Series Discussion: (P1) Anaheim Ducks vs (WC1) Calgary Flames

[MonarchFlames]

As much as it hurts to see the Flames losing this series. It was them that put themselves in the position to lose. They could very well be up 2-0 instead of being down in the series. But mistakes being made due to lack of experience in playoff games put them in this position. As long as they can learn from their mistakes and improve upon it in these next two home games win or loss it'll be a win. This will help in the growth of the team in the future.

On another not it's great to see Monahan doing so well.

 

[Anglesmith]

Reopened with a spirit of overwhelming dread.

 

[Fig]

IMO, we're missing a sense of killer instinct that was lost when Hartley was coach.

I feel like Hartley was a guy who was super short sighted who didn't give a damn except whether we were taking steps towards the goal. You play balls to the wall regardless of what is going on. You destroyed the other team even if it chips away at yourself.

I feel like Gully is a huge big picture guy, but he looks so far away, we trip on the tiniest pebbles. I think he can grow into a good coach if he figures out things like this. I almost feel like he congratulated them on winning game 3 after two periods. The team that came out was playing something weird in the 3rd period. It was like turtling or conservation of energy or something. He also seems too nice. We had them, and we let go of the gas. I think Gully made that call and I forget where I read it, but a Ducks fan mentioned Gully's strategy is too "nice".

Something in between would be great.


Greasy strategy, but Anaheim is a team we should be icing Lazar, Forward Hamilton and Hathaway to grind their Dmen into dust.


IMO, everyone deserves redemption. Gully included. I'm also of the opinion Elliott gets all the rope he wants. He can hang himself. That being said, I think Johnson deserves a shot at playing a playoff game at home... So I don't know.



I was amazingly disappointed last night, but I didn't know whether to be angry in general, or just feel super bad for the team. I'm sure it hurts way more for them.

 

[Ynnek]

Reopened with a spirit of overwhelming dread.

Cue the Chad Johnson shutout streak.

 

[FlamerForLife]

Take it 1 game at a time, the 4th win is always the hardest to get, pressures on them to end the series, we just need to come out and play loose.
Even though I'm still shell-shocked at what happened, I think this experience will do nothing but help our young guns for the future.

 

[Master Bill]

IMO, we're missing a sense of killer instinct that was lost when Hartley was coach.

I feel like Hartley was a guy who was super short sighted who didn't give a damn except whether we were taking steps towards the goal. You play balls to the wall regardless of what is going on. You destroyed the other team even if it chips away at yourself.

I feel like Gully is a huge big picture guy, but he looks so far away, we trip on the tiniest pebbles. I think he can grow into a good coach if he figures out things like this. I almost feel like he congratulated them on winning game 3 after two periods. The team that came out was playing something weird in the 3rd period. It was like turtling or conservation of energy or something. He also seems too nice. We had them, and we let go of the gas. I think Gully made that call and I forget where I read it, but a Ducks fan mentioned Gully's strategy is too "nice".

Something in between would be great.


Greasy strategy, but Anaheim is a team we should be icing Lazar, Forward Hamilton and Hathaway to grind their Dmen into dust.


IMO, everyone deserves redemption. Gully included. I'm also of the opinion Elliott gets all the rope he wants. He can hang himself. That being said, I think Johnson deserves a shot at playing a playoff game at home... So I don't know.



I was amazingly disappointed last night, but I didn't know whether to be angry in general, or just feel super bad for the team. I'm sure it hurts way more for them.

The team this year has been highly incompetent in generating momentum when trailing late in the game. There just was never the sense of belief that they could tie the game up, as opposed to the belief Hartley's team had with themselves.

Coaches improve too, and I'm also hoping these experiences help Gulutzan figures these things out.

 

[Pirate King Luffy]

Not even mad ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

 

[MonyontheMoney]

At the start of the 3rd the team took all physicality out of their game. Time after time the Ducks escaped punishment, which wasn't happening when we were in control. They sacrificed OZ time for passivity and that is what cost them the game. The best way to protect a lead is to cycle endlessly in the OZ to kill time.

I'm not mad that the team didn't go for the throat with a 5th goal, I'm mad that the completely sat back and gifted possession to the Ducks.

