Brent Sutter: "our effort was definitely there, tonight."
Those were the first words to come out of Brent Sutter's mouth to start last night's press conference. I was absolutely floored by that quote. And, this morning, I still can't get it out of my head.
If that "effort", last night, is what's considered ample or efficient - then the Calgary Flames are in for a very LONG season. Their LACK of "effort" is what cost them the game. The New York Rangers were ripe for the picking and the Flames let it get away because they refused to do the extra-effort things that win hockey games.
The expectations for this team have reached an all-time low. If you want to see real "effort", then you should have watched the Boston Bruins play last night. You can argue the Leafs were on a back to back, had to travel and were on the road... that's all well and good - but the Bruins went for the jugular. They weathered the early Leafs momentum and then gave them a beat-down. They hustle to loose pucks, they body their man off the puck to create turnovers and when the puck gets dumped behind the offensive zone net - THEY CHASE IT! <- Can you believe that?
Jay Bouwmeester's short-handed turnover was a direct result of laziness (plus, brainfart). Had he skated to that puck and beat his man to it and even poked it ahead - absorbing a hit in the process - that goal would have never happened. Instead, as Flames D are so apt to do, he refused to make the hard stride to the puck, let the forechecker overtake him (with ease) and, boom, puck in net. A little "effort" would have prevented that goal. A little "effort" would have seen our powerplay generate some offensive zone possession. A little "effort" would have won that game.
I had to get this out of my system. What I saw last night from my seat at the 'dome was nothing short of a lazy, lackadaisical team that's been getting away with a lack of effort and focus for far too long. I don't care about the shots or the positive possession numbers, obviously that didn't translate into a win did it? Nor did it last year. It's a problem when you lose to borderline playoff teams, at home, who aren't playing their 'A' game - end of story.
And, if Brent Sutter really believes what he said last night - then, unless the players can pick up the pace without the prodding of the coaches... missing the playoffs won't be the worst of this organizations fears.
13 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
I dont know how you can be surprised by the man. He is obviously delusional and idiotic. What he says just shows me that the team is playing his “system”. Which is a system built on playing hockey like an imbecile.
by Jeremywilhelm on Oct 21, 2011 10:27 AM PDT via mobile reply actions
Agreed
Then again, I was sitting beside you. But that’s exactly it. Here’s my take on the game.
Tom “Why should I hurry out of the offensive zone” Kostopolous
Rene “But I would have had to skate to get that puck” Borque
Cory “But they were pressuring me” Sarich
Jay “You want me to take a hit?” Bouwmeester
Jarome “The game was basically into the shootout” Iginla
I could go on, but I wont.
I think Sutter’s answer is probably coloured by the reasonable amount of pressure they were putting up in the second half of the third period.
That said, the Flames in general, and the D in particular, were turning over the puck all night, and putting themselves into bad situations often. As you said, they were lazy and soft most of the game.
You might be right about the reasonable pressure, but if you take a look at the scoring chances as tracked by Kent Wilson on FlamesNation – the Flames were outchanced 6-1 from the 13 minute mark of the third through overtime.
Interesting. It certainly didn’t feel that lopsided when I was watching, and I would have picked the Flames to be on top, but it may have been more that they were controlling possession in the Rangers zone but not generating any real shots on net, which I can certainly believe.
Last time I remember seeing it, the turnover count was something like Flames:12 Rangers: 4. Simply unacceptable from a team that is supposed to be playing a puck posession game.
The only bright spot is that many of our terrible contracts are done at the end of the year, save Anton ‘Dion 2.0’ Babchuk.
by DownGoesLuongo on Oct 21, 2011 11:11 AM PDT via mobile reply actions
I don’t know Scott – the Flames are playing the way Sutter wants them to and in my eye they had better jump last night too.
All relative – I do not compare the Flames to the Bruins or the Capitals or the Flyers or Sharks or any top tier team. So for a middling team they appeared to me to give a good performance. I don’t accept the loss and I also do not think the Flames are at their peak but this game was better than the one in St. Louis by a long shot.
I think it is fair to knock the system and Sutter and individual players on a game to game basis but overall team effort was pretty good. It may make players look hesitant on the ice but to me there was better jump out there within the confines of how Sutter wants them to play.
I’ll take the single point.
I can appreciate that take. As long as there’s progression, I suppose that should be considered a positive.
I have just seen this team give more and have seen and expect each individual to give more. When there’s a loose puck or a race to a puck I expect nothing less than a players best effort. I see that when I watch the good teams. I don’t see that when I watch Calgary. Maybe I’m asking too much? I just don’t think so – what with the whole “every game matters” mantra and all. It should be “every shift matters”, because it does.
I believe the Flames are a middling team, absolutely… I’d say they’re bordering on being a BAD team. But, bad or middling teams can still be difficult to play against. The Flames are not. On a scale of 1-100 in terms of effort, I’d give the NYR game a 65. If that’s the most we’re going to get? Yikes.
by Scott Lepp on Oct 22, 2011 7:34 AM PDT via iPhone app up reply actions

by 

















