Flames vs. Wild Game Thread
by Robert Cleave on Mar 7, 2010 9:00 AM PST
427 comments
Calgary Flames at Minnesota Wild, Mar 7, 2010 12:00 PM PST
With a badly needed win tucked away Friday, the Flames head out for a two game sojourn that starts in St. Paul this afternoon. I mentioned the other night that pretty much every game is a mandatory victory at this juncture, and today's meet-up with the Wild is no different. In fact, it's the type of game where they could do themselves a favour by separating from a team below them for once. As we all saw on Wednesday, the Wild do seem to have the ability to put Calgary into a deep slumber, and that type of half-game effort just won't do when you're not comfortably in the playoffs.
I won't go into too much detail today, because we just saw the Wild a few days ago, and it doesn't sound like the Flames will be adjusting any personnel after their win over the Devils. I didn't think much of the play of Stajan-Bourque-Iginla through the first two periods, and the goal that Stajan tallied in the third was a Bourque production, with the captain irrelevant. I've said this before, but even if you want to bend over backwards to give Jarome Iginla the benefit of the doubt, it would take a powerful pair of blinders to ignore his play when he's confronted with the other team's best. I'm at the point where I don't care who his line mates are, as long as he takes on the second string. That noted, a few goals always make coaches think that they've found the elixir, so I can't see them splitting until the team falls behind in a game by more than one.
So, Langkow should ride with Higgins and Kotalik again, and Mikael Backlund will have another outing with Hagman and David Moss. The bottom half of the Flames' roster was very solid against New Jersey, and although I've openly disagreed with the policy that leaves Dawes in the PB, Nystrom and Mayers have been OK. I'm still of the mind that this personnel deployment is an opportunity for exploiting mismatches gone wanting, though.
The defence will likely roll as is, but Steve Staios is very likely over his head against top-sixers. I don't see him being busted down until a bad loss, even with the somewhat shaky play that he and Bouwmeester exhibited on Friday. That does leave Sarich and Giordano a good chance to boss Minnesota's lower orders in the manner they managed Friday, which was a tidy affair on their part.
The Herald story I linked to suggested that Brent Sutter wasn't dropping any hints as to what he has in mind regarding his starting goalie. I don't really want to see Vesa Toskala play a meaningful game this spring, and he may not go today, but if he's going to get more than two games in, this might be a non-B2B spot for him, particularly with it being a matinee on a shortish turn-around and Detroit looming on Tuesday.
Minnesota's last outing ended in a loss via the skills competition Friday night versus the Oilers. The news from that encounter was the reckless knee hit Derek Boogaard unloaded on Ryan Jones. That bit of foul business will cost the Wild "enforcer" two games and a bunch of dough, and I can't help but feel he got off pretty lightly. I am somewhat conflicted about his absence, though, because he's a liability for the Wild when he's not attempting to damage someone.
Game wise, the Flames were a bit fortunate to get the Olympic version of Marty Brodeur the other night, so I wouldn't relish their chances if they fall behind in this one. One area not even worth thinking about anymore is special teams, since those sorts of events have apparently been prohibited by secret league protocol in Calgary games for the duration.
Puck drop goes shortly after 1 MT on Sportsnet West.
0 recs |
427 comments
|
Email
Print
Comments
Lets see, watch an afternoon NHL game involving the most dreadfully boring hockey club in the history of the sport, or watch the Hitmen battle Saskatoon for top spot in the WHL? Easy call there. Hoping I come home to a good score in this one.
Over/under on the number of Minnesota icings is 35.
The Blackhawks are doing us a favor up 2-0 late in the 1st. Hopefully the Hawks goaltending doesn’t suck for the rest of the day.
What you see is, What you get.
GO FLAMES GO!!!
too bad you were exactly right in your fears.
by walkinvisible on Mar 7, 2010 10:55 AM PST up reply actions
why are the flames TRYING to lose games ????
by walkinvisible on Mar 7, 2010 11:55 AM PST up reply actions
i gotta ask: how effin’ hard is it for everyone to hope for vancouver wins ? it’s hard, right ?? god, i hope they beat the preds.
