SB Nation - Mark Giordano

Mark Giordano Stars in...The Pwning

Kent Wilson — Fri, 18 Dec 2009 16:35:55 -0000

Heeeeeeeeere's Gio!

*(If anyone can find a video of Giordano dodging Brown's ill-fated revenge elbow, let me know and I'll post it here).

Curtis Glencross: Idiot

David Driscoll-Carignan — Mon, 14 Dec 2009 15:02:56 -0000

More photos » by Jeff McIntosh - AP

2 months ago: Calgary Flames' Curtis Glencross celebrates his goal during the first period of an NHL hockey game against the Vancouver Canucks in Calgary, Friday, Oct. 16, 2009. (AP Photo/The Canadian Press, Jeff McIntosh)

Browse more photos »

The Calgary Flames were embarrassed by the Avalanche last night. We know that. I'm sure the Flames are not proud of their 5 1st-period minor penalties, or the pathetic 21 shots that they mustered during the game, or that they had their ass handed to them by a team with 7 first-year players. I get that.

That doesn't explain the idiotic post-game quotes from Curtis Glencross. Glencross, you may recall, was in the box for high-sticking when the Avalanche scored their first goal. He had six penalty minutes in the opening frame, and, of course, it's not his fault.

"The guy was cut early in the game and it was a one-handed little poke," Glencross said. "I just hit his stick with one hand and it went up and supposedly hit him. The guy was bleeding before. He was bleeding in the first couple of shifts, bleeding from his mouth, and he was whining.

"It's too bad (they) can't be a little more honest players, diving all over the place. It's embarrassing."

Yes, Matt Duchene was bleeding before your little stick went up and "supposedly hit him" (which, actually, looked an awful lot like an attempted decapitation). Clearly, the blood was not there from, you know, a concerted effort by the Flames to mug Duchene at every opportunity. Instead, it was summoned magically in an attempt to sell your little oopsie. And oh, by the way, you seem unsure as to whether you hit him or not, but at least one guy is pretty sure that it was a penalty:

"Sure, it might have been a two-minute penalty, but it sure isn't a four-minute penalty," Glencross said.

Oh, Curtis. Look, make up your mind, butthead. And once you figure out if you hit him or didn't hit him, I have some breaking information for you. When an NHL player is hit in the face with a stick, he checks for blood. If he finds blood, he shows the ref. That's the way it works. Perhaps you can ask your teammate, Mark Giordano, for help with this, as he did the exact same thing later in the game. And here's a helpful hint: if you don't want to get on the hook for 4-minutes...DON'T HIT A GUY IN THE FACE WITH YOUR STICK, especially if you KNOW THE GUY IS ALREADY CUT. It's not rocket science, dumbass.

Lucky for you, the extra two minutes wasn't a factor, as the Avalanche scored just 45 seconds into your penalty. That goal is all on the moron who took a stupid penalty with his team already shorthanded (AKA: you). It was a boneheaded play on your part, and whining about it is a dick move. Please, do us all a favor and shut. the. fuck. up.

Thanks.

Game 35 Recap: Avalanche 3 - Flames 2

David Driscoll-Carignan — Mon, 14 Dec 2009 04:27:53 -0000

More photos » by David Zalubowski - AP

9 days ago: Calgary Flames left winger Eric Nystrom, front, skates past as Colorado Avalanche players Kyle Quincey, Wojtek Wolski, of Poland, Chris Stewart and Matt Duchene celebrate Wolski's power-play goal in the first period of an NHL hockey game in Denver on Sunday, Dec. 13, 2009. (AP Photo/David Zalubowski)

Browse more photos »

Final - 12.13.2009	1	2	3	Total
Calgary Flames	0	1	1	2
Colorado Avalanche	1	2	0	3

Complete Coverage >

Wow.

The Avalanche are back in first in the NW division after knocking off the Calgary Flames 3-2 tonight. I wanted to see if the Avs would show up, and they did. In spades.

Right out of the gate, the Avalanche were ready to play. If I had to use one word to describe them tonight, it would be "relentless". Thanks in part to 5 PPs given up by a reckless, headhunting Calgary club, the Avalanche launched 20 shots on Mikka Kiprusoff in the 1st. Kipper had an extraordinary game and kept his club in it, and the Avs only managed to get one goal in the first, a Wojtek Wolski one-timer on a 5-on-3 for his first PP goal of the year.

