HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Western Conference > Pacific Division > Calgary Flames
Notices

MacFarlane touts Lemaire as Keenan's replacement

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
05-04-2009, 01:07 AM
  #1
GoFlames
Registered User
 
GoFlames's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Vancouver, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,690
vCash: 500
MacFarlane touts Lemaire as Keenan's replacement

Just posting an article I came across:

http://slam.canoe.ca/Slam/Hockey/NHL...13996-sun.html

One thing is for sure with Lemaire the defensive game would be radically different... as long as it is not a trap team all the tiem and like watching painrt dry it would be worth considering.


Last edited by Dogbert*: 05-04-2009 at 12:14 PM. Reason: It's not really a rumour... just his opinion.
GoFlames is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-04-2009, 08:53 AM
  #2
bam09
Registered User
 
bam09's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 1,494
vCash: 500
Lemaire would be an awful choice.

bam09 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-04-2009, 09:48 AM
  #3
Complacent Iggy
Registered User
 
Complacent Iggy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 269
vCash: 500
this team is going no where fast, this would be a desperate move.

Complacent Iggy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-05-2009, 04:47 PM
  #4
a79krgm
Registered User
 
a79krgm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: White Bear Lake
Country: United States
Posts: 675
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to a79krgm
Quote:
Originally Posted by bam09 View Post
Lemaire would be an awful choice.
Huh? ... Did you like Keenan? I guess you wouldn't want your team to play better defense. Funny that Nolan had a better year with the Wild than he did with Calgary.

a79krgm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-05-2009, 05:48 PM
  #5
GoFlames
Registered User
 
GoFlames's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Vancouver, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,690
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by a79krgm View Post
Huh? ... Did you like Keenan? I guess you wouldn't want your team to play better defense. Funny that Nolan had a better year with the Wild than he did with Calgary.
I was also surprised by that. I think a lot of it might have ahd to do with teh fact he had many chances for ice time due to Gaborki's injury. I might be wrong there but he earned what looked to be a somewhat rich contract.

GoFlames is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-05-2009, 10:21 PM
  #6
Body Checker
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 1,229
vCash: 500
WE have to tighten up defensively but not at the expense of enjoying watching hockey.

Just finished watching a very boring Canucks/Hawks game #3. Canucks played the trap, boring hockey.

I want us to emulate teams like Carolina, Philly, Chicago, etc. We have similiar personnel to those teams.

Body Checker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-06-2009, 02:12 AM
  #7
GoFlames
Registered User
 
GoFlames's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Vancouver, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,690
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Body Checker View Post
WE have to tighten up defensively but not at the expense of enjoying watching hockey.

Just finished watching a very boring Canucks/Hawks game #3. Canucks played the trap, boring hockey.

I want us to emulate teams like Carolina, Philly, Chicago, etc. We have similiar personnel to those teams.
Good call, the Wild and Nucks bore me to tears most of the time. They short spurt energy shifts then go back to the funeral march. I like Philly and Chicago personally. I really was surprised how Chicago played both fast and physical, a lethal combination.

GoFlames is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-06-2009, 08:16 AM
  #8
bam09
Registered User
 
bam09's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 1,494
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Body Checker View Post
WE have to tighten up defensively but not at the expense of enjoying watching hockey.

Just finished watching a very boring Canucks/Hawks game #3. Canucks played the trap, boring hockey.

I want us to emulate teams like Carolina, Philly, Chicago, etc. We have similiar personnel to those teams.
I agree with everything, although I don't overly care if Flames play boring hockey too much if we get a win out of the deal.

We have too many skilled offensive players to be a Lemaire team. We have been a much better offensive than defensive team in the last few years IIRC.

bam09 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-06-2009, 10:53 AM
  #9
Bourque17
 
Bourque17's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Calgary Alberta
Country: Canada
Posts: 281
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by a79krgm View Post
Huh? ... Did you like Keenan? I guess you wouldn't want your team to play better defense. Funny that Nolan had a better year with the Wild than he did with Calgary.
Honestly, I hate Lemaire and I wouldn't want us to have him as coach to improve defense because that would mean sacrificing our offense which with our organization is something I dont think we need right now.

Bourque17 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-06-2009, 10:58 AM
  #10
Pardy Time
Registered User
 
Pardy Time's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Country: Canada
Posts: 886
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bourque17 View Post
Honestly, I hate Lemaire and I wouldn't want us to have him as coach to improve defense because that would mean sacrificing our offense which with our organization is something I dont think we need right now.
I don't understand this part of your post.