I guess so.
So the Flames moved Boyd because “Backlund is a top 9 forward on this team”. Right? RIGHT??
wow. personally, i think that’s gonna be a disaster. i predict a solid -2 for the old man…. put it this way: if i’m right, enjoy today cause it’ll be conroy’s last game (barring injuries, of course).
by walkinvisible on Mar 7, 2010 12:04 PM PST up reply actions
i think that was directed towards me.
shep —-you must be very glad for the start time !!!! :)
by walkinvisible on Mar 7, 2010 12:08 PM PST up reply actions
i will gladly, postgame, say that i’m wrong. ps: if he’s not a -2, he’ll be a -1 and in the penalty box for another minny goal. that’s my prediciton.
by walkinvisible on Mar 7, 2010 12:07 PM PST up reply actions
i think they moved boyd because nystrom is a bonafide 4th line centre
by walkinvisible on Mar 7, 2010 12:05 PM PST up reply actions
remember in october when we used to score in the first minute all the time ? those were the days….
by walkinvisible on Mar 7, 2010 12:09 PM PST up reply actions
did they say he’s a really really good guy ?
by walkinvisible on Mar 7, 2010 12:11 PM PST up reply actions
Toskala in nets? I’m not sure how I feel about that.
Actually, check that. I know exactly how i feel. I hate it.
Did you see that shot by Staios? Beauty shot, low, wide of the blocking Minny forward, perfect for tip-ins. I have no illusions about Staios’ offensive ability but it’s a nice individual play.
i watched the toronto game the other night (not last night) and dion is still the same. huge unnecessary hits. in position during a goal against, but doing pretty much nothing besides standing there.
by walkinvisible on Mar 7, 2010 12:14 PM PST up reply actions
We’re still only breaking even on chances by the looks of it, ours have just gone in.
I expect that to change though, this group of forwards is very good. Too damn bad we don’t have 82 games to play with here, I’m sure we’d contend for home ice with this group.
Yeah, what’s up with not playing Backlund? The correct move is to have him if the AHL but if they’ve already committed to giving him time in the NHL (winnign be damned) then do it! Doing things halfsies is just insane.
this is a presumption. i think they moved boyd because daz knew he wouldn’t be able to re-sign him and didn’t want to deal with qualifying/offer sheets etc etc etc.
by walkinvisible on Mar 7, 2010 12:25 PM PST up reply actions
But then he could have got a 3rd rounder instead of a 4th rounder. It’s not that hard to tender a qualifying offer (unless you are named Dale Tallon).
Go Flames Go
Goals? Where we're going, we don't need goals.
by Justin Azevedo on Mar 7, 2010 12:27 PM PST up reply actions
hahaha good morning to you too, justin.
:)
maybe it was a case of darryl being sincere in saying he wanted boyder to get a chance at playing. i doubt it, but it’s possible.
by walkinvisible on Mar 7, 2010 12:28 PM PST up reply actions
At this point, that is really the only reasoning that makes sense. Unless the Assistant GM didn’t tell Daz about the QO/3rd rounder thing.
Go Flames Go
Goals? Where we're going, we don't need goals.
by Justin Azevedo on Mar 7, 2010 12:31 PM PST up reply actions
this is also possible, though something i would think darrly would be aware of.
by walkinvisible on Mar 7, 2010 12:31 PM PST up reply actions
Darrly? Maybe we should start calling him that. :)
Go Flames Go
Goals? Where we're going, we don't need goals.
by Justin Azevedo on Mar 7, 2010 12:32 PM PST up reply actions
i like that actually. it’s short for darling.
by walkinvisible on Mar 7, 2010 12:33 PM PST up reply actions
Wild are sending everything on net and not always from the greatest angles, they obviously are playing this game differently than if Kipper were in net. I mean, that last rush was led by Burns for pete’s sake!
