GDT: Scorch at Bolts: starting pretty much right now on SNW

[Lunatik]

While that's impressive, it mostly speaks to the killer instinct that these guys have in 3v3 OT more than to the killer instinct in closing out the game in regulation. No team can guarantee they'll be leading into the third, let alone the Flames. I just want to see some "throw it into high gear" Hartley catchup hockey, to know that they can play from behind as well.

Still have a lot of hope for the season and I personally don't have a huge issue with the coaching as much as other posters, although it's certainly not tailor-fit to the roster's strengths as much as I believe it could be.

I'm not sure I would give the OT record that much credit. We have 6 OT wins and 2 SO wins, but did we have the lead heading into the 3rd in all of them? I highly doubt it. I think our issues defending a lead are more in the first and second periods. I think the 3rd is usually the teams best period.

 

[1989]

I'm not sure I would give the OT record that much credit. We have 6 OT wins and 2 SO wins, but did we have the lead heading into the 3rd in all of them? I highly doubt it. I think our issues defending a lead are more in the first and second periods. I think the 3rd is usually the teams best period.

That's fair, I am making assumptions with regards to not knowing the correlation between records.

And just for clarity, while I agree Calgary plays a stronger game as the game goes on, I am specifically picking on the lack of finish in the last 5 minutes. When Gulutzan pulls the goalie, I have little faith bazed on what I've watched this season that the team can tie it up; meanwhile, to be specific I an aware the team doesn't always give up a goal when the other team's net is empty, I hate how the team forgets the neutral zone exists.

Time and again, long bomb after long bomb for icing (and increasing fatigue + increased scoring chances for the opposition) versus smart plays to neutral zone to negate icing or improved chances to score the empty netter.

 

[Lunatik]

That's fair, I am making assumptions with regards to not knowing the correlation between records.

And just for clarity, while I agree Calgary plays a stronger game as the game goes on, I am specifically picking on the lack of finish in the last 5 minutes. When Gulutzan pulls the goalie, I have little faith bazed on what I've watched this season that the team can tie it up; meanwhile, to be specific I an aware the team doesn't always give up a goal when the other team's net is empty, I hate how the team forgets the neutral zone exists.

Time and again, long bomb after long bomb for icing (and increasing fatigue + increased scoring chances for the opposition) versus smart plays to neutral zone to negate icing or improved chances to score the empty netter.

We definitely have issues scoring on the empty net, but I think alot of teams do. No team has more than 6 goals when having 6 skaters on the ice. Our 2 goals with 6 skaters sounds abysmal, but we are one of 16 teams to have 2 or fewer, with 6 skaters on the ice. Another 4 only have 3 goals with 6 skaters on the ice.

 

[1989]

We definitely have issues scoring on the empty net, but I think alot of teams do. No team has more than 6 goals when having 6 skaters on the ice. Our 2 goals with 6 skaters sounds abysmal, but we are one of 16 teams to have 2 or fewer, with 6 skaters on the ice. Another 4 only have 3 goals with 6 skaters on the ice.

Very fair points, all - statistically sound. I suppose I believe that the Flames are/can be above average and need to really start escalating their performance to a higher level, leaving behind post-season bubble berths, 1st round exits, etc. Maybe not this season, but really focusing on that "next step" mentality. And that starts with game-by-game analysis and specifically for me right now, really improving that last effort at the end of the third, whether it's putting the game beyond reach or rallying the team when it's needed most.

 

[Lunatik]

Very fair points, all - statistically sound. I suppose I believe that the Flames are/can be above average and need to really start escalating their performance to a higher level, leaving behind post-season bubble berths, 1st round exits, etc. Maybe not this season, but really focusing on that "next step" mentality. And that starts with game-by-game analysis and specifically for me right now, really improving that last effort at the end of the third, whether it's putting the game beyond reach or rallying the team when it's needed most.

I think some had to high of expectations for this season, I also think we as a group are overly hard on the team. They are close to where I expected them to be, I hoped for a 100 point season and in the mix for the division title, they are currently on pace for 95 and if not for Vegas' incredible first half, we would be in the mix for the division title. But the way our fan base talks about the team, you would think we weren't even close to a playoff spot.

 

[1989]

I think some had to high of expectations for this season, I also think we as a group are overly hard on the team. They are close to where I expected them to be, I hoped for a 100 point season and in the mix for the division title, they are currently on pace for 95 and if not for Vegas' incredible first half, we would be in the mix for the division title. But the way our fan base talks about the team, you would think we weren't even close to a playoff spot.

I don't hang around here or post nearly as often any more, though I check at least a couple times a week when there's a game. I don't go on CP, but I know the community here is small, and I don't stat check very much. I've watched about 80% of the season thus far, so with little fan input, I'm mostly speaking from what I've seen. I don't really agree with at least a third of the ranting that can happen on these boards, and I definitely agree that people are unnecessarily pessimistic. I think this team lacks the consistency to be considered a playoff contender (WCF team), but they're above being a wildcard-chaser, too.

