Argh!
Hard to blame the guys after that performance. On the second night of a B2B, playing only 11 forwards, the Flames managed 47 shots on net and fundamentally outplayed the Cancuks in practically every way (aside from the one that matters most). Luongo and the goalposts won that game for Vancouver last night, and the Flames should take some comfort in that. The PP is still a problem and I have quibbles on an individual level in terms of performance, but the club as a whole played a pretty damn impressive game. If that's the Flames team that shows up consistently going foward, they should be fine.
The NW division is still within reach, but one wonders if the Flames should perhaps focus on resting some of the big boys before the end of the season. Kiprusoff, Iginla and Phaneuf come to mind here. The team isn't going to gain much by winning the NW, aside from bragging rights and a few more home dates. Playing the money players into the ground to beat Edmonton and finish third may just be a pyrrhic victory at this point. As Matt says, there isn't much to choose between CBJ or CHI at this point.
32 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
hahahaha i’m pretty sure that we can’t afford to rest players, under the current cap situation (kiprusoff aside, of course). perhaps i don’t understand it exactly right but if we can’t currently afford boyd, we can’t afford the likes of other hole-fillers (dvdg, greentree, *ahem*chucko etc). so unless you’re suggesting we play with 10 forwards to rest iggy, and 5 defensemen to rest dion, then i’m not really so hot on the idea.
(also: speaking of cap space and playoffs, i will all-but GUARANTEE a return of warrener in game 1, if regehr or sarich are unavailable).
Well, by resting I didn’t necessarily mean scratching. Keenan could treat the last couple games against the Oilers like pre-season games and just spread the ice time to guys who don’t normally get much of it.
Also, when you say “Luongo and the goalposts”, which was more important last night? I thought it was 50/50. If one or the other doesn’t show up, the Flames win and in grand fashion. If I were Alain Vigneault I’d be worried that only 50% of my team’s success is under my/their control.
(having said that, I step back and read what I just wrote and it seems like a blind fan trying to downplay the opposition… is that so?)
Thanks. It is a small group, although you do pretty well for yourself here on the SBN.
by R O on Apr 8, 2009 1:04 PM PDT up reply actions
Yeah, things are building a bit, which is nice. It’ll be interesting to see if we can attract a few more commenters and traffic down the road.
Kent, youre probably the most well-known flames blogger out there, but even at that, it seems like the flames have wayy less blog readers and bloggers than the nucks and especially the oilers. what do you think the issue is? do you also think that your articles are posted in too many different places (here, flamesnation, FHF etc) instead of focusing on one locale? i guess you started FHF and are most well known for that (christ, youre a link on the Flames Sports Illustrated page) and flames nation is a good spot for flames and oilers matchups, what do you think the best way to rally as many troops is?
by Dustin Timberlake on Apr 8, 2009 1:44 PM PDT up reply actions
I imagine it would be a lot easier if we had the dynasty history of the Oilers.
Kent, can you do something about that? :)
by R O on Apr 8, 2009 1:57 PM PDT up reply actions
I have no idea. There could be a division in the online culture that delineates Flames fans and Oilers fans since the latter was more rapid in the adoption and expansion of blogging. As such, there seems to be an undercurrent of contempt for blogs in most online Flames venues such as Calgarypuck, because it’s seen as something dirty Oiler fans do.
That said, there just seems to be more Oiler fans online than Flames fans. Check out the different teams sections over at HF boards. Maybe it’s the Oilers superior past, or maybe it’s because they have way more to bitch about now.
Luongo and the goalposts won that game for Vancouver last night,
And Rypien. And Ohlund. And Willie Mitchell’s uber-stick of glory. And stellar penalty killing. And better coaching.
Let’s be honest here.
Yeah…AV’s strategy of getting grossly outplayed to the tune of 47-25 at home to a tried squad with 11 skaters was genius. Of course he knew that the Flames would hit posts, miss break-aways and Luongo would have his best game in probably the last 2 months.
I’ll give your guys credit – they made the most of their opportunities. But, seriously…9 times out of 10, Vancouver loses that game.
I’ll give Temujin that part about coaching, I’m almost sure that Keenan was just sending out Bertuzzi in good situations such as the powerplay and on Iginla’s line to help him score on Bobby Lu. Keenan looked PRETTY bad trading Bertuzzi for Luongo, and if Todd picked up a goal on Luongo (especially after the spin o rama shootout attempt in February), I’m sure Keenan would have convinced himself that he came out on top of that trade as he softly weeps himself to sleep or whatever he does every night. Man, much like Glencross moonlights as a chuckwagon racer in the summer, I am sure Keenan also likes to get away from hockey in the offseason….. albiet his leisure activities probably involve the words ‘child predator’ and ‘online chatrooms’ to some extent. Dude just has that look about him.
by Dustin Timberlake on Apr 8, 2009 1:37 PM PDT reply actions
I agree the Flames win that game nine times out of 10, but there are still lessons to be learned and reasons for the loss:
• Power play sucked. Two five-on-threes, six chances overall, no results. And pretty much every time, Jokinen-Iginla, which hasn’t worked to date on the PP, was dispatched to try to end the 0-for-30+ streak. That’s a coaching problem. TRY SOMETHING DIFFERENT.
• And, again, Dion Phaneuf. Two of the goals, which was basically the margin of victory (forget about the fourth goal, it was a throwaway), were directly his fault: The atom-level ring-around-the-rosey-plus-deflection on Ohlund’s first goal, and screening Kipper on his second because he couldn’t hold position on Bernier in front of the net.
In a game of that magnitude, against an elite goalie, you have to be great at all times — not just most of the time. Otherwise, you lose, even if you do have 47 shots.
There’s an old bromide about a goalie needing to “get in the game” the first few minutes, and with Luongo I am convinced it is true. iIcannot tell you how many times he has let the first shot on goal in (lots), but if he can shut the door for the first 5-10 minutes, my confidence level goes sky-high, because it usually means he’s not going to let in any stinkers.
I’ve heard you folks bemoaning Dion Phaneuf’s play all season. After last nights game, I can finally and fully appreciate why. I don’t see it as a Wade Redden-esque collapse in skill level, but what is the problem? Tougher minutes? More minutes? Worse D partners?
Of the 47 shots by Calgary, how many would you say were “good scoring chances”? 15? 20? I was half-drunk for the most of the game so maybe my numbers are off.
That was a pretty fair post-game from a Canucks viewpoint.
by R O on Apr 8, 2009 3:08 PM PDT up reply actions

by 

























