Good 5, Evil 3 - G8, Canucks at Flames Post-Game
by R O on Oct 16, 2009 10:22 PM PDT
28 comments
Let's get this out of the way right now:
SUCK IT VANCOUVER!
Ok back to rational discussion. Tonight the Flames had something to prove. They came out, and they proved... something. Not sure what - maybe that old adage about leopards and spots? The team's still a work in progress.
However, here is what I said in Tuesday's post-game:
Oh well. Let's hope the Flames regroup for Thursday against the Canucks. Honestly priority #1 in that game for me is to win it, I don't care how bad we play as long as we get 2 points and Vancouver gets zero. But it'd be nice if they played well.
Mission accomplished!
Breakdown by period:
1st
EV shots: 6-6
EV Corsi: +3 Calgary
2nd
EV shots: 10-7 Vancouver
EV Corsi: +4 Vancouver
3rd
EV shots: 5-4 Vancouver
EV Corsi: +7 Vancouver
Overall
EV shots: 21-17 Vancouver
EV Corsi: +8 Vancouver
Breakdown before and after 5-0:
Before
EV shots: 12-11 Calgary
EV Corsi: +5 Calgary
After
EV shots: 10-5 Vancouver
EV Corsi: +13 Vancouver
The Flames are getting shit-kicked in the media for choking away leads. The PBP don't lie - Calgary has been coming out strong and converting consistent zone pressure into goals, only to give it all back and more.
This game was no different. Calgary spent a ton of time with the puck on their sticks or behind Luongo - in the first half of the game. After the back-breaking fifth goal, it's as if 14 or so switches collectively flipped to the OFF position. An unfortunate Giordano lost skate edge in the neutral zone late in the second led to two consecutively awful shifts spent running around our zone - but one could be forgiven for chalking this up to bad luck, no?
NO! The third period was more of the same. Lots of time in spent in our zone, lots of pucks directed towards our net, and general chaos all around. Ironically the Canucks only netted one goal from this pressure, a perfectly placed short-side top-shelf shot that Kipper probably still should have shouldered away. Two bogus penalties (and a legit too-many-men) later, Vancouver made the game "interesting".
Notables:
- Iginla and Jokinen still suck. Coach Sutter definitely avoided Jokinen vs. tough comp (he had a few double shifts with Iginla but they seemed to be against the Kesler or Wellwood lines - someone correct me if they saw differently). Iginla didn't look disastrous beside Conroy and Glencross, but he didn't stand out. That makes the Jarmoe count 7.5/8 for the season by my estimation. Balls.
- Boyd was dominant tonight. Kent counted 14 scoring chances for the Flames tonight, and by my estimation Boyd was directly responsible for at least 4 of them. In eight minutes of ice time. Yeah. Boyd is the bet for the future of Flames offense. One awesome game vs. weak comp proves nothing, but it's a nice arrow to start the collection.
- Regehr looked a lot better today. He had two outstanding vintage-Regehr moves tonight: body the forward to gain position, clear the puck. 'Bout fucking time.
- Bouwmeester and Sarich got the tough assignments today. Bouw went 1-5 for EV scoring chances, Sarich went 0-5. All 5 chances against came from the Sedin unit. Two came in the first period when Bouw-Sarich played behind the Iginla unit (blech) and three came in the panic half of the game.
- The Calgary PP is really, really good. Crisp passes, lots of puck support, quick releases and the down-low forwards are absolutely victimising the D-men when they go after the rebounds. And that's on a night where we *only* go 1 for 4.
- Calgary: 5-2-1, 11 pts; Vancouver: 2-4-0, 4 pts. Enjoy this moment, friends.
0 recs |
28 comments
|
Email
Print
Comments
Do we bash the Canucks as much as they do to us after reading many lines from Nucks Misconduct I guess that’s what you expect from the NHL’s most annoying fans.
But I thought the Flames showed a lot tonight Jokinen looked a tad bit better most likely coming from playing weaker comp Iggy still needs to find himself but you can feel it in him he wants to score every time he’s out there and we all know it’s coming.