I wonder if the Flames are aware there is advance scouting. Their breakouts today have been approximately 90% on the boards, and by on the on boards I mean firing it around the boards (which is difficult to pick up cleanly). This has been their breakout pattern for too long, with no variation, and the other teams sit on it. So far there’s been 9 different times where the puck was stopped at the line, and 6 others where the result was punching the puck out to the center ice line where Minnesota started a new rush. This is Russian Roulette.
I haven’t paid as close attention to our own F since I’m keyed in on Toskala and what the Wild F are doing, but are we getting much support below the dots? That’s something that these forwards dont’ do so well, soemtimes they jailbreak like Bertuzzi.
Not bad support, but they’re not using the forward (center) that is circling below the dot at all, and that forward isn’t covering anyone because he’s looking for space as part of the breakout (if that makes sense).
Yeah, it does. Basically the centre’s not really doing his part, he’s acting as a low winger instead of helping with the battles or angling away the third man on the cycle.
during the game on wednesday, in the third period, jarome took the puck up the middle and i believe it was the ONLY time he penetrated the zone without losing the puck in the ENTIRE GAME
by walkinvisible on Mar 7, 2010 12:27 PM PST up reply actions
3.6 worth of useless from Sarich, 2.7 worth of useless from Staios…
Go Flames Go
Goals? Where we're going, we don't need goals.
by Justin Azevedo on Mar 7, 2010 12:31 PM PST up reply actions
Ok. So 2.7 worth of mediocrity.
Go Flames Go
Goals? Where we're going, we don't need goals.
by Justin Azevedo on Mar 7, 2010 12:33 PM PST up reply actions
There’s a premium for age. Like wine and renaissance paintings.
by mike_H on Mar 7, 2010 12:33 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
at least i know this is MY mikeH, and not an imposter. :)
by walkinvisible on Mar 7, 2010 12:34 PM PST up reply actions
lol. rec’d
Go Flames Go
Goals? Where we're going, we don't need goals.
by Justin Azevedo on Mar 7, 2010 12:34 PM PST up reply actions
i c wat u did thar
Go Flames Go
Goals? Where we're going, we don't need goals.
by Justin Azevedo on Mar 7, 2010 12:44 PM PST up reply actions
The one with the hat? If so, yes.
Go Flames Go
Goals? Where we're going, we don't need goals.
by Justin Azevedo on Mar 7, 2010 12:50 PM PST up reply actions
maybe he doesn’t understand how to exploit the icing.
by walkinvisible on Mar 7, 2010 12:42 PM PST up reply actions
which is why i’m suggesting that he doesn’t understand it. either that or he thinks the speed of the fourth line is awesomesauce.
by walkinvisible on Mar 7, 2010 12:45 PM PST up reply actions
So, this is just a strange period for the Flames. Ahead on the scoresheet, we’ve drawn more penalties, and yet we haven’t really outplayed or outchanced.
Straight out of the Twilight Zone.
Shots were advantage us, too.
Go Flames Go
Goals? Where we're going, we don't need goals.
by Justin Azevedo on Mar 7, 2010 12:44 PM PST up reply actions
Really? Damn, that’s impressive then. Maimster and I have both seen the same thing, Flames playing in their own zone a lot.
Although there was that late push by Iggy’s line when Backstrom gave up the puck.
Hey. He’s got big-body presence.
Go Flames Go
Goals? Where we're going, we don't need goals.
by Justin Azevedo on Mar 7, 2010 12:43 PM PST up reply actions
I’ve never actually seen Staios with a beard.
Go Flames Go
Goals? Where we're going, we don't need goals.
by Justin Azevedo on Mar 7, 2010 12:49 PM PST up reply actions
I can’t get too worked up about how Sutter works the icings. The 4th line needs sheltering, that’s one way to do it.
Bigger issue is playing the fourth line as much as they’re being played in high-leverage ice time. Myself, I prefer three EV units and subbing in the extra F’s here and there to rest players in a rotation.
Yeah, I’m with you. But I’d be thinking the same at 10 minutes in, I woudln’t play that fourth unit at all.
