Reach-Arounds and Shafts in the Face: G10, BoA @ Calgary Post-Game
The question on everyone's lips going into last night's edition of the Battle was: "revenge"? Thanks to Pat Quinn's asinine remarks about how (back in the day) he used to use the onion on his belt to beat people, there was some question of whether Jarome Iginla was going to get hosed by grease, so to speak. And so he did.
Oh, and the Flames dominated the Oil. That's not news though.
Breakdowns
First
EV Shots On Goal : 8-6
EV Shots Toward Net : 11-10
EV Faceoffs Starts : 7-3
Second
EV Shots On Goal : 9-7
EV Shots Toward Net : 12-11
EV Faceoff Starts : 1-5
Third
EV Shots On Goal : 7-4
EV Shots Toward Net : 10-11
EV Faceoff Starts : 5-2
Overall
EV Shots On Goal : 24-17
EV Shots Toward Net : 33-32
EV Faceoff Starts : 13-10
Note: I'm doing the breakdowns a bit differently this time around. Shots on goal and toward net are listed as CGY-OPP (i.e. 10-5 means the Flames outshot the opponent, 5-10 means the Flames got outshot). The faceoff notation is thus: Flames_OZone_Starts - Flames_DZone_Starts. And of course Kent does the Flames scoring chances which just adds another layer of data.
This game was fucking awesome. An improvement at EV over the Columbus game, which was already a terrific effort. The first period was played to a standstill, the second was dominant and the Flames shutdown strategy in the third actually worked for once. The Oilers didn't get an EV shot for the last 10 minutes of the third, which the coaching staff must have been happy about.
Of course by that point the outcome was a forgone conclusion, the Oilers were mailing it in, and they're not exactly a good team anyway (the roster were flu-stricken - plus, they're the Oil). But this is a game that the Flames should have dominated, and they did. So give the Flames a slow clap because the boys deserve it.
It wasn't all tequila and strippers though. Here are some things the Flames need to work on:
- The PK is still bleeding goals and chances at a rate that this fan is not proud of. The first Oilers PP goal caught three guys (Kipper, Johnson and another PKer) watching the puck and not even remotely close to anticipating the wide-open backdoor play. Johnson's PK work in particular doens't impress me very much.
- Jokinen's a bum.
- The top line struggled a bit. I didn't notice but other commenters saw Glencross struggling. Myself, I saw Iginla lose a couple puck battles in the D-zone. His O-zone work wasn't great, he got two 10-cent chances but there was no sequence that I could remember in which he converted any sort of half-wall battle into a chance below the face-off dots. Disappointing night even though his numbers were ok.
Aside from their generally excellent EV play, here are some observations about the Flames strengths:
- The Flames first PP was uber dangerous and a big factor was the fact that Phaneuf was able to advance from his point position. The Oilers weren't pressuring the points and it cost them. The second PP saw an Oilers adjustment on the PK, but I think that can be broken with better pressure from the forwards.
- Boyd and Bourque were incredible. They had turns where they looked like Iginla-of-old out there. Boyd especially - when did he steal that off-the-boards move from Iggy, and when is he going to give it back?
- Bouwmeester's defensive stick work is a thing of beauty.
- How about that Kipper eh? Talk to me when game 70 rolls by but he's having himself quite the little run at EV (1 EVGA in his last three starts and a 0.981 EVSV%) - as if that'll last but let's enjoy it while it lasts.
And some general game notes:
- How about that McGrattan-Macintyre fight, eh? I don't like our current goon iteration - I don't mind a player with goon in him but he better be able to play hockey, like Georges Laraque or something - but that was a very entertaining tilt. McG's still useless (two shifts, 1:01 ice time - picking up a +1 was injustice) but he's good at fighting.
- I might be the minority in saying the officiating was pretty even (except for one glaring exception which is elucidated below). The Oil fans are complaining but the PP ledger ended up 8-3 in favor of the Oil - what the fuck more do they want? And some Flames fans are complaining but 4 of the 8 PPs came in the end of the second, and 3 of them were deserved (and the 4th - the second Sarich minor - was just plain bad luck that Stortini split open again). There were missed calls on both sides but these were mostly balanced out (again with a glaring exception) and the flow of the game was not interrupted.
- Mark Lee and Kevin Weekes might not be the most insightful CBC play-by-play duo, but "reach-around" and "shaft in his face" were priceless quotes.
Now I have three hockey ethics issues I want to rant about. In ascending order of importance:
1.) Aaron Johnson's crosscheck to JF Jacques' head bugged me a lot. It was dirty and unncessary and unbelievably dangerous. Shame on him.
2.) Mark Giordano needs to remove his helmet in the fight against Smid. He just has to. It's a point of honor, you do it as a sign of respect for your opponent, and Smid had just obliged him. I hope El Capitan took him aside for that.
3.) The Zack Stortini run on Iginla was a fucking farce. A helpful Oiler fan has provided a clip of the run on Youtube, which they are trying to pass off as evidence that the hit was a clean legal check.
