HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > National Hockey League Talk
National Hockey League Talk Discuss NHL players, teams, games, and the Stanley Cup Playoffs.

give flames more credit

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
05-26-2004, 07:17 PM
  #26
Trottier
Very Random
 
Trottier's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: San Diego
Posts: 27,487
vCash: 500
Here's a very basic, pseudo-existential concept:

What is, is.

Sometimes, things are exactly as they appear.

The Lightning and the Flames are playing for the Stanley Cup. They earned it.
Will leave it to other posters to contemplate these two teams' respective futures, or look back at their pasts.

In the here and now, this year, this season, they are unquestionably the two best teams. They've accomplished it, they are here.

Congratuations to them. No pretzel logic can detract from these teams' stature. They've earned it.

Trottier is offline  
Old
05-26-2004, 07:38 PM
  #27
icarus
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Kingston, ON
Country: Canada
Posts: 742
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Swedish Bolt Fan
Oh yeah how could we forget the scary level of a team that was in a race with the Rangers to see whom could not make the playoff for the longest
Until last season, Tampa was in the exact same race. As you say, "how could we forget"?

icarus is offline  
Old
05-26-2004, 07:41 PM
  #28
Enoch
This is my boomstick
 
Enoch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Chattanooga TN
Country: United States
Posts: 12,465
vCash: 500
Okay, can we get rid of the flame wars. Obviously both teams had a legitimate shot at the start of the playoffs for those that watched them play. They are currently reaping the rewards of good coaching, and hard work. I don't see either team as being a "cinderella"..........so I fail to see what the big deal is here.

If you want to break it down though:

Goaltending - Equal, as Kipper is playing great
Offense - TB
Defense - Calgary
Speed - ????
Physical play - Calgary
Skill level - Tampa Bay

The series seems pretty evenly matched to me. What Calgary lacks in offense and skill, they make up for with physical play and hard nosed defense.....The same holds true for Tampa Bay. As I see it, I give niether team the edge. However, I do predict the Flames to win the series. The reason: every bounce has been going there way, and they have become almost unbeatable in OT when the whistle is swallowed completely.

Calgary in 7 (I'm still pulling for the Lightining though )

Enoch is online now  
Old
05-26-2004, 07:46 PM
  #29
Bicycle Repairman
HFBoards Sponsor
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 1,695
vCash: 500
I think the Rangers are more like Snow White. Poison in the Big Apple has put it asleep for years.

Bicycle Repairman is offline  
Old
05-26-2004, 07:49 PM
  #30
Lexicon Devil
Registered User
 
Lexicon Devil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Posts: 8,343
vCash: 500
Quote:
Oh and ahh you finished with a whopping 5 pt cushion to the #9 spot. That imo is not a too huge margin of error Lightning on the other hand managed to get a 21 pt cushion to the same spot.
I hope you'll be able to take comfort in those regular season stats when Jarome Iginla is hoisting the Stanley Cup.

Lexicon Devil is offline  
Old
05-26-2004, 08:39 PM
  #31
Swedish Bolt Fan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: win it again
Posts: 1,171
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lexicon Devil
I hope you'll be able to take comfort in those regular season stats when Jarome Iginla is hoisting the Stanley Cup.
For the 2nd time i never said it had any meaning. But quit sounding like Calgary is all worlds and the best team that has ever been iced

Swedish Bolt Fan is offline  
Old
05-26-2004, 08:45 PM
  #32
HF-Addict
Registered User
 
HF-Addict's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 3,749
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Swedish Bolt Fan
For the 2nd time i never said it had any meaning. But quit sounding like Calgary is all worlds and the best team that has ever been iced
Same can be said about you and the lightnings.

HF-Addict is offline  
Old
05-26-2004, 11:31 PM
  #33
ehc73
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Coquitlam, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,943
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to ehc73
And here I thought this thread was gonna be about Greg Millen...
I had a good rant about his idiocies worked up too!

ehc73 is offline  
Old
05-26-2004, 11:40 PM
  #34
Bicycle Repairman
HFBoards Sponsor
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 1,695
vCash: 500
Okay, how about this....

The Calgary Flames are an upstart team.

The Tampa Bay Lightning are an emerging elite team.

Both fanbases happy now that the folktale descriptions have been tossed aside?

Bicycle Repairman is offline  
Old
05-27-2004, 12:08 AM
  #35
Iggy-4-50
Registered User
 
Iggy-4-50's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Country: Switzerland
Posts: 5,488
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Flames Draft Watcher
Well we'll give you Turek and McLennan for half a season and see how high you finish in the Western Conference...seriously
You can add playing 30 odd games without 3 of their top 4 centres

How many teams could lose their #1 and #2 goalies,3 of 4 centres for long stretches and even hope for a playoff spot

BTW,if you look at the schedule down the stretch...the Flames wern't in danger of losing a playoff spot,they were fighting with Dallas and Vancouver for 4-5th with 10 games to go but both of those teams got very hot to pull ahead.