If you are playing the fourth unit though and you really want to distribute some icetime then the soft minutes have to be given to them. I just disagree with playing the fourth unit in gneeral.
Actually, I remember when Jokinen was here he made a point of putting Olli and Jarome out there for those. And at least half the time the puck ended up moving the wrong way anyways.
that goes for olli full stop, though, non ?
by walkinvisible on Mar 7, 2010 1:01 PM PST up reply actions
Depends on how long the other team has been out there. Putting a strong line out if the other guys have a minute in already can really make a difference. Maybe a goal once every 4-5 games or so, and that’s worth something.
Oh yeah, 0.2 goals a game is huge, that’s basically like having another impact forward on the roster. If Sutter could work that kind of advantage out of this roster then he probably deserves to be paid in the millions.
Yeah, Mike Brophy. I’d like the addition a lot better if his cap hit wasn’t over 2.5 million dollars.
Go Flames Go
Goals? Where we're going, we don't need goals.
k, i don’t understand that cialis ad. why is the dude rolling around on scaffolding ? cause he’s “up” ?
I was going to try and answer that, but everything I could think of was at best NC-17.
Go Flames Go
Goals? Where we're going, we don't need goals.
by Justin Azevedo on Mar 7, 2010 12:54 PM PST up reply actions
A mirror blinded him and he tripped over a black cat, falling into a ladder.
Go Flames Go
Goals? Where we're going, we don't need goals.
by Justin Azevedo on Mar 7, 2010 12:57 PM PST up reply actions
also, re: commercials: i can’t believe casa di mama chose the flames pedestal jersey. makes no sense at all. not very “non descript”
Those commercials look like the high school AV club produced them.
Go Flames Go
Goals? Where we're going, we don't need goals.
by Justin Azevedo on Mar 7, 2010 12:55 PM PST up reply actions
Pretty much. Toskalol was swimming a little in the early going.
Go Flames Go
Goals? Where we're going, we don't need goals.
by Justin Azevedo on Mar 7, 2010 12:56 PM PST up reply actions
That was a very big rebound. Yikes.
Go Flames Go
Goals? Where we're going, we don't need goals.
by Justin Azevedo on Mar 7, 2010 1:02 PM PST up reply actions
Them’s rational minutes, given the choices.
by Robert Cleave on Mar 7, 2010 1:03 PM PST up reply actions
what the hell is simmer talking about there, on toskala ? getting up quickly and getting back square to the shooter ??? dude was on his knees through that entire rebound.
I cannot believe how low he plays. It’s absurd.
Go Flames Go
Goals? Where we're going, we don't need goals.
by Justin Azevedo on Mar 7, 2010 1:04 PM PST up reply actions
Sounds incredibly perverse. I like it, too.
by SmellOfVictory on Mar 7, 2010 3:07 PM PST up reply actions
This is Toskalol’s first game since January 28th. That’s a lot of rest.
Go Flames Go
Goals? Where we're going, we don't need goals.
by Justin Azevedo on Mar 7, 2010 1:08 PM PST up reply actions
Speaking of commercials: TAC: 3
Go Flames Go
Goals? Where we're going, we don't need goals.
by Justin Azevedo on Mar 7, 2010 1:11 PM PST up reply actions
Also funny watching him on dump ins – the puck goes behind the net and out the other side and he just watches it, like he’s not aware he’s allowed to go play it.
if a dude doesn’t feel comfortable handling the puck, the dude shouldn’t handle the puck. end of story.
by walkinvisible on Mar 7, 2010 1:12 PM PST up reply actions
“cory sarich struggling a little bit in that 4-0 game” um…. cory sarich struggled a FUCKTON in that game (right, RO ?) :P
Hangin’ out in America too long, sir ;-)
by Robert Cleave on Mar 7, 2010 1:15 PM PST up reply actions
Cory Sarich struggles a fuckton getting out of bed in the morning, and it’s still all downhill from there.
Go Flames Go
Goals? Where we're going, we don't need goals.
by Justin Azevedo on Mar 7, 2010 1:14 PM PST up reply actions
He’s greasy, too.