BULLSHIT.
- The hit was late. I don't care if the Oil fans are calling it "less than a steamboat late", the fact of the matter is that there is no way for Stortini to use the hit to gain possession since Iginla had relinquished the puck, and so it is penalizable. And it should have been, because...
- The hit was dirty. Don't fucking tell me that hit was just "finishing the check". I wasn't born fucking yesterday. Stortini comes in with speed, he is aiming to injure and it is just plain good luck that Iginla turns and receives the check in the chest. If Iginla had not turned Stortini would still have hit him straight into the boards.
What the hell, Stortini? A better player than you will ever be learned the hard way in 03-04 the consequences of eye-for-an-eye. There is a difference between the split-second bad decisions that often happen in a league as fast as the NHL, and the bush-league ... thing that you tried.
0 recs |
22 comments
|
Comments
If McGrattan is around to “fight” …. then get back out there and solve the growing Stortini problem. Whether or not the Iginla hit was ‘legal’ … that jackass was running around at people all night. Curious move with the Prust healthy scratch …
by Calgarian in SJ on Oct 25, 2009 10:18 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Herald article said that McGrattan challenged Stortini but the latter declined.
by R O on Oct 25, 2009 10:23 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yet another example of the uselessness of of the otherwise untalented goon.
McGrattan goes on and on in the press about how he’s a deterrent and how he’ll police the ice so guys like Iginla don’t have to worry about cheapshots and the first time he has an opportunity to take a pound of flesh in retaliation for said cheapshot he’s stopped by the word “No”? That’s pretty weak Kryptonite.
Just further reinforces my belief that goons are just a freakshow attraction.
by Parallex on Oct 26, 2009 5:55 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Well, if Stortini is going to tuck his tail and run after a dirty hit, there is nothing anyone can do short of taking a dumb penalty – something Banfield would have loved to call given how far up Quinn’s ass his head was. McGrattan tried to have Stortini answer the bell. Stortini chose to be a coward. Move on, forget about it.
Stortini’s yellow streak isn’t an argument against the usefulness of McGrattan. 1:01 of ice time is.
by Resolute on Oct 26, 2009 7:09 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
It’s entirely an argument against the usefulness of McGrattan, his icetime, his slot on the reserve list, and his salary against the cap.
The mantra he’s been chanting ever since he got here has been “I’m a detterent! I’m a detterent!” and several times “I’m just waiting for someone to take a run at one of those guys so I can show ’um what I bring” and he’s stopped from doing that by someone just saying “No”? Well that’s not much of a deterrent now is it.
So what he’s only effective when A: The score is lopsided, B: cheapshots are being taken, C: said cheapshooter is inclined to fight, D: we have favourable reffing? That’s a pretty niche market.
by Parallex on Oct 26, 2009 7:47 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I will agree with you. In order to be an effective deterrent McGrattan needs to be on the ice. He needs to be able to play it both ways – beat up the other guy if it comes to that, or beat them at playing hockey if it doesn’t. And he can’t do the latter so he doesn’t get the ice time.
by R O on Oct 26, 2009 8:27 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
i respect a goon’s right to leave his helmet on, so as to not bash his head on the ice with a takedown…. but yeah. gio watched smid take his off and then tugged at his own for a split second before electing to leave it on…. also ? i really hope that’s the last gio fighting photo you post this year. dude’s gonna wreck himself.
by walkinvisible on Oct 25, 2009 10:55 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Ok, so we’re through ten games and things look decent on the standings chart. I only got to watch the first 37minutes of the game because I was coming back from a surfing trip (yes, I live in Vancouver…weather here is mild…sorry to the rest of Canada). From what I saw, the Flames are starting to come together… well except Iginla and Jokinen. I also don’t really want to see Johnson again…Pardy is the superior player.
The Flames looked pretty dominant to me in this game and finally, finally are getting the shot totals they would like to see. 25 shots against was the goal and Kipper saw the benefit with a great even strength showing and a solid game overall. I personally thought that he was trying to block the pass across on the first goal and maybe committed a little too hard on that, but it was a gamble that could have paid off. I agree it would have been nice to see it followed by a butterfly slide across, but…that’s tough from that position after he goes for the pass deflection. Oh well.
So the stats for Kipper through 9 games:
Last night: 1.000% ev sv%, Highlight reel: 2-2
Game stats Kipper: 7-1-1 – .903% (.924% ev)
.920 sv% +: 3 of 9
sv% >/= opp. sv%: 8 of 9
<27 s/a: 1 of 9
>30 s/a: 6 of 9
>33 s/a: 4 of 9
Highlight reel: 37 – 18
Ok, so…a big test coming up for the Flames and the goalie vs. Colorado. I’m not putting money on the goaltending battle, but I think Kiprusoff will hold his own. Let’s hope for a stinker from Anderson.
by LawrenceS on Oct 26, 2009 12:17 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
The pass ended up not going through the crease at all so Kipper’s gamble wasn’t going to work. The backdoor came from the pinching Visnovsky but I think he should probably still have noticed that the left side was uncovered.