Whether that is an egregious coaching error, or a misguided mindset of the players, I don't know, but that's why the lead was blown.

People can complain about puck luck all they want, but we put them in a position to get those bounces. It really doesn't matter if we kept them from a great number of dangerous chances if we just gift them possession and hope for the best. Bottom line is we put them in a position to earn bounces by not playing the way needed to hold onto a lead. Don't blame bounces, that's what people looking for excuses do, blame either the strategy or the mindset, hold someone accountable for the way we dominated 40 minutes and got dominated for the other 20, which turned out to be the difference.

Did we deserve to win? Probably played well enough through 40, but I don't know if we deserved to win looking at the full picture.

 

[Mobiandi]

We deserved to lose all 3 games. Playing a game of "what ifs" doesn't fly in the playoffs

 

[Fig]

I also don't see a point in blaming the refs or video review. If we have to rely on that type of luck to win, phooey. You win some, you lose some and we had a silver platter last game. We easily got away with more than the Ducks did. Pointing at the high stick goal is weak. The tires were flat well before that.

We win if we play the style of period 1 and 2 of game 3 in all 3 periods for the remainder of the series. I say ham up the physicality and let this series end with two completely damaged and gassed teams.

 

[Flaming Satan]

Versteeg has really elevated his game these playoffs. IMO the hardest working Flame at times in all 3 games.

 

[Perceptor]

I'm not even blaming the officials or the replays. All 3 games were winnable and we didn't take advantage of them. Just have to play smarter and more consistently for the whole game.

 

[Anglesmith]

At the start of the 3rd the team took all physicality out of their game. Time after time the Ducks escaped punishment, which wasn't happening when we were in control. They sacrificed OZ time for passivity and that is what cost them the game. The best way to protect a lead is to cycle endlessly in the OZ to kill time.

I'm not mad that the team didn't go for the throat with a 5th goal, I'm mad that the completely sat back and gifted possession to the Ducks.

Whether that is an egregious coaching error, or a misguided mindset of the players, I don't know, but that's why the lead was blown.

People can complain about puck luck all they want, but we put them in a position to get those bounces. It really doesn't matter if we kept them from a great number of dangerous chances if we just gift them possession and hope for the best. Bottom line is we put them in a position to earn bounces by not playing the way needed to hold onto a lead. Don't blame bounces, that's what people looking for excuses do, blame either the strategy or the mindset, hold someone accountable for the way we dominated 40 minutes and got dominated for the other 20, which turned out to be the difference.

Did we deserve to win? Probably played well enough through 40, but I don't know if we deserved to win looking at the full picture.

In the end, that's something of a philosophical discussion. The only way to have extended zone time in the offensive end is to take chances and be aggressive. That opens you up to transition chances against.

It's easy to say "be in the offensive zone but don't take chances," but that's not how it works. If you don't commit and you try and hang high, the cycle is broken up in no time (that's if you manage to recover the puck in the offensive end without throwing yourself in there aggressively in the first place).

End of the day, the Flames had over 30 games doing this without issue. They give up zone time, but the chances they give up are chances that 90% of the time aren't going to go in, let alone multiple of them. And this time they did, multiple times.

 

[Fig]

We played 2 periods of something that worked.

IMO, Gully made a classic "don't fix what isn't broken" error. The style in the 3rd was different. I don't think the team walked out on the third thinking, "I think we know better than the coach. Let's try something new" I think he was looking to game 4 and was trying to conserve energy or something.

I just realized the massive irony in this. Some fans are claiming Gully didn't adjust and that's why we lost. I think they weren't paying attention. The game changed. Gully adjusted incorrectly and couldn't get the team to revert back to the plan from earlier. Gully's error might be actually trying too much.

 

[Ace Rimmer]

I'm not even blaming the officials or the replays. All 3 games were winnable and we didn't take advantage of them. Just have to play smarter and more consistently for the whole game.

That's honestly the most frustrating thing about this for me. It's not like Anaheim has completely outplayed Calgary (they have dominated some shifts for sure) but a couple bounces (and/or calls) their way, and the Flames could be the team up 3-0 in the series.