Go Flames Go
Goals? Where we're going, we don't need goals.
by Justin Azevedo on Mar 7, 2010 1:18 PM PST up reply actions
No.
Go Flames Go
Goals? Where we're going, we don't need goals.
by Justin Azevedo on Mar 7, 2010 1:21 PM PST up reply actions
Good thing I sat Bourque for Patrick Sharp (-2, 0 points)
Go Flames Go
Goals? Where we're going, we don't need goals.
this happens to me all the time. usually it’s hossa for samuelsson.
by walkinvisible on Mar 7, 2010 1:27 PM PST up reply actions
that was a lucky fast whistle, there.
ps: jamal —if you break your stick, you might as well skate to the bench to get another, you’re not doing any good there.
If someone can explain why the Nystrom line is out against Havlat/Latendresse with a rational reason, I’d like to hear it.
I’d like to know why they’re out at all the shift after the PP. Just insane, forward depth is now a STRENGTH for this team. Only team with top-heavy forward corps have to resort to this.
by R O on Mar 7, 2010 1:28 PM PST up reply actions
Comical bench management there.
I mean, we have a lot of forwards right? So the shift after our own PP, there should be no reason for Mayers to see the ice until at least the 3rd shift after the PP.
definitely both today. i’m not sure if we’re going back a game or not.
by walkinvisible on Mar 7, 2010 1:32 PM PST up reply actions
although sarich was looking AWFUL with jaybouw too.
by walkinvisible on Mar 7, 2010 1:32 PM PST up reply actions
Both of Minny’s tonight, and at least two on Friday.
by Robert Cleave on Mar 7, 2010 1:32 PM PST up reply actions
Naw Kent, it’s the fact that the forwards have so much confidence in front of Staios.
Wait, that narrative’s only used for goalies?
by R O on Mar 7, 2010 1:36 PM PST up reply actions
he’s not BAD, per sé, he’s just useless.
by walkinvisible on Mar 7, 2010 1:38 PM PST up reply actions
olli for higgins straight up would have been an awesome trade. re-sign or not.
by walkinvisible on Mar 7, 2010 1:40 PM PST up reply actions
NY had to move a salary, so if the Flames wanted to move Joker, there weren’t many choices. That noted, NY had absolutely given up on Higgins, so Calgary likely could have got him alone for very little.
by Robert Cleave on Mar 7, 2010 1:42 PM PST up reply actions
i’m just not sure how kotalik became a good idea for us to take on as a NYR salary dump. also ? he had the best first game with a new team of any player ever (maybe). way to tie down. *sigh
by walkinvisible on Mar 7, 2010 1:44 PM PST up reply actions
That was kind of my point. I wouldn’t have moved Joker if it meant taking Kotalik’s boat anchor deal. If Sutter really liked Higgins as a reclamation project, the Rags were trying to just about give the guy away.
by Robert Cleave on Mar 7, 2010 1:46 PM PST up reply actions
boyd, johnson and a 3rd rounder for higgins ? sounds pretty good to me.
by walkinvisible on Mar 7, 2010 1:48 PM PST up reply actions
jokinen to nashville for a 4th rounder ? also sounds pretty solid.
by walkinvisible on Mar 7, 2010 1:48 PM PST up reply actions
i’m disgustingly serious, here. then we’d still have prust and + or – 5.7 mil in capspace next year.
by walkinvisible on Mar 7, 2010 1:51 PM PST up reply actions
Might not have cost that much, which makes me a bit sad. Probably could have traded Prust and that third, or maybe just the pick.
by Robert Cleave on Mar 7, 2010 1:49 PM PST up reply actions
I want to bang my head in here because while Toskala has looked terrible in nets, he actually wasn’t really culpable for either goal against.
There are certain bench management tactics here that just drive the keen-eyed fan insane.
Butter needs to give the 4th line a rest. He’s been riding them hard since Glencross was demoted (and, to be fair, they’ve had some decent games), but that’s river boat gambling, especially on the road.
