| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| leigh |
Posted - 04/28/2009 : 16:46:18
Oh the pain! Yes, yes it hurt. But I'm over it and I'm already planning what I can do with my spare time now (sadly so is my wife!!!)
Ok so I've had some time to look back at the Flames MASSIVE 6 game playoff run and here are the reasons I think the Calgary Flames lost the series against the Blackhawks...yes I will be stating some very obvious things:
1) Injuries - The blue line was absolutely descimated. Regehr, Giordano, Phaneuf and Sarish. And you could tell that some of the forwards were no where near 100% - Bourque and Langkow for starters.
2) Brutal Penalty Kill - How in the world does an opponent's power play score 6 consecutive times. I'll tell you how, no defense. So really this point ties into the injuries.
3)Shut down - As much as I hated listening to McGuire yap incessantly about Seabrook making the Olympic team (that guy gets some serious man-crushes), he was correct that he and Keith did a great job shutting down Iginla. Iginla played well and he got away from the coverage a few times but not enough. Regardless of who Keenan put on with Iginla they were trying to manoevre in a phone booth. Hats off to Seabrook and Keith
4) Terrible Break out - My old peewee coach from the 70's would have been furious with the pathetic breakout attempts put up by the red white and yellow. They often couldn't get over their own blue line let alone the centre line. Why on earth they continued to try to carry it out of their end after several games of being turned back regularly, is beyond me. What ever happened to a nice 2 pass break out where players are constantly moving instead of standing still at the blue line. But then again...does this tie back into the depleted defense depth they had? Credit to Chicago though, what a forecheck!
5) Goaltending - While Kiprusoff wasn't bad at all, he wasn't great. And at this time of year you need your goaltender (especially one making his coin) to be beyond great. He only let in a couple bad goals but they were costly when the goalie at the other end is standing on his head making 40+ saves. Admittedly the Hawks made the Flames pay on the PP with some seriously sick back door passes! No Kipper wasn't bad, but he wasn't great.
6) Face offs - You can't score goals if you can't get possession. I don't know the figures but you could see that Calgary was beat pretty handily in this department. I read that Chicago won the face off stat in 4 of the 5 games. Toews was a drawing machine!
7) Chicago - Khabibulin, Toews, Sharp, Havlat, Versteeg, Kane, Seabrook, Byfuglien, Keith, Pahlsson, Campbell, Barker and even Eager, Ladd, Walker and Burrish. Plain and simple, they were the better team.
Sigh, there's always next year...
So anyway, where the hell did I put my toolbox, gardening supplies, golf clubs and ball glove? And where is my honey-do list?
|
| 18 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| Guest0918 |
Posted - 05/04/2009 : 00:37:53
quote:
Originally posted by hockster
the regular season is not the playoffs lets not kid ourselves. Even with injuries calgary only got outdone in games five alll the others could have gone either way.
reffing was a little suspect in the series too...
I'm a joke? LOL! You're so blinded by being a fan you can't accept the truth. Now you're saying the "reffing was a little suspect"? Give us a break!
Then when someone mentioned losing all 4 meetings with the Hawks in regular season (when the Flames did NOT have injuries) you say "regular season is not the playoffs"? Thanks for stating the obvious.
End result, The Flames got beat whether it be to injuries, lack of heart, lack of skill or the refs being paid off by the Chicago Mob.
Go Hawks Go!  |
| Guest4271 |
Posted - 04/30/2009 : 11:30:38
Why didn't Calgary get a backup goalie that they weren't afraid to play? I do not care how good any goalie is you cant really expect them to play 65+ games and expect them to be sharp in the playoffs. Should be a priority in the off season. |
| MSC |
Posted - 04/30/2009 : 10:54:29
At the end of the day they simply lost to the better team. |
| leigh |
Posted - 04/30/2009 : 10:34:43
quote:
Originally posted by Guest7752
Your ONLY valid point is #7.
All others are excuses.
Habs could have used your #1 to #6 excuses, just with different names.
Reasons or excuses, call it what you will. With the exception of #1 they could all be attributed to playing a better team....or playing poorly. Whatever.
Iggy needed to get angry, when he was angry they were amazing. Chicago realized this and didn't do anything to annoy him after game four. Great coaching by Q. |
| Guest4638 |
Posted - 04/30/2009 : 08:58:19
You take any team in the NHL playoffs, eliminate their top 2 D-men, injure the two D-men who replaced those guys, and injure 2 of their top 6 forwards and then see how far they get. NOBODY could win through that type of devastation. |
| Guest7752 |
Posted - 04/30/2009 : 08:39:30
quote:
Originally posted by leigh
Oh the pain! Yes, yes it hurt. But I'm over it and I'm already planning what I can do with my spare time now (sadly so is my wife!!!)
Ok so I've had some time to look back at the Flames MASSIVE 6 game playoff run and here are the reasons I think the Calgary Flames lost the series against the Blackhawks...yes I will be stating some very obvious things:
1) Injuries - The blue line was absolutely descimated. Regehr, Giordano, Phaneuf and Sarish. And you could tell that some of the forwards were no where near 100% - Bourque and Langkow for starters.
2) Brutal Penalty Kill - How in the world does an opponent's power play score 6 consecutive times. I'll tell you how, no defense. So really this point ties into the injuries.
