POSTGAME - PLAYING FOR PRIDE?

Vintage Flame
April 01 2012 12:00AM


 

Another loss for the Flames that really no one is surprised by. Going into the game, Calgary had 0.2% of still making the playoffs which realistically meant they had no chance. Even gaining the point in overtime, with the Phoenix win and some games that will al put the math into place, the Flames have officially been eliminated from the playoffs. I won't even give the Canucks the benefit of being the team that eliminated Calgary either, that distinction solely hangs around the neck of each Flames player and coach. Wear it well boys.

THE RECAP

The Flames came out in the first period and actually showed some jump. Playing like they still had something to prove, be it to the fans, or to themselves, they looked to make a statement  early. Applying pressure in the Vancouver zone didn't mean to much though when what has been the case far to often over the last eight games, they had no finish. Then at the 5:08 mark Henrik Sedin carried the puck from the neutral zone all the way into the Flames zone. Half way through the right face off circle, Sedin would saucer pass a back hand over to Maxim Lapierre, that he would in turn push underneath Karlsson's pad, that wasn't even along the ice. Despite Karlsson not playing an NHL game since December, it was a terrible goal and another example as to why Hank won't be with the Flames next season. Shots were 12-7 in favour of the Flames, but the goal took the wind out of their sales and by the end of the period, Vancouver had taken over the scoring chances 7-5.

In the second period, Vancouver completely took over this game. They dominated Calgary in shots, 11-8; and completely decimated them 6-1 in scoring chances. At the 5:20 mark, while on the power play, Olli Jokinen would cough up the puck to Yannick Hansen, and he would be off to the races with the short handed breakaway. At about 5:27, Mark Giordano makes an incredible play, coming all the way back to not only catch hansen, but disrupt the play and knock the puck into the corner. Iginla picks up the puck at his own blueline and goes kitty-corner to the Canucks blueline, stops and feeds Olli Jokinen the one timer for the power play goal. The goal came on their only power play and only scoring chance of the period.

The third period started well for the boys. At just :51 seconds into the frame, Mike Cammalleri unleashed a rocket that Luongo didn't see but I'm sure he heard go passed him and into the net. Great pass from Moss from the left boards and despite all logic, Calgary lead Vancouver 2-1. The Canucks didn't dominate the Flames too much in the third, holding small margins in shots (12-10) and scoring chances (6-4) as well.  At 11:45, Sedin and Burrows would play keep away from Calgary and then dish the puck off to  Marc-Andre Gragnani who would put the slap shot through Karlsson to tie the game at two. Despite Hank feeling he was interfered with by Lapierre, he whiffed on the shot and let another soft goal go in between his arm and his body. Strike two Tower.

Given Calgary's record in overtime, when the clock hit zeros, fans everywhere must have felt like the game was lost. Despite the record, they played overtime anyways, but at 3:52, Karlsson would cap the night off, letting the recently returned Andrew Ebbett score the winner. And that was the ball game.

 THE STARS

1. Maxim Lapierre

2. Mike Cammalleri

3. Andrew Ebbett

THE FINAL

Fans had to know that as soon as they saw Karlsson in net, that the Flames had surrendered to their fate. They can say all they want to the media that they are playing for pride, because what else are they supposed to say? As always actions speak louder than words and if you didn't hear the message tonight, Henrik Karlsson put three exclamation marks on it over a span of sixty-five minutes.

It's not mathematical, but it is official now that they will not be going to the playoffs. With a maximum of 90 possible points, they're done. All that's left now is to sit back and play for fun in the last two games; the party starts on Thursday when they get to play these same Vancouver Canucks. Bring your party favorites, puck drop is at 7 pm on Sportsnet and the Fan 960.

E42f2ca09dfb26046c3060ff46473aff
Vintage Flame is a Calgary based sports junkie that prefers to call hockey a "religion" rather than an addiction. He believes there are two types of hockey fans. Those who cheer for the Flames, and those who don't understand the sport yet. Follow Vintage_Flame on Twitter
Avatar
#51 Chris
April 02 2012, 10:54AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

The thing I don't really understand is vehement opposition to a proper rebuild. I get it from an emotional fan perspective because it sucks. The thought of it pains me to consider.... Penguins got 30th-30th-29th or something like that before they became an elite team. But how else do you get Crosby, Fleury and Malkin? Not by trading 35 year old Iggy thats for sure....