Phaneuf & Regehr had easily their best games of the season tonight like R O said it was the Regehr of old out their tonight. As for the comeback tonight The Flames dominated play for about 50 minutes until they got lazy started taking dumb penalties and yeah they were forced to play most of that final frame in their own end because of it.
It wasn’t a perfect game but there are some really good things you can take out of this game and just imagine what it will be like if Kipper can continue his play like this, Iggy + Olli finally come out of their coma’s and the PP continues to click things will start looking up before you know it.
Where the Lead is never safe, Ahead or Behind.
by CofRed on Oct 16, 2009 10:42 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Do we bash the Canucks as much as they do to us after reading many lines from Nucks Misconduct I guess that’s what you expect from the NHL’s most annoying fans.
Wow, sore win much? If you actually read the gamethread, we spent most of the game praising what a thorough ass kicking you handed us.
I have to praise you guys. I haven’t seen the Canucks dominated like that – from coaching to the fourth line – like that since Anaheim back in 2007. That third period was a lie, this game was over well before the halfway point. And to a man, the Flames weren’t just better, they were scary better. Congrats.
'Nucks Misconduct - Housing Swedish Millionaires Since 2000.
by Yankee Canuck on Oct 17, 2009 3:24 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
agreed that regehr FINALLY looked like regehr…. damn. it was good to see.
by walkinvisible on Oct 16, 2009 10:56 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
What a difference a season makes in terms of the PP …
by Calgarian in SJ on Oct 16, 2009 11:08 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Regehr had a +3 game and now he’s only sitting at -4 for the season. Big game for him tonight. I think he needed it.
Am I the only one that thinks McGrattan deserves some recognition (more than 3rd star) tonight?
by RedMile on Oct 16, 2009 11:12 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
no no no no … i said it in the previous thread: a gordie howe hat trick is nothing to scoff at. damn good on mcgrattan…. ALSO at the moment of it’s happening, i texted kent something to the nature of “i LOVE mcgrattan for staying with the play instead of dropping the gloves.” i’m not sure who it was but the canuck wanted the fight and mcG didn’t bite: he followed the puck and got an assist on boyder’s goal. it makes me not hate him.
by walkinvisible on Oct 16, 2009 11:15 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
It was Douchey Hordichuk.
…see what I did there?
-Colin
by Colin S on Oct 17, 2009 1:00 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
yep. and then i read an article that described how mcgrattan wouldn’t fight him because his hand was taped up and he didn’t want to make hordichuk bleed with his tape, and get ejected. still smart but in an entirely different (and far less revelatory) way. meh. he still had a good game, i certainly won’t expect it to repeat.
by walkinvisible on Oct 17, 2009 9:06 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Well, that was a little more like it. That was as close to a complete game that we have seen thus far this season IMO, less the final 10 minute gong-show. Jokinen to me, looked better, Iggy a little more comfortable…but…enh. Pretty good all around. Kipper was great until the last ten minutes, and then all the f*ck-ups buried him. The shot by Rypien was a complete and total gaff by Gio, not even close. He was imitating Phaneuf I think, standing around right in the way. There is no reason what-so-ever for him to be in that position. the second goal…well 5on3. the third is the one Kipper should have had. It was a well placed shot, but he got a clean look at it.
That 3rd goal really blew any feelings out of the water that he played great for me. Good, yes, but not great. Anyway, I’m doing my own tracking….and he still beat the hell out of Luongo…who can keep sucking as far as I’m concerned. The .902 sv% is looking a little ripe, but the whole 6-man defensive unit stills needs to be tightened before I’m going to jump on the Finn for that. He’s still outplaying the other guy in almost every match-up.