I'm really liking the bottom six. Had a lot of faith in Jankowski being a contributor at the NHL level. Mangiapane has been a surprise this early on. Brouwer has picked up his play as a top-six fill-in. Lazar has been up-and-down but has been better lately.

I mentioned early in the season/pre-season that I believed a healthy top six was good and set, and that the Flames needrd to really set out to improve the bottom six, especially the fourth line. Dominant teams have fourth lines that feed energy to the rest of the roster by creating their own scoring chances. Calgary's is now much better with the addition of Mangiapane, but Stajan is basically a warm body and needs replacing soon. Not terrible, but Calgary is close to having a tenacious fourth line capable of turning games around in a supporting role and he won't be a part of that.

 

[Lunatik]

I don't hang around here or post nearly as often any more, though I check at least a couple times a week when there's a game. I don't go on CP, but I know the community here is small, and I don't stat check very much. I've watched about 80% of the season thus far, so with little fan input, I'm mostly speaking from what I've seen. I don't really agree with at least a third of the ranting that can happen on these boards, and I definitely agree that people are unnecessarily pessimistic. I think this team lacks the consistency to be considered a playoff contender (WCF team), but they're above being a wildcard-chaser, too.

I'm really liking the bottom six. Had a lot of faith in Jankowski being a contributor at the NHL level. Mangiapane has been a surprise this early on. Brouwer has picked up his play as a top-six fill-in. Lazar has been up-and-down but has been better lately.

I mentioned early in the season/pre-season that I believed a healthy top six was good and set, and that the Flames needrd to really set out to improve the bottom six, especially the fourth line. Dominant teams have fourth lines that feed energy to the rest of the roster by creating their own scoring chances. Calgary's is now much better with the addition of Mangiapane, but Stajan is basically a warm body and needs replacing soon. Not terrible, but Calgary is close to having a tenacious fourth line capable of turning games around in a supporting role and he won't be a part of that.

I agree with pretty much all of this Sig. But to add to that, maybe the reason I am not as pessimistic about the team is because I didn't expect us to be a "contender" just yet. I think we are closer than we were a year ago, but we are still far too soft and mentally fragile IMO. I'm not as worried about scoring as most, as I feel like with a productive 3rd line we will get that. And I think despite his early struggles that Hamonic is a great addition to our back end as we needed that stay at home type. I think now what we need (ironically) is an Engelland type on the 3rd pairing and some more toughness in our forward group somewhere.

 

[Tofveve]

I noticed that Gaudreau is now +12 . That's actually quite impressive, one of the better +/- in the top 25 point-producers.

 

[Volica]

I agree with pretty much all of this Sig. But to add to that, maybe the reason I am not as pessimistic about the team is because I didn't expect us to be a "contender" just yet. I think we are closer than we were a year ago, but we are still far too soft and mentally fragile IMO. I'm not as worried about scoring as most, as I feel like with a productive 3rd line we will get that. And I think despite his early struggles that Hamonic is a great addition to our back end as we needed that stay at home type. I think now what we need (ironically) is an Engelland type on the 3rd pairing and some more toughness in our forward group somewhere.

We need someone to spend the entire night in their own zone, bleed chances just so they can caveman battle sometime?
Stone is plenty tough to play with; and Kulak is a great skater/puck mover.

This is the best third pairing Calgary's had in what seems like forever; both guys are legitimate NHL'ers; the same could not be said for some of those pairings we've thrown out there.

Brouwer, Ferland, Tkachuk, Bennett, Hathaway and Lazar are all tougher players. The problem is, you're never going to have a 'tough' team, when your core is soft as butter. Gaudreau can't really be that meanie, because he's the size of a teenager. Monahan doesn't have a 'tough' bone in his body, and might actually be softer than Johnny. Backs is a skill guy, so are Fro and Janks; none of those guys are 'hard' to play against in that sense (they're hard to play against, because they spend the night in your zone).

 

[The Gnome]

One overlooked positive from last nights game was Brouwer. He played tough, won a solid fight, had some great passes, played well in front of the opposition net, and had a beauty of an assist. Was one of the better players last night for sure. He's slow as hell, but made up for it and played to his strengths last night. Also, Hamonic keeps improving, which is great to see.

 

[Volica]

Brouwer needs a possessive centre to succeed. We have one of those, we played Troy with him. Still takes away from Backs and Chucky a bit, but certainly elevates Brouwer... which is nice

 

[InfinityIggy]

One overlooked positive from last nights game was Brouwer. He played tough, won a solid fight, had some great passes, played well in front of the opposition net, and had a beauty of an assist. Was one of the better players last night for sure. He's slow as hell, but made up for it and played to his strengths last night. Also, Hamonic keeps improving, which is great to see.

Angry Brouwer = Best Brouwer.

 

[Anglesmith]

One thing I found funny is that I read through the Bolts GDT last night, and they, too, were on the refs right from the puck drop thinking they were getting the shaft. Goes to show that there probably is never any point complaining about refs, because we're all so far from objectivity on the matter.