3)Shut down - As much as I hated listening to McGuire yap incessantly about Seabrook making the Olympic team (that guy gets some serious man-crushes), he was correct that he and Keith did a great job shutting down Iginla. Iginla played well and he got away from the coverage a few times but not enough. Regardless of who Keenan put on with Iginla they were trying to manoevre in a phone booth. Hats off to Seabrook and Keith
4) Terrible Break out - My old peewee coach from the 70's would have been furious with the pathetic breakout attempts put up by the red white and yellow. They often couldn't get over their own blue line let alone the centre line. Why on earth they continued to try to carry it out of their end after several games of being turned back regularly, is beyond me. What ever happened to a nice 2 pass break out where players are constantly moving instead of standing still at the blue line. But then again...does this tie back into the depleted defense depth they had? Credit to Chicago though, what a forecheck!
5) Goaltending - While Kiprusoff wasn't bad at all, he wasn't great. And at this time of year you need your goaltender (especially one making his coin) to be beyond great. He only let in a couple bad goals but they were costly when the goalie at the other end is standing on his head making 40+ saves. Admittedly the Hawks made the Flames pay on the PP with some seriously sick back door passes! No Kipper wasn't bad, but he wasn't great.
6) Face offs - You can't score goals if you can't get possession. I don't know the figures but you could see that Calgary was beat pretty handily in this department. I read that Chicago won the face off stat in 4 of the 5 games. Toews was a drawing machine!
7) Chicago - Khabibulin, Toews, Sharp, Havlat, Versteeg, Kane, Seabrook, Byfuglien, Keith, Pahlsson, Campbell, Barker and even Eager, Ladd, Walker and Burrish. Plain and simple, they were the better team.
Sigh, there's always next year...
So anyway, where the hell did I put my toolbox, gardening supplies, golf clubs and ball glove? And where is my honey-do list?
Your ONLY valid point is #7.
All others are excuses.
Habs could have used your #1 to #6 excuses, just with different names.
|
| Guest2559 |
Posted - 04/30/2009 : 07:30:25
quote:
Originally posted by hockster
not the heart again
see above comment
SARICH PLAYED WITH A FRICKIN BROKEN ANKLE 20+ MIN PER GAME!!!!
Thats one guy [Mod. Edit - No need for name calling] what about the rest of the stars on the team where were they? |
| n/a |
Posted - 04/30/2009 : 05:47:34
Tip of my pint glass for ya, Leigh. Just wasn't their year.
I'll be the first to say it: Mike Keenan.
"Take off, eh?" - Bob and Doug |
| hockster |
Posted - 04/29/2009 : 18:29:21
not the heart again
see above comment
SARICH PLAYED WITH A FRICKIN BROKEN ANKLE 20+ MIN PER GAME!!!! |
| Guest2559 |
Posted - 04/29/2009 : 14:35:11
The reason Clagary lost is because they couldn't play with the lead. They should have taken the first 2 games butcouldn't lock it down, and Chicago was the better team in the series with more Heart. |
| hockster |
Posted - 04/29/2009 : 07:26:23
the regular season is not the playoffs lets not kid ourselves. Even with injuries calgary only got outdone in games five alll the others could have gone either way.
reffing was a little suspect in the series too... |
| Guest2758 |
Posted - 04/29/2009 : 05:00:00
They were not that injured during the regular season when chicago beat them four straight times. Chicago was definatly the better team this year. |
| hanley6 |
Posted - 04/28/2009 : 22:40:39
Calgary obviously does not suck... They are one of the toughest and hardest working teams in the NHL. If Calgary was 100% healthy they would have easily beat Chicago |
| Guest9844 |
Posted - 04/28/2009 : 21:48:02
The main reason why the Flames lost.
1.) They suck. |
| hockster |
Posted - 04/28/2009 : 19:23:23
quote:
The main reason the Flames lost? They had no heart
o is that what playing injured is?
is that playing with a fractured ankle
now i know giving it your all even when there is nothing left that is no heart.
you are a joke guest that showed calgary had more heart than skill and thats why they lost they werent good enough with out all their regulars
Iginla for 2010 team captain.
Flames for cup...eventually. |
| Guest0918 |
Posted - 04/28/2009 : 17:58:14
The main reason the Flames lost? They had no heart. They got annihilated in game 5 and they gave up before game 6 was over. They should have won this series but you could see in ALL of their faces they were "hoping" and not convinced they could/would win.
I blame Keenan. I'm okay with that though... I'm a Hawks fan. |
| hockster |
Posted - 04/28/2009 : 16:51:32
quote:
1) Injuries -
not to mention the severity of such sarich fractured ankle
borque clearly still had an ankle sprain
reports are taht langkow did not have one band hand but two to the point he could not shoot
if you take any teams top two d and one of their top 6 out along with two top 6 forwads and 3 rd best d playin hurt no one would ahve a chnce
chicago was the better team but they had a huge advantage
Iginla for 2010 team captain.
Flames for cup...eventually. |
| Higgsy |
Posted - 04/28/2009 : 16:50:25
I agree
The Two main aspects of the flames loss was injuries snd Penalty Kill.
take the best two Defensemen off of Chicago and have their third best play with a broken foot, it changed the series.
Their Penalty Kill was the worst i have seen it...7 goals!!!
Ex-NHL, AHL and, OHL player. Black Hawks Devils Red Wings. Tim Higgins (career 78-89) Scored 59 points in my best season, I think I know hockey. |