Game stats Kipper: 5-1-1 .902%
.920 sv% +: 2 of 7
sv% > opp. sv%: 6 of 7 (5 of 7 minus sht/o wins)
<27 s/a: 0 of 7
>30 s/a: 5 of 7
>33 s/a: 4 of 7
by LawrenceS on Oct 17, 2009 1:52 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
I only consider a mess-up large when it leads to a legit scoring chance. Allowing Rick Rypien to shoot from a poor angle doesn’t equate to a big mistake in my books. The combination of a seeing eye shot and Kipper cheating off his post a tad was the reason that went in. 99 times out of 100, that puck hits the goalie or sails over the net and no one remembers it.
by Kent Wilson on Oct 17, 2009 9:29 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I would say that poor positioning (especially if that is what Sutter is stressing) and screening the goalie creates a legit scoring chance. Boyd had his man (Rypien) Pardy had the middle (where there was noone) and Gio was guarding a guy behind the net, which he should have body position on so that guy can’t come in front to get a rebound – that means shortside post. Instead, he’s standing 2-3 feet out from the goal line right in Kiprusoff’s line of sight and Rypien catches them all standing still with a lucky shot. If Gio is on the line he’s got body position on the forward behind the net, who couldn’t get in front if there is a rebound and Kipper sees the puck clearly, likely no goal. As you said though…99 times out of 100 Rypien, especially, doesn’t pick that corner.
by LawrenceS on Oct 17, 2009 5:33 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
The score should have been 5-1. 2 of the 3 goals in the 3rd period (especially the 3rd goal, a groaner). He needs to get through a game iwthout allowing a goal that makes me angry, dammit.
by Subversive on Oct 17, 2009 9:07 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Wow, missed a couple words there….
should have read…. “2 of the 3 goals in the 3rd period (especially the 3rd goal, a groaner) should have been stopped by Kipper”
by Subversive on Oct 17, 2009 9:08 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Some headway made in this game, but there are issues remaining.
When, for example, was the last time the Flames allowed less than 3 goals against in a game?
by Kent Wilson on Oct 17, 2009 9:22 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
And, even despite the improvements, the Flames were still outshot last night. I saw some improvements, but still a long ways to go.
by Subversive on Oct 17, 2009 9:28 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Um, Tuesday? You meant in a win, right?
by Robert Cleave on Oct 17, 2009 10:03 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
a-ha, that’s right. One in eight is still a lackluster ratio.
by Kent Wilson on Oct 17, 2009 10:32 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Boyd has looked much better since moving to the fourth line and playing his natural posistion.
McGratton played his role on the fourth line to perfection.
I’ll take him over Roy any day especially against Vancouver.
Kipper made some very solid saves in the late stages of the first and a few more in the second period. He out played Looo again. Nice to see these kinds of games from him in the month of October.
by J.Bender on Oct 17, 2009 9:35 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
True, I don’t think Kipper is getting enough props for this one. He looked solid and make some pretty impressive saves. His best game of the season? Its games like that that give me hope we’ll see the old Miikka again.
by DFT on Oct 17, 2009 10:47 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
The issue I have with Kipper is he needs to give up substantially less weak goals. You can make all the spectacular saves you want, but if you don’t stop the ones you should nearly always, you’re hurting the team, IMO.
by Subversive on Oct 17, 2009 11:17 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I would say that Kipper has been doing just fine in the ‘weak goal’ department, as I would count 2, maybe..3 this year. Plekanic, for sure… the Brule blast (which was a good hard shot, and….. Last night’s goals were not Oveckin breakaway’s, but even the Erhoff goal, which I said he should have had, was as good a shot, and a more difficult save than GlenX’s on Luongo. Glencross is shooting high glove across his body and doesn’t have the angle, but it’s a well placed shot. Few people are going to blame Luo on that, but I would, and based on his reaction, he knew he should have that save.
Erhoff, on the other hand, was shooting 1 foot off the ice with the angle going stick side (one of the more difficult saves for a goalie to make from a left handed shooter) WITH traffic cutting in front (Burrows or Grabner if I remember). I stand by, that with the way Kipper was playing he likely could have made that save, and would have stamped in as a great game, but it is far, far, far from a “weak” goal.