 

[Tofveve]

Timeouts. We need to use it when the tide us turning and we've got under 10 minutes left.

 

[Lunatik]

Timeouts. We need to use it when the tide us turning and we've got under 10 minutes left.

Some have mentioned it may have been lost on the no goal.

 

[MonyontheMoney]

In the end, that's something of a philosophical discussion. The only way to have extended zone time in the offensive end is to take chances and be aggressive. That opens you up to transition chances against.

It's easy to say "be in the offensive zone but don't take chances," but that's not how it works. If you don't commit and you try and hang high, the cycle is broken up in no time (that's if you manage to recover the puck in the offensive end without throwing yourself in there aggressively in the first place).

I disagree. The cycle game is inherently low risk, where the cycle becomes risky is when teams who are desperate for offence take chances with low percentage plays off the cycle - including throwing the puck blindly to the slot, D activating into the play sacrificing their defensive responsibilities or pinching on pucks that aren't guaranteed retrievals and shooting pucks into blockers.

An effective cycle always has a guy high, regardless of situation. That is how it works. A cycle of the three forwards, with one in the high slot is still not an easy breakup for defenders.

Theoretically, any pucks turned over on an offensive cycle would have had at least 4, if not all 5 Flames players above the puck, again making it low risk hockey. Any Anaheim transition off a turnover would be defended well. It takes smart plays, and some work ethic, but it sure as hell beats praying for every bounce to go your way.

Is it boring? Yes. Is it how many teams defend leads successfully? Yes.

End of the day, the Flames had over 30 games doing this without issue. They give up zone time, but the chances they give up are chances that 90% of the time aren't going to go in, let alone multiple of them. And this time they did, multiple times.

The Flames also had a prolonged stretch of finding success while counting on 3rd period comebacks to win games. While not totally related, it's about the process. We knew counting on those comebacks wouldn't be conducive to winning games, just like I don't feel sitting back to defend a lead is conducive to defending a lead consistently.

Regardless, I'd also argue the Flames haven't sat back that much with a lead in a long time.

 

[FlamerForLife]

Some have mentioned it may have been lost on the no goal.

I don't think that was a coach's challenge. Thought it was just a toronto review

 

[Ace Rimmer]

Timeouts. We need to use it when the tide us turning and we've got under 10 minutes left.

Had a 17 minute timeout after the tide had been turning for about 5-10 minutes of game time in the 2nd period, it clearly did nothing.

 

[SmellOfVictory]

We played 2 periods of something that worked.

IMO, Gully made a classic "don't fix what isn't broken" error. The style in the 3rd was different. I don't think the team walked out on the third thinking, "I think we know better than the coach. Let's try something new" I think he was looking to game 4 and was trying to conserve energy or something.

I just realized the massive irony in this. Some fans are claiming Gully didn't adjust and that's why we lost. I think they weren't paying attention. The game changed. Gully adjusted incorrectly and couldn't get the team to revert back to the plan from earlier. Gully's error might be actually trying too much.

The only glaring error I saw on GG's part was the fact that he kept playing the bottom pairing when the Flames were protecting a one goal lead with half a period left. I get that you don't want to tire your players out too much, but for god's sake, shorten your damn bench if the game is that close to over.

 

[Kahvi]

Not even mad ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

This is me after the game

 

[Fig]

The only glaring error I saw on GG's part was the fact that he kept playing the bottom pairing when the Flames were protecting a one goal lead with half a period left. I get that you don't want to tire your players out too much, but for god's sake, shorten your damn bench if the game is that close to over.

I think it was further exacerbated by the bottom pairing. You cannot send the bottom pairing guys to help out on a turtle strategy. It puts the entire team out of sync.

Agreed. Shorten the bench to hold onto the game.

This is me after the game

This was me:

 

[seventieslord]

Leafs fan just coming in to say that high stick goal last night was utter nonsense.

You all look like reasonable fans who want to put the blame nowhere but on the Flames themselves - and good on you, that's a mature approach most of the time. But last night that goal played a major part in screwing you. Absolutely embarrassing.

 

[I Hate Blake Coleman]

Stop taking penalties.

This team always finds a new way to disappoint.

Gaudreau needs to get his act together and be the best forward on the ice.