If they play Minny’s 3rd and 4th lines, they’d likely manage. I just don’t get the sort of poor planning that gets them out against either Koivu or Havlat unless it’s after an icing.
by Robert Cleave on Mar 7, 2010 1:48 PM PST up reply actions
Seems like Wild are getting Havlat out against Conroy et al, they’re getting beat up worse than the 4th line.
Likely so. i just really noticed the two terrible shifts in the second against the Nystrom line.
by Robert Cleave on Mar 7, 2010 1:55 PM PST up reply actions
Are we actually cheering for VAN right now? Damn, this sucks. They have tied it up now, but really I’d like to see the Flames take a run at the div title, they have the horses IMO.
ahhhh…. bourque. there’s the classic third period bad bourque penalty: BBP™
by walkinvisible on Mar 7, 2010 2:06 PM PST up reply actions
There’s Lanks with his usual poor positioning, does he not know that he needs to hang around the top of the circles on the PK instead of going strong post and being available for key pass interceptions?
But you don’t actually watch that closely, right?
by Robert Cleave on Mar 7, 2010 2:09 PM PST up reply actions
Yeah I actually can’t tell one way or the other but in ten games I’m going to know for sure, you know?
by R O on Mar 7, 2010 2:10 PM PST up reply actions
ps: “cheaty-cheat” is awesomeness. i meant to rec that the other day. :P
by walkinvisible on Mar 7, 2010 2:09 PM PST up reply actions
seriously. is it because he’s being saddled with duds, or is there something actually wrong ?
by walkinvisible on Mar 7, 2010 2:12 PM PST up reply actions
That’s the kind of positioning that Steinberg wants to see from our first line players.
by R O on Mar 7, 2010 2:15 PM PST up reply actions
Following up on this, he circled from his defensive position when the puck was reversed the other way and it was clear they had possession. His D had pinched and was wide, and he snuck between the two D so as soon as they got the puck, he was already breaking clear.
Thanks Maimster. I thought he was closing on the red line when the puck was still at the face off dot which is usually a bad cheat but if we had possession then it’s not so bad.
by R O on Mar 7, 2010 2:25 PM PST up reply actions
“This game is an example of what happens when the stripes get in the way of a great game”. Direct quote…
That’s hilarious and yet so true. Didn’t the Wild get a gift PP because teh stripes coudlnt’ call a textbook hook?
by R O on Mar 7, 2010 2:20 PM PST up reply actions
It’s the one thing he might be useful for. Strange decision making.
by Robert Cleave on Mar 7, 2010 2:23 PM PST up reply actions
i think regehr took the point in the first (pre-jaybouw)
by walkinvisible on Mar 7, 2010 2:23 PM PST up reply actions
Yeah that’s just mind boggling.
If we’re not using Kotalik on his usual role on the PP then there’s not much use in acquiring him, so Higgins was the target. But if Higgins was the target he should have been resigned.
Strange all around.
by R O on Mar 7, 2010 2:24 PM PST up reply actions
and then daz gave staios all the higgins money. what a douche.
by walkinvisible on Mar 7, 2010 2:30 PM PST up reply actions
That money’s going into the minors, book it. No way we can even dress a complete roster with that money still on the books IIRC.
by R O on Mar 7, 2010 2:31 PM PST up reply actions
So, uh, Canucks win. Whcih helps the Flames get in the playoffs but really I want them to lose. There aren’t many players on that team who deserve success, to be frank about it.
Burrows cries like a girl.
Go Flames Go
Goals? Where we're going, we don't need goals.
by Justin Azevedo on Mar 7, 2010 2:28 PM PST up reply actions
as a girl, i’m offended by this. the saying should be “girls cry like burrows”
by walkinvisible on Mar 7, 2010 2:29 PM PST up reply actions
I am A-OK with this.
Go Flames Go
Goals? Where we're going, we don't need goals.
by Justin Azevedo on Mar 7, 2010 2:30 PM PST up reply actions
That’s Koivu’s penalty completely changed and killed the game (which, of course, wasn’t a penalty because at that point, you should be allowed to run over the goalie).