This city is loyal, and I see no reason why ownership wouldn't be able to admit its time to reboot. Top to bottom, sell off every moving part (Iggy, Jbo, Kipper, Gio) and start building towards Baertschi's team in 2016 or 2017. It would be ugly for a few years... But the dome will be sold out 100% of the games, so the bottom line won't be impacted. And if anything they'd sell more jersey's if they brought in some exciting kids that we could get behind and dream about instead of being upset with Iggy for not being able to become 25 again.

Take for example the last 3 years. We've sold out every game, never made the playoffs, and have nothing to show for it except frustration and a lucky pick (and still not proven) on Baertchi.

The Oilers have also missed the playoffs the past 3 years, but have completely reorganized and now have Taylor Hall, Nugent Hopkins, Eberle AND another top 3 pick this year....

Both teams have sold out 100% of their games, neither have 1 single playoff game to show.

Of course hindsight is 20-20 but wouldn't we have been better off to reboot as well? Ownership would likely make more money by being well under the cap for a few years, but still selling out. The fans COULD be sold on it if it was communicated properly as a real plan for the future. And in 3-4 years we might not be perpetually fighting for 8th with no hope of becoming an elite playoff team.

I've been advocating since Sept to blow it up and face reality. Now we are just 1 year older but no further ahead.

The Leafs tried to do a "mini" rebuild, or a rapid rebuild or whatever you want to call it. And look where they are now... Starting back at ground zero after 7 yeras out of the playoffs. If this team doesn't face reality we'll be the Leafs just starting our rebuild in 2016.

I really hoped my kids could see a proud Flames team one day, and they just might, I just might not be alive to enjoy it with them at this rate.

Avatar
#52 non descript
April 02 2012, 10:59AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props
Justin Azevedo wrote:

yes because there's not 19 other guys on a team.

seriously, people, stop talking about this. it's a horrible, meaningless piece of information. florida sucked before he was there and after he left and the flames were the recipients of bad luck the past two seasons before this one.

i suppose you are right. bad luck and coincidence have been plaguing bouwmeester since his midget season. i suppose that a dominant junior defenceman playing in the whl cannot elevate his team to even scrape into the playoffs (or even play .500 hockey for that matter) though we see the difference a dominant player in the chl quite regularily. i suppose that after two full nhl seasons, and a reasonable season in the ahl, that it is coincidence that he had zero points in a long playoff run with a team he was loaned to (specifically to get playoff experience). he was loaned to the chicago wolves because the team he played on during the regular season, surprise, didn't make the playoffs. i suppose it's coincidence, or bad luck, that in his last four seasons in the nhl, if you took the last 20 odd games of each season (the playoff race) his numbers are 82 gp, 27 points, minus 37.

i will say that you can frame evidence any way to suit a position.

i will also say i hope bouwmeester stays with the flames his entire career.

bad luck and coincidence indeed.

Avatar
#53 Eat me
April 02 2012, 12:56PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

@non descript

***Comment removed by moderator***

Avatar
#54 everton fc
April 02 2012, 01:03PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props
icedawg_42 wrote:

"As for Iggy... A more limited role on the 2nd line makes sense, with Tanguay and Cammy. Cammy centres that line... though I think we are paying too much for the smallish Cammy, and would consider moving him, as well, to a contender, if at all possible"

While I agree in principle with this sentiment at a pure hockey level, keep in mind that would be 15.5 million cap bucks getting 'limited' ice on your second line? Who is your first line then? I cant agree more with everyone who says this team needs to look drastically different before we'll see some success. I may be pessimistic but I don't see how they are going to get any returns or win any deals with the pieces they have to move. Honestly I see this trending even further down. The Flames could well be a lottery team in the next couple years. The term on Cammi (and Tanguay - as I said at the time) is a big mistake and a big step backwards. I like them both as players, but seriously this is a repeat of the problems that have plagued the Flames for the last 3 years.