Of course he could probably have been thinking that the high forward was going to cover that point, which is an entirely reasonable expectation. Who was that douche who let Visnovsky pinch like that?
by R O on Oct 26, 2009 8:24 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
forwards on the ice were Boyd and Glencross…
by maimster on Oct 26, 2009 8:36 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
The puck doesn’t have to go through the crease for Kipper to intercept a pass, as his goalie stick is likely about 60" long. He dropped his weight back and right (not leaving a strong push across likely) and went for it, didn’t get it, and was beat by a pretty nice passing play. Anyway, however you look at it, it’s not that important what he did, it’s more important what the PK didn’t do – so I think we’re probably saying the same thing.
by LawrenceS on Oct 26, 2009 9:15 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think the next five games we will finally get a good look at this team especially the back to back against the Stars and Blues it’s up in the Air which Goalie starts which but I’d give C-Mc’s the start in Dallas just to get a bit of revenge on his poor effort a few weeks ago.
But can we complain 7-2-1 after 10 games and each game since the Hawk comeback and the loss in Columbus this team has been getting better and better even without great production from Iginla, Jokinen and might as well throw Langkow in their as well.
I think the Colorado game will be a slobber-knocker it will be tough to get goals in my mind Anderson is probably playing the best out of any goalie in the NHL right now and Kipper isn’t a slouch right now.
The main key for the upcoming games is be smart and disciplined no taking dumb penalties and the PK must be the number one concern for Brent and the Boys right now.
Where the Lead is never safe, Ahead or Behind.
by CofRed on Oct 26, 2009 12:30 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Finally,
A game where they outshot the oppoent. That’s the first of the season. I know the Oilers are not even close to be our biggest rival anymore, but its still fun to watch how much we burn them.
Keep this up and when Iggy back to his form, we’ll have a great season. I can see that Iggy has fight his way to be a much better player then the past 9 games, and sometimes he might do too much, but at least he’s trying and I think he will be good, may not be a 50+ goal scorer, but he’ll be good.
Have you guys noticed during one of the powerplay when Jokenin had an open shot and decided to make a lousy pass? what is he afraid of? I might not had the best look at it, but heck, SHOOOOOOOT the damn puck! He looks like he is so afraid of losing position and making too many mistake to lost possesion… absolute lost confident, is SAD!
by Outz on Oct 26, 2009 9:48 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
how about the play where he slipped on a banana peel ?
by walkinvisible on Oct 26, 2009 9:59 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
and that… thanks for reminding me the horror…
how the hell was he a ‘decent’ center? I would rather play Dave Lowry as a center. yea, I know he didn’t play center and in his mid 40s.
by Outz on Oct 26, 2009 10:20 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
He didn’t have a good shot on that play (assuming we’re thinking of the same play) and no one was in position to take a rebound. Zero doubt in my mind that if Jokinen took that shot I’d either end up in ’bulin’s glove or on a defenders stick.
by Parallex on Oct 26, 2009 10:24 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
maybe you are right, but i remember he should’ve a clear shot. Not sure if there were any rebound tho, because all the players were bunched up on the left side. Anywho, 2 SOG for whom should be our true center and in our PP line just won’t cut it.
by Outz on Oct 26, 2009 11:31 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
boyd
cant say enough about the game boyd had. 70% on faceoffs played the body well and was coming up with pucks. Would be huge for the flames if he starts gathering points on a regular basis.
by Ricky G on Oct 26, 2009 4:40 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Boyd’s been farily strong most of the year, but he was outstanding the last 2 games. If he can keep this up, Jokinen becomes expendable (moreso).
by Kent Wilson on Oct 26, 2009 4:47 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
As invisible as Chokeagain has been … it’s jumping the gun to use the word “expendable” – at least for now.
Sure Boyd has been better lately, but IMO he hasn’t shown to be the consistent finisher that the Flames want. Funny thing is that these are two guys that D. Sutter really believes in, so they will definitely get their opportunities.
by Calgarian in SJ on Oct 26, 2009 6:06 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I disagree, if only because Boyd makes 1/10th the amount of Jokinen. What makes Olli such a problem is his pay scale and the fact that he can’t take on the big boys (despite being paid like someone who can). If Pumpkinhead continues to play 11 minutes at ES on the third line, he’s certainly expendable – probably even if Boyd doesn’t continue to look so damn good.
by Kent Wilson on Oct 26, 2009 7:30 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Boyd is our best bet next season for the 2nd centre on the depth chart behind Langkow. Conroy is getting old, Jokinen is incapable and Backlund is a question mark.
The Sutters MUST be talking about this. Boyd’s role this year will probably tell us what they are planning vis-a-vis the Flames centre position for next season.
by R O on Oct 26, 2009 7:51 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

by 




