Don’t recall. I did hear you say that we needed more leadership, whether it be on the ice, off the ice, in the pressbox, from the nosebleeds, up the road, down the creek…
by R O on Mar 7, 2010 2:30 PM PST up reply actions
Aside from the first, he was.
Go Flames Go
Goals? Where we're going, we don't need goals.
by Justin Azevedo on Mar 7, 2010 2:30 PM PST up reply actions
Yep. Good thing they played well in front of him.
Go Flames Go
Goals? Where we're going, we don't need goals.
by Justin Azevedo on Mar 7, 2010 2:32 PM PST up reply actions
Exactly! The team has a fairly reasonable backup so if he can do this twice more for the rest of the year we’ll be looking good.
Too bad those useless Hawks couldn’t help us. Today was the exact reason they won’t win the Cup. Dumb penalties lead to bad Goaltending.
What you see is, What you get.
GO FLAMES GO!!!
And vice-versa.
Go Flames Go
Goals? Where we're going, we don't need goals.
by Justin Azevedo on Mar 7, 2010 2:34 PM PST up reply actions
He did, haha!
Go Flames Go
Goals? Where we're going, we don't need goals.
by Justin Azevedo on Mar 7, 2010 2:34 PM PST up reply actions
it means simmer’s lost it.
i just wrote “sutter’s lost it” but that’s totally not what i meant to write.
by walkinvisible on Mar 7, 2010 2:35 PM PST up reply actions
I dunno guys, Toskala was awful all game. He’s allergic to his far post, that’s basically where a good chunk of shots will go if opposing shooters have any sense.
STANLEY CUP FOR SURE
Go Flames Go
Goals? Where we're going, we don't need goals.
by Justin Azevedo on Mar 7, 2010 2:36 PM PST up reply actions
He was not awful. He made some big saves when he needed to, and he hadn’t played in more then a month, so I would call that pretty good.
Go Flames Go
Goals? Where we're going, we don't need goals.
by Justin Azevedo on Mar 7, 2010 2:36 PM PST up reply actions
I assort this a bit to the defense being a little more aggressive which can be good and bad.
What you see is, What you get.
GO FLAMES GO!!!
This argument? The “defense let the goalie down” argument? Comon.
You see what you want to see.
by R O on Mar 7, 2010 2:41 PM PST up reply actions
CGY -11. Iggy – 4 points, -5. Hmm. The Flames blocked 14 shots at EV and only had 3 blocked. Who are these guys?
EV shots 20-19 Min, 4-4 in the third. Minny had 6 total shots in the third period, which is perfectly fine work when starting the period with the lead.
Softer minutes come in all forms, right?
by Robert Cleave on Mar 7, 2010 2:36 PM PST up reply actions
Well, Brophy and Shannon are longtime hockey watchers from press boxes, not guys who’ve been around the game. Bob McKenzie is the only guy I’ve seen who is from the same place, but does actual relevant analysis.
Hrudey’s got all the respect in the world from me, but he plays the game. MacLean also, because he usually defers to the actual analysts.
This was my major problem with Millions when he was PBP guy, is he was always editorializing on the game beyond his comprehension. This is the same reason I don’t have much of a problem with Loubardias … his analysis never goes beyond what can easily be understood on the surface. He just suffers from Simmer sitting next to him.
Guys. Toskala was bad. He lost his net on more than half of his shots. The shots didn’t go into the part of the net he lost. In future games – they will.
Well, as long as it’s only two more, it will be fine.