Pardy Time is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-06-2009, 11:06 AM
  #11
Bourque17
 
Bourque17's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Calgary Alberta
Country: Canada
Posts: 281
vCash: 500
Yeah I was kinda unclear, I meant that I think we have a lot of promise with some young guys offensively and that if Lemaire becomes the coach he might hinder their growth

Bourque17 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-06-2009, 11:19 AM
  #12
Pardy Time
Registered User
 
Pardy Time's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Country: Canada
Posts: 886
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bourque17 View Post
Yeah I was kinda unclear, I meant that I think we have a lot of promise with some young guys offensively and that if Lemaire becomes the coach he might hinder their growth
I partly agree with you. This team needs to learn some team defense and bring in a coach that will coach team defense, and I don't think Lemaire is the right guy for the job.

Some people are suggesting that the Flames should become a defense first team again. I disagree with that. I feel that the Flames should be balanced everywhere. Don't let your offense take away from your defense, but don't let your defense take away from your offense.

Pardy Time is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-06-2009, 11:51 AM
  #13
Bourque17
 
Bourque17's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Calgary Alberta
Country: Canada
Posts: 281
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CGY View Post
I partly agree with you. This team needs to learn some team defense and bring in a coach that will coach team defense, and I don't think Lemaire is the right guy for the job.

Some people are suggesting that the Flames should become a defense first team again. I disagree with that. I feel that the Flames should be balanced everywhere. Don't let your offense take away from your defense, but don't let your defense take away from your offense.
Thats basically what I was trying to say but couldn't hehe. I totally agree

Bourque17 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-06-2009, 01:49 PM
  #14
Steveorama
Registered User
 
Steveorama's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Mississauga, ON
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,669
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by GoFlames View Post
Good call, the Wild and Nucks bore me to tears most of the time. They short spurt energy shifts then go back to the funeral march.
Canucks are currently 4th out of 16 teams in goals scored/game in the playoffs.
They play an attacking style that generates scoring chances...trapping is so last year to the Canucks.

Steveorama is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-06-2009, 05:38 PM
  #15
GoFlames
Registered User
 
GoFlames's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Vancouver, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,690
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steveorama View Post
Canucks are currently 4th out of 16 teams in goals scored/game in the playoffs.
They play an attacking style that generates scoring chances...trapping is so last year to the Canucks.
Sometimes yes. Other times it is a non physical game that cycles and gets knocked off the puck. The Canucks are definitely better but they need to get tougher it seems.

GoFlames is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-07-2009, 09:19 PM
  #16
Grannys
Registered User
 
Grannys's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: London, UK
Country: Finland
Posts: 3,037
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by bam09 View Post
I agree with everything, although I don't overly care if Flames play boring hockey too much if we get a win out of the deal.

We have too many skilled offensive players to be a Lemaire team. We have been a much better offensive than defensive team in the last few years IIRC.
exactly.

Grannys is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-18-2009, 12:20 PM
  #17
cross16
Registered User
 
cross16's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 246
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steveorama View Post
Canucks are currently 4th out of 16 teams in goals scored/game in the playoffs.
They play an attacking style that generates scoring chances...trapping is so last year to the Canucks.
Only until they get a lead, or for about the first period. Then they go into their defensive shell. Thats why Chicago was able to come back so many times in the series. Canucks sat back and let a quick team come at them. Then they took bad penalties (which you tend to do when your playing passive) and by the time its tied, they try to go into attack mode but they are out of sorts. They don't trap, they never did. But they go into a passive defensive shell. The Canucks are not an true "attacking" team.

But now way to Lemaire. those type of coaches are suffering in today's NHL. I'm all for defensive responsiblity, but you don't need to play a suffocating defensive system to do that. Detroit, SJ and Chicago were all great defensive teams, and neither had to play passive hockey to do it.

cross16 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-18-2009, 12:50 PM
  #18
Skobel24
GO IGGY GO!
 
Skobel24's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Winnipeg
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,982
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by a79krgm View Post
Huh? ... Did you like Keenan? I guess you wouldn't want your team to play better defense. Funny that Nolan had a better year with the Wild than he did with Calgary.
Could be wrong, but I think Nolan spent alot of time on the top line with Koivu while Gaborik was out.

Skobel24 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-18-2009, 01:05 PM
  #19
cross16
Registered User
 
cross16's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 246
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by a79krgm View Post
Huh? ... Did you like Keenan? I guess you wouldn't want your team to play better defense. Funny that Nolan had a better year with the Wild than he did with Calgary.
Thats misleading.

Your discounting 2 things. 1 - When Nolan signed with the Flames he was out of hockey for years. and 2 - he had much more opportunity with the Wild.

his first 20 games with the Flames. he had 2 goals, 4 assists for 6 points. Most fans will remeber how bad he looked doing it hough. It took him about half the sason to get back into the game.
Compare that with his start with the Wild. 9 goals 5 assists for 14 points.

He also played a full minute more on the PP with the Wild than the Flames. 12 of his 25 goals, so virtually half, came off the PP. He scored one PP goal as a Flame.

Not as cotton dry as you want to make ti seem. Nolan played a different role with the wild than he did with the Flames

cross16 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:08 PM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2014 All Rights Reserved.