Iggy-4-50 is offline  
Old
05-27-2004, 02:11 PM
  #36
Snakeeye
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Calgary
Posts: 735
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by T@T
You can add playing 30 odd games without 3 of their top 4 centres

How many teams could lose their #1 and #2 goalies,3 of 4 centres for long stretches and even hope for a playoff spot
And to flip that, where could the Flames have been if they only lost 35 man games to injury?

And yes, that assumes Calgary trades for Kiprusoff regardless of injury situation.

Snakeeye is offline  
Old
05-27-2004, 02:12 PM
  #37
Snakeeye
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Calgary
Posts: 735
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Swedish Bolt Fan
For the 2nd time i never said it had any meaning. But quit sounding like Calgary is all worlds and the best team that has ever been iced
If you say that your comment had no meaning, then why waste the time to post it? Do you enjoy wasting everyone's time with meaningless comments?

Snakeeye is offline  
Old
05-27-2004, 02:43 PM
  #38
quat
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Victoria BC
Posts: 8,918
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to quat
Quote:
Originally Posted by Snakeeye
And to flip that, where could the Flames have been if they only lost 35 man games to injury?

And yes, that assumes Calgary trades for Kiprusoff regardless of injury situation.
Why does one assume that Calgary would be suddenly that much better? It seems that chemistry is a huge part of their present success, and there is every chance that a different group of guys, though slightly more skilled, wouldn't be playing the same team game. One could say that Calagary to date has beaten teams that all had more talent, so to suggest they would be much better with more talent themselves seems to fly in the face of their success.

quat is offline  
Old
05-27-2004, 03:24 PM
  #39
Snakeeye
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Calgary
Posts: 735
vCash: 500
Surely you arent seriously suggesting the Flames would be unlikely to be better if they had Steve Reinprecht all season long, instead of, say, Josh Green?

Why do you get to assume that if many of our players were healthy that the chemistry, and therefore the team, would suffer, but I cant assume that a healthier Flames team would have been better?

Snakeeye is offline  
Old
05-27-2004, 04:17 PM
  #40
ehc73
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Coquitlam, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,943
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to ehc73
Quote:
Originally Posted by Snakeeye
Surely you arent seriously suggesting the Flames would be unlikely to be better if they had Steve Reinprecht all season long, instead of, say, Josh Green?

Why do you get to assume that if many of our players were healthy that the chemistry, and therefore the team, would suffer, but I cant assume that a healthier Flames team would have been better?
I don't think he's saying you can't, just that it's not a given that they would be better just because they're healthier. But there's a good chance they would be; far from a guarantee though.

ehc73 is offline  
Old
05-27-2004, 05:12 PM
  #41
quat
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Victoria BC
Posts: 8,918
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to quat
Quote:
Originally Posted by Snakeeye
Surely you arent seriously suggesting the Flames would be unlikely to be better if they had Steve Reinprecht all season long, instead of, say, Josh Green?

Why do you get to assume that if many of our players were healthy that the chemistry, and therefore the team, would suffer, but I cant assume that a healthier Flames team would have been better?

No, I am suggesting that perhaps the Flames team has become more important than the individual players, and they've reached that by losing several important players throughout the season. Overcoming obsticales as a group instead of relying on one or two players is extremely important, and yet that seems to not factor into your judgement of the team. Perhaps Donovan or Comodore or Clark wouldn't have become as confident without the larger roll they were given during the season.

It's like the Flames fan who says the team was comfortably in a playoff berth for the last 20 or 30 games. That's nonsense. Sutter himself said that they were treating the last 28 games as playoff rounds, and that really helped them with their mindset. They didn't worry when Simon or Gauthier went down in the first round... or when they lost other guys as well.

Without all the injuries to the Flames, they may very well have not had the focus to overcome these set backs in the playoffs. I'm not suggesting that is what would happen, but like I said earlier, the chemistry they have now seems largly based having overcome some pretty large obstacles.

Also, I notice that you completely ignored my example of how Calgary has beaten three teams who were all said to have had more talent.

quat is offline  
Old
05-28-2004, 04:05 PM
  #42
Snakeeye
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Calgary
Posts: 735
vCash: 500
I ignored it because it is irrelevent. The talent level of the opposition has no bearing on the talent level of the Flames.

You do have a point about the team learning and growing as a result of the injuries - even if your examples are poor - however, that growing could have been accomplished without the ridiculous number of injuries the Flames battled through this season.

Or, it could also point to the fact that the Flames have a hell of a lot more talent than most people either realize, or are willing to admit. Which goes back to the origin of this topic... The Flames deserve more credit than they are getting from certian ... locations.

Snakeeye is offline  
Old
05-28-2004, 07:44 PM
  #43
Spankatola Jamnuts*
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: ...sucka?
Country: United States
Posts: 10,982
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by sehnsucht
Calgary wasn't like Anaheim last year, barely making the playoffs.
This is a bit OT, but this bit of revisionist history that's cropped up lately is annoying me.