Go Flames Go
Goals? Where we're going, we don't need goals.
by Justin Azevedo on Mar 7, 2010 2:39 PM PST up reply actions
He might play Minny two weeks from this afternoon. Calgary is in almost exactly the same scenario that we had today: Friday night at home, Sunday afternoon in St. Paul.
by Robert Cleave on Mar 7, 2010 2:41 PM PST up reply actions
OHMYGOD. these guys do not understand how commercials with pro athletes work.
jarome isn’t busy doing olympic ads ? you mean, the ones he shot IN SEPTEMBER !???! i could give you exact dates for each spot (samsung: monday, scotiabank: tuesday/wednesday, sandwich shot out of his hand with a snowball on greenscreen at a NE studio: thursday) and all of them were before he even started training camp…
this is where the MSM honestly pisses me off. these two chumps just seriously suggested that the reason jarome was tired leading up to the olympics was because he was busy with the extra curricular sponsorship commercials. where do they get their information from ?? they don’t. they invent stuff and present it as fact.
by walkinvisible on Mar 7, 2010 2:39 PM PST up reply actions
All this nonsense conversation is what you get when a network a) Doesn’t want to pay actual experts, and b) Tries to have the faux experts analyze Calgary games from Toronto. Oh, I long for the days of Grant Pollock vignettes between the second and third on Channels 2&7 …
fine. but don’t show up presenting these myths as FACT. because it’s not fact, nobody is correcting them, and (inevitably) someone will turn up at work on monday and suggest around the watercooler “hey, so jarome was so tired-looking because he was doing all these commercials in january —-he shouldn’t be sponsored so much.” and the rumour will propogate itself.
by walkinvisible on Mar 7, 2010 2:41 PM PST up reply actions
You can make a difference
Time for a Hit The Post blog entry! And, leave some comments on Mike Brophy’s Sportsnet blog.
where’s it ? and was it mike brophy that said it ? i was listening, not watching
by walkinvisible on Mar 7, 2010 2:43 PM PST up reply actions
I off to play some street hockey and enjoy what’s left of this beautiful weather.
Later peeps.
What you see is, What you get.
GO FLAMES GO!!!
Enjoy.
Go Flames Go
Goals? Where we're going, we don't need goals.
by Justin Azevedo on Mar 7, 2010 2:42 PM PST up reply actions
steinberg totally talked about his disagreement with RO. funny. i wrote a bit about it over at mine.
So we finally know the secret to Iggy being able to snipe and not go high/wide. Regarding his hat trick against Minny:
"I’d be lying if I said I was aiming those," said Iginla, who assisted on last week’s gold medal-winning goal by Sidney Crosby(notes) for Canada against the United States. "I was really just trying to hit them hard, and fortunately, they came off the right way."
All he has to do is stop trying to aim, and BAM! Goals out the wazoo.
totally fits perfectly with the story about him aiming on net (and missing) during the commercial i shot with him. if you don’t know the story, i’ll repeat it (again).
by walkinvisible on Mar 7, 2010 10:55 PM PST up reply actions
Haha yes, I remember that story, Sutter and all.
by SmellOfVictory on Mar 8, 2010 1:26 AM PST up reply actions
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
Related FanPosts on Matchsticks and Gasoline
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recent FanPosts
Northwest Standings
Flames Schedule
Next 5 Games
Vancouver
|
Tue 09/21 | 6:00 PM PDT |
|
@
Vancouver
|
Tue 09/21 | 7:00 PM PDT |
|
Tampa Bay
|
Sat 09/25 | 6:00 PM PDT |
|
Phoenix
|
Tue 09/28 | 6:00 PM PDT |
|
@
New York Islanders
|
Wed 09/29 | 5:00 PM PDT |
Last 5 Games
|
@
Vancouver
|
Sat 04/10 | L 3 - 7 |
|
Minnesota
|
Thu 04/08 | SO - L 1 - 2 |
|
San Jose
|
Tue 04/06 | L 1 - 2 |
|
@
Chicago
|
Sun 04/04 | L 1 - 4 |
|
@
Colorado
|
Fri 04/02 | W 2 - 1 |
In Association With
Latest Puck Daddy - NHL from Yahoo! Sports
- In which former NHL coach Ken Hitchcock foils a shoplifter
- Montreal's Price talks new 2-year contract, expectations post-Halak
- Donald Fehr aware of Kovalchuk drama, mum on everything else
- Puck Headlines: Savard's agent rants on Bettman; Halak in Montreal
- Boudreau, Crawford placed on the coaching hot seat
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.
