes in the theory. We all know the club has a reputaion of poor culture, it appears its still there. Frankly whats tiring is the excuses, yeah we weren't ready, we didn't start on time, coulnd't capitiaze, have to bear down more. How many years and how many times does this have to get spewed before you look in the mirror and say I have a problem, not the system not the coach ME. The minute you change the world around you changes as well. I get the frustration with Sutter I do, but I for one don't belvie he is the major issue here, its the players and lack of commitment and fortitude to rise to the next level or its quite possible liek Trutard would say " Your just asking for to much from this group. Maybe just maybe they the majority of them can't rise to this level. 

[cross16]

I get the points argument but to me focusing on OT is missing the point. There is no 3 on 3 in the playoffs so personally I could care less how good a team is in OT, it's likely a red herring in terms of evaluation. 

 

Flames have to figure out how to stop getting so many games to OT, not how they get better at OT. That comes down to a combination of timely goals, better/consistent D play (for the most part this is happening) and lastly better goaltending. Timely goals and goaltending being the bigger opportunities for improvement, outside of last night's game. I don't think the Flames were sharp in their own zone but they have been lately and I think last night was more around a lack of compete/focus than it was execution. 

[travel_dude]

11 minutes ago, tmac70 said:

I believe I did state it was a collective lose, in that they did this in CLB as well. So lets go down your rabbit hole. In essence your stating as are many others ( I can understand to a point) that Sutter has no idea what he doing? That its just the younger crowd that gets the short end, they should be granted a spot until they figure it out. This is pro hockey at the highest level. Sutter played Toffoli and Pearson when he was in LA played as younger players, it pokes holes in the theory. We all know the club has a reputaion of poor culture, it appears its still there. Frankly whats tiring is the excuses, yeah we weren't ready, we didn't start on time, coulnd't capitiaze, have to bear down more. How many years and how many times does this have to get spewed before you look in the mirror and say I have a problem, not the system not the coach ME. The minute you change the world around you changes as well. I get the frustration with Sutter I do, but I for one don't belvie he is the major issue here, its the players and lack of commitment and fortitude to rise to the next level or its quite possible liek Trutard would say " Your just asking for to much from this group. Maybe just maybe they the majority of them can't rise to this level. 

 

You are making general statements about the club and young players and culture.

The entire team wasn't good to start or so it seemed.

They are one of the better teams for 1st period production.

But the execution wasn't there.

Like they were out of sorts.

 

Sutter is good for some things.  I don't fault him when players make mistakes.

The system works if everything works.

No room for error.

What I am seeing is a lack of change to things that are not working.

The answer isn't always just rolling 4 lines and a playbook that doesn't change at all with different teams.

The PP looks the same most games, so I question what they are expecting to do.

 

All I was really pointing to is that it's not one group of players.

Dube and Mange got good chances.

Zohorna got a few looks.

Kadri and Hubey and Ras made mistakes.

Markstrom made a few errors on the initial saves.

The D lost men.

The F tried risky plays.

[cross16]

Think what we need to remember is that what a coach says to the media, especially in the case of a veteran coach like Sutter, is almost always premediated and targeted. It really should not be taken at face value.

 

So why single our the "youth" its pretty simple, they are still learning and Sutter's style is to motivate you by challenging you. Why not challenge the Vets, Sutter has faith that they know this effort isn't ok so why call all that out? What does he gain?

 

Certainly not a style for everyone but it's how he uses the media, it's a motivational tool for him (and many coaches).

[tmac70]

2 hours ago, cross16 said:

I get the points argument but to me focusing on OT is missing the point. There is no 3 on 3 in the playoffs so personally I could care less how good a team is in OT, it's likely a red herring in terms of evaluation. 

 

Flames have to figure out how to stop getting so many games to OT, not how they get better at OT. That comes down to a combination of timely goals, better/consistent D play (for the most part this is happening) and lastly better goaltending. Timely goals and goaltending being the bigger opportunities for improvement, outside of last night's game. I don't think the Flames were sharp in their own zone but they have been lately and I think last night was more around a lack of compete/focus than it was execution. 

100% agree

[tmac70]

1 hour ago, travel_dude said:

 

You are making general statements about the club and young players and culture.

The entire team wasn't good to start or so it seemed.

They are one of the better teams for 1st period production.

But the execution wasn't there.

Like they were out of sorts.

 

Sutter is good for some things.  I don't fault him when players make mistakes.

The system works if everything works.

No room for error.

What I am seeing is a lack of change to things that are not working.

The answer isn't always just rolling 4 lines and a playbook that doesn't change at all with different teams.

The PP looks the same most games, so I question what they are expecting to do.

 

All I was really pointing to is that it's not one group of players.

Dube and Mange got good chances.

Zohorna got a few looks.

Kadri and Hubey and Ras made mistakes.

Markstrom made a few errors on the initial saves.

The D lost men.

The F tried risky plays.

I agree collectively it was Satoshi Nakamoto from the start. What gets old for me is the same old excuses every game and every night. 

[sak22]

48 minutes ago, cross16 said:

Think what we need to remember is that what a coach says to the media, especially in the case of a veteran coach like Sutter, is almost always premediated and targeted. It really should not be taken at face value.

 

So why single our the "youth" its pretty simple, they are still learning and Sutter's style is to motivate you by challenging you. Why not challenge the Vets, Sutter has faith that they know this effort isn't ok so why call all that out? What does he gain?

 

Certainly not a style for everyone but it's how he uses the media, it's a motivational tool for him (and many coaches).

Yes, to add into that his assessment of the goalie switch being that their goalie was better was maybe true in the sense of goals against and and shots, but I think the quality was different.  Big shot gap but HD was only a difference of 2.  It's just Sutters way of not letting anyone off the hook for last night.

[travel_dude]

3 hours ago, tmac70 said:

I agree collectively it was Satoshi Nakamoto from the start. What gets old for me is the same old excuses every game and every night. 

 

I don't make excuses for the team or the coaches.

The coach's media event says they needed to score 4 to win, hard to do that.

Don't have two 40 goal scorers this year.

Have to score greasy goals.

Goalies need to stop the puck.

 

That's the part that gets old.

Not that he is being entirely honest about it.

He probably has to review game tape to see why things happened.