Oh - and I don't care how bad it gets around here I will NEVER cheer for the Vancouver CaSUCKS!!! In fact I think i'll jump back on the Bruins bandwagon - though I could see the Penguins going all the way now.

We are bascially on the same page, Icedawg.

I know we had to move Bourque. But for the smallish Cammy, whose no youngster... and simply not worh $6mill/season... Seems to be the same old same old...

Not sure who'd be on a first line here. I would take a first line of Baertschi/Statnsy/Iginla... See how that owkrs for one season, as Iggy will be UFA after next season.

We need guys with character who come to play every night, who have some spunk, not to mention good hands, and who are willing to go to the difficult spots for scoring opportunities. This is one reason Moss is valuable, if he's healthy - he'll go places his teammates won't. Something to consider...

Where we need to look drastically different is with our GM and head coach. It starts there. King seems untouchable. This is one of the main problems here. But a new GM... A new, progressive coach who can earn buy-in from the players, and who will also jettison those who won't buy in... with the GM's support...

That's the drastic change we need.

Iggy will be 36 when his contract runs out. If they can move him... They probably should. But we lack scoring. Iggy can score, but is streaky, and has been plagued w/slow starts. Can we replace Iggy with some 20-25 goal scorers, some depth? Look at the Predators... No 30 goal scorer... But a lot of 20-plus guys...

Kipper can probably be Kipper for a few more years. If other organizations see Kipper this way, you may have to move him, too. I like Irving. None of us know abour Ramo, other than he didn't do so well in the NHL his first go-round. But moving Kipper and Iggy may bring back some depth.

I'm rambling here. We'll know the direction of the club by the draft. If Feaster remains, I fear more moves like Tanguay's contract, like brining in Cammy's contract, like signing Babchuk... Like the insane offer for Richards... And so forth. For two seasons Feaster has said publically he likes this team, and thinks they can make the playoffs. They haven't, and the team's point and win totals have sunk. He should be held accountable. As should Sutter. And some of the players...

Avatar
#55 suba steve
April 02 2012, 01:31PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props
Eat me wrote:

***Comment removed by moderator***

Was going to say you might be being a little harsh...Then I went back and read non descript's post and now I see, you are pretty much bang on. Carry on.

Avatar
#56 the-wolf
April 02 2012, 01:44PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props
suba steve wrote:

Was going to say you might be being a little harsh...Then I went back and read non descript's post and now I see, you are pretty much bang on. Carry on.

Well so much for class. Everyone's entitled to their opinion. Using proper English, what exactly did non descript say that was so wrong?

Avatar
#57 non descript
April 02 2012, 02:05PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props
the-wolf wrote:

Well so much for class. Everyone's entitled to their opinion. Using proper English, what exactly did non descript say that was so wrong?

thanks steve, i appreciate your support. some people are not able to differentiate between being a fan and evaluating a player based on facts. right azevedo. that being said, i am about to take the low road.

Removed "Low Road Comment by Mod"

have a nice day flamers.

Avatar
#58 suba steve
April 02 2012, 03:05PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props
non descript wrote:

thanks steve, i appreciate your support. some people are not able to differentiate between being a fan and evaluating a player based on facts. right azevedo. that being said, i am about to take the low road.

Removed "Low Road Comment by Mod"

have a nice day flamers.

My appologies if anyone thought I was supporting eat me's post, I keep forgetting that sarcasm doesn't translate well on this forum. You obviously made no statement to warrant such an attack. As I stated earlier,the post "[was] a bit harsh". Carry on.

Avatar
#59 Justin Azevedo
April 02 2012, 05:40PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

@kittensandcookies

they are 4 goals better then the flames, and where did they finish the past two seasons? tallon signed like 11 ufa's, it's a new team this season.

Avatar
#60 Justin Azevedo
April 02 2012, 05:44PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

@non descript

there's a difference between mathematical "facts" and "anecdotal and coincidental evidence". you are presenting the second.

Comments are closed for this article.