The Flames had a 5 point cushion over 9th place Edmonton. That's barely making it. You know what's NOT barely making it? The Mighty Ducks in 02-03, 95 points, 16 points over 9th place Chicago.

Spankatola Jamnuts* is offline  
Old
05-29-2004, 06:36 PM
  #44
chriss_co
Registered User
 
chriss_co's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: CALGARY
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,769
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chock Full Of Booger
This is a bit OT, but this bit of revisionist history that's cropped up lately is annoying me.

The Flames had a 5 point cushion over 9th place Edmonton. That's barely making it. You know what's NOT barely making it? The Mighty Ducks in 02-03, 95 points, 16 points over 9th place Chicago.
Well.. thats cuz edmonton had that amazing run late in the season... heck, had they won against vancouver and the avs beat nashville, the oilers would have made the playoffs..

there wasn't a playoff race in 02-03.. granted whoever said anahiem barely made the playoffs is wrong

but so is the remark that calgary just squeaked into the playoffs because they didn't.. they were consistently in the 5-7th position in the western conference all year and especially late in the season.. had several games gone different, calgary could have finished 4th (i was hoping they wouldn't solely for draft positioning)

anyhoo... i guess we can both agree that neither anaheim of 02-03 and calgary this year squeaked into the playoffs

chriss_co is offline  
Old
05-29-2004, 07:49 PM
  #45
Colorado_Starsfan
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 226
vCash: 500
I mean let's get real here, Flames fans. The only decent player on your team is the Goalie and Iginla. Calgary covers up for their lack of skill by playing hard and pounding the other team as much as they can.

It would be an upset of monumental proportions for them to win the cup - talent usually wins out in the end.

Colorado_Starsfan is offline  
Old
05-29-2004, 07:56 PM
  #46
Teemu
Moderator
 
Teemu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Palatine
Country: United States
Posts: 20,386
vCash: 500
I guess there is one good thing about the blackhawks never making the stanley cup finals - we don't have the chance to make fools out of ourselves and our team like we've seen on these boards

Teemu is offline  
Old
05-29-2004, 08:12 PM
  #47
BruinsGirl
Registered User
 
BruinsGirl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Bruinsville, MA
Country: United States
Posts: 5,159
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Flames Draft Watcher
Well we'll give you Turek and McLennan for half a season and see how high you finish in the Western Conference...seriously
Oh..please. I respect Calgary but advantage of the Western Conference is a myth this year.

How was WC better than EC???

At least during last years WC featured best goaltenders like Roy, Hasek, Belfour...Now they don't even have them.

BruinsGirl is offline  
Old
05-29-2004, 11:25 PM
  #48
Snakeeye
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Calgary
Posts: 735
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Colorado_Starsfan
I mean let's get real here, Flames fans. The only decent player on your team is the Goalie and Iginla. Calgary covers up for their lack of skill by playing hard and pounding the other team as much as they can.

It would be an upset of monumental proportions for them to win the cup - talent usually wins out in the end.
If we have no talent, how come 40% of our regular 20 man roster is on a World Cup team?

Iginla, Regehr - Canada
Conroy, Leopold - USA
Lydman, Kiprusoff, Niememen - Finland
Nilson - Sweden.

You will note that three of those players are defensemen, where our greatest concentration of skill lies.

I would suggest that theopinions of the GMs of these world cup teams are a little more valuable than yours.

Snakeeye is offline  
Old
05-30-2004, 02:27 AM
  #49
ehc73
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Coquitlam, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,943
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to ehc73
Quote:
Originally Posted by Snakeeye
If we have no talent, how come 40% of our regular 20 man roster is on a World Cup team?

Iginla, Regehr - Canada
Conroy, Leopold - USA
Lydman, Kiprusoff, Niememen - Finland
Nilson - Sweden.

You will note that three of those players are defensemen, where our greatest concentration of skill lies.

I would suggest that theopinions of the GMs of these world cup teams are a little more valuable than yours.
To be devil's advocate, it could be argued that those Flames are getting selected because of a strong playoffs. Gretzky himself said that one of the criteria for selecting Team Canada was looking for a strong playoff or world championship tourny, so it's not impossible that the other GMs are doing the same.
This isn't to say that Calgary players would suck otherwise, but just that there's another side to the World Cup argument.

ehc73 is offline  
Old
05-30-2004, 02:39 AM
  #50
Phanuthier*
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Murder capital (Edm)
Posts: 10,675
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chock Full Of Booger
This is a bit OT, but this bit of revisionist history that's cropped up lately is annoying me.

The Flames had a 5 point cushion over 9th place Edmonton. That's barely making it. You know what's NOT barely making it? The Mighty Ducks in 02-03, 95 points, 16 points over 9th place Chicago.
So the Flames had 94 points, and the Ducks 95?

BIG difference there. Guess the Ducks ARE that much better. :bonk:

Phanuthier* is offline  
Closed Thread

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 08:30 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.