Right now, and that could drastically change in no time, Kipper is the least of our problems.
by LawrenceS on Oct 17, 2009 5:43 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Well, I think he’s certainly been better than he has in October the past 2 seasons, however he’s still letting in roughly 1 goal a game where I think he should have had it. It hasn’t cost the team any games yet, but I still don’t like it. That said, he’s definitely looked more like a median quality NHL goalie thus far this season, which is an improvement from last year. Still not good value for $5.83M in cap space, but not as bad as it could be.
He’s certainly below Jarmoe and Jokinen (we need an insulting nickname for him, stat!, btw) on the list of issues, but he’s still definitely on my radar as a potentially huge problem for this team. CuMac hasn’t done anything to convince anyone he’s an NHL goalie so if Kipper gets any worse, we’re basically screwed.
by Subversive on Oct 17, 2009 6:13 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Jokinen = Pumpkinhead in my mind. Nolli Goalinen is pretty good too.
by Kent Wilson on Oct 17, 2009 6:36 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I’d like to know what a goal is that “a goalie should have had.” This sounds like the same useless rhetoric that is often bantered around by armchair fans who just ‘sound off’ when it comes to goalies. You ask a goalie and they will tell you “Every goal, is one I should have had” so what is the point of saying, Kipper is “still letting in roughly 1 goal a game where I think he should have had it.” The stats don’t say that. So you think he should have had one, Kipper probably thinks he should have had about 2.5/game. Shoulda, woulda coulda, is not reality.
The reality is, the Flames are still a porous defensive team that isn’t setting up either of their goalies for success. As well, being outshot every game and allowing 33 shots+ in 4 of 7 games Kipper has played in while still being 5-1-1 isn’t telling me that Kipper isn’t holding up his end of the deal.
However, saying he “needs to give up substantially less weak goals”, saying that he doesn’t "stop the ones you should nearly always stop, and is “letting in roughly 1 goal a game where I think he should have had it.” isn’t exactly saying anything but: that you’re either not watching the games and are just running on or you’re not willing to give credit where it is due.
If you wanna single out players who aren’t performing up to par there are about 12-15 others who should be mentioned before Kipper, unless you just plainly don’t like the guy, which is what I presume it probably boils down to.
by LawrenceS on Oct 18, 2009 2:04 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
If this was facebook I would “Like” that post.
LawrenceS you nailed it.
by DFT on Oct 18, 2009 2:37 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
blackhawks claim andrew ebbet from anaheim of waivers. i always saw him good.
by shep_ on Oct 17, 2009 11:36 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Andrew Ebbett, 5’9", 172 lbs.
Two way contract ($487,500 cap hit), UFA at end of season
From his 08/09 season:
EVTOI/60: 11:35 (ranked 6/12 amongst ANA forwards)
+/- ON/60: 1.08 (ranked 2/12 amongst ANA forwards)
Corsi ON/60: 11.55 (ranked 4/12 amongst ANA forwards)
QC: 10/12 amongst ANA forwards
QT: 5/12 amongst ANA forwards
ZoneStart: 62.7% in the offensive zone (ranked 2/12 amongst ANA forwards)
He was definitely sheltered but he did well in his limited role. At league minimum there’s not a lot of downside in having him playing on the 4th line. I’m not sure why Anaheim decided to dump him.
by R O on Oct 17, 2009 12:08 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recent FanPosts
Northwest Standings
Flames Schedule
Next 5 Games
@
Minnesota
|
Sun 03/21 | 12:00 PM PDT |
|
Anaheim
|
Tue 03/23 | 6:00 PM PDT |
|
@
New York Islanders
|
Thu 03/25 | 4:00 PM PDT |
|
@
Boston
|
Sat 03/27 | 10:00 AM PDT |
|
@
Washington
|
Sun 03/28 | 12:00 PM PDT |
Last 5 Games
|
San Jose
|
Fri 03/19 | W 4 - 3 |
|
@
Colorado
|
Wed 03/17 | W 3 - 2 |
|
Detroit
|
Mon 03/15 | L 1 - 2 |
|
@
Vancouver
|
Sun 03/14 | L 1 - 3 |
|
Ottawa
|
Thu 03/11 | W 2 - 0 |
Certain photos copyright © 2010 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
