FLAMES TRIVIA | FLAMES AUDIO | FLAMES DIRECTORY | Peter Maher's Blog | Mike Rogers's Blog | Bryn's Blog | Pat's Blog
Well, we said it on Overtime yesterday…we’d learn a little bit more about the Calgary Flames after their Tuesday night game in Columbus. Well, I think it’s fair to say that we have learned a little more about the team, good and bad. 2 goals in 124 seconds was enough for the Columbus Blue Jackets, as they hand Calgary their 3rd straight loss; the final score was 2-1.
It’s tough to say what you take from a game like this. Many were hoping for a knock the doors down game for Calgary after their loss in Chicago on Monday night. That wasn’t the case, and it wasn’t a great game for the Flames, yet I think there are some positives you can take from the game tonight. First off, I thought Calgary stuck with it defensively for the entire game. Far more often, we saw the team positioned well in their own zone and they were able to keep the Blue Jackets on the outside much more than they kept Chicago on the outside Monday. At times, you were able to see what Calgary wants to do in the defensive game Tuesday night. However, Columbus did fire 33 shots on goal and they did put Miikka Kiprusoff under fire a few times. Second…you have to give credit to Kiprusoff, he stood in there with Blue Jacket players in his face all night and played a solid, solid game.
What you don’t like is Calgary’s ability to generate shots, and more importantly scoring chances. From the time Columbus scored their first goal until the end of the game, you can count on 1 hand the number of times the Flames had the puck from the hashmarks in. It was a continual story of Calgary gaining the blueline and immediately being repelled by Columbus. Now, tons of credit has to go to the Jackets…they played a Ken Hitchcock game to a T. But there wasn’t enough battle from Calgary to get to the tough areas of the ice, and that showed. It’s not because of a lack of effort or work ethic…but for big chunks of the last 2 games, Calgary had trouble getting the puck to the tough areas of the ice.
Was there improvement from Monday’s debacle in Chicago? Absolutely, and I think it’s almost unfair taking them as a combined effort. Take the Chicago game out of the equation, and I think you’d agree Calgary took some steps forward from their loss at home to Dallas. Was it good enough? No. But the Flames now play only 5 games in 20 days, and that gives them a lot of time to get things closer to where they want them to be. Next up is Friday night at home to the Canucks to start a 5 game homestand.
Follow me on Twitter at www.twitter.com/Steinberg960.
I had to stop listening to the show tonight because I could not listen to that guy talking about calling out Jarome Iginla and the rest of the core players anymore. We have four wins and nine points in seven games. Jarome is the Calgary Flames and when we are last in the division maybe we can start asking questions. Jarome just needs to learn a new system like everyone else but he will come around. I hate seeing the flames lose as much as the next guy but even more I hate people questioning Iginla. I hope that guy calls back in April to apologize after Jarome has his best overall season and the Flames are in the playoffs for the sixth straight season. Go Flames Go and if anyone is having doubts after seven games they can always start cheering for a team on the coast or a team two and a half hours north. Why is it so hard for people to look for positives instead of negatives.
PS: I think right now, Nathan, people are a little worried because they see a lot of similarities with this team to last year’s team. And it’s true, Iginla hasn’t started all that great, but I’m of the opinion he’ll be just fine. Others aren’t of that opinion, and that’s just fine too. People who call the show are pretty darn knowledgeable fans and do a great job in backing up their opinions, if we agree with them or not.
- NathanNot sure what is happening in Calgary myself. First period against the blackhawks they look like the best team in the league. Rest of the gamethey look like the worst. I am still not sold on Joekinin or am I sold on Phenauf as for two years now he has been one of the worst defensive defensemen in the league and with Reger playing with him we do not have a shutdown defense pairing.
PS: On Jokinen, he has to do more than he has in his time in Calgary. 10 points in 20 games, and his goal Monday was his first goal in 18 games. A lot of people haven’t liked the combination with Iginla, and Sutter split them up Tuesday night. As for Phaneuf, I think he’s been pretty good this year…yeah, he’s not perfect in his own end, but he’s shown improvement and has been fairly consistent for the most part.
- KeithYou hit it on the head Pat. Far too many similarites to last years team. I’ll take it even further…it started when Playfair was behind the bench. Bad habits, lack of intensity, heart and worst of all…NO KILLER INSTINCT!! When you have a team down 5-0, you step on their throat OR frustrate them the rest of the game. You DON’T let them back in. If we call out the captain because of this Nathan, it’s because he’s the common denominator of wearing the “C” the past 4 years. He clearly has to take it to another level to lead this team. He can, and he probably will. But there is nothing wrong with calling him out. What would have Messier, Gretzky, Jordan or Montana done? Instead of just saying the right things, they would show you.
PS: The interesting thing is, apparently Iginla has never been the type of captain to be all rah rah inside the locker room. For me, he’s got to do his leading on the ice and really come ramp his game up to the gear we’re all used to him playing at. Maybe a game against Vancouver is the perfect thing to get him riled up.
- Sultan