Colorado kept it up in the 2nd, and a great play by Wolski to regain the puck after his breakaway attempt was stopped so that he could dish it to Chris Stewart and Paul Stastny led to a Stewart goal and a 2-0 lead. Rene Bourque cut the lead to 2-1 just a minute or so later, but then Darcy Tucker scored the eventual game winner with a tip-in that knuckled over Kipper late in the 2nd. The Avalanche have been absolutely incredible at keeping the puck inside the blueline the last couple of games, and it's really paying dividends on both shots for and shots against.

After two periods, the Avs had a decided 33-14 shot advantage and I was already thinking of ways to work in metaphors about 60 minutes of effort in this very recap. But, once again, they petered off a bit in the 3rd. The Avalanche were better in the 3rd period than they've been in previous games with a lead, but they still need to find a way to generate more pressure than 2 shots. Colorado had a 3-1 lead going into the 3rd and started off playing pretty well, but then gave up 3 PPs to the Flames. Even though Avs PK hadn't allowed a goal to Calgary all year, you can't keep giving them chances like that. Sure enough, Mark Giordano scored a PP goal with just under 7 minutes left. And the nail biting could officially commence.

Craig Anderson was nowhere near as busy as his counterpart was tonight (just 21 shots, the 3rd straight game the Avs had given up 22 shots or less), but he came up with a couple of big saves in the 3rd to preserve the lead. T.J. Galiardi and Ryan O'Reilly had a couple of great late-game shifts as well. Still, enough with the hang-on-for-dear-life endings, okay?

This was a big, big victory for the Avalanche. The team had 7 rookies in the lineup and it wasn't a detriment at all. In fact, the rookies were the difference. Galiardi had one of his better games as a pro. O'Reilly had a great game defensively. Duchene overcame getting mugged 3 times in the first period to have a solid game. Ryan Wilson's thunderous hit on David Moss was highlight reel material (and he assisted on Tucker's game-winning goal). Seven different Avs had a point tonight. Six of those scorers are under 25. These kids aren't riding the bus, they are driving it. And they are doing a hell of a job.

Flames Game Day: Swimming in the harbour of your smile

Robert Cleave — Sat, 05 Dec 2009 22:00:25 -0000

by Ross Franklin - AP

View full size photo »

Calgary Flames vs. San Jose Sharks

HP Pavilion

8 PM MT

Opposition: Fear The Fin

TV: CBC

Meh. Blah. Why do I ever buy a PPV?

That pretty much covers my feelings about Thursday's effort in Phoenix, so it's a good time to move on, and the Flames certainly have a worthwhile test this evening. Tonight's opponent is equally displeased with its last adventure, and not to be trifled with even if they were satisfied, so this game should give all of us another chance to see what kind of team Calgary can actually be.

I don't mean to diminish anything that the Coyotes did Thursday. They have a plan in place, and they've executed it both nights they met the Flames, as well as most other games they've played on the season. Each team got an extra bounce in their respective win, and that's about all the difference there was. All that accepted, there's a talent difference between Phoenix and the Sharks, so if the Flames struggle this evening, a hiding like they took last November might be in the offing.

Preventing that sort of occurrence likely requires a more fluid effort from Bourque-Jokinen-Iginla. Rene Bourque was rusty, to be blunt, and Sutter noted that he faltered away from the puck and in his own end more often than when on the attack. It looks like McLellan likes to run P v P, so a night head to head against Thornton et al requires a much improved night of work from that line, or Sutter will have to run a different match-up.

I didn't really think Nigel Dawes was at his best Thursday. He seemed a bit rushed with the puck, to my eye, and made a couple of errors along the boards that lead to extending some Coyote pressure. He, Langkow and Moss might well get some mix of Pavelski, Clowe and Setoguchi, which would be a pretty solid confrontation in it's own right. I think the lines as a whole are likely to stay as is, but I suppose that doesn't exclude a McG outing.

The defense is intact as well, with Sarich still down. A shame, really, although Patrick Marleau might not share that outlook:

Mark Giordano was on the end of some unwelcome scrutiny for his mis-play on Pyatt's winner Thursday, and to be honest, even if there were other things involved in the build-up to the play, he was a bit careless, at the expense of a point. I don't think that will affect the pairings tonight, but sometimes lost in the rush to run Cory Sarich and his salary slot out of town, it's wise to remember that Gio's not quite the finished article. I'm a fan of long standing, but I still like him a lot better as a third paring guy that dominates, at least for this year.

Kipper will go again, and why not? He's been good. If he has any extended run of really poor play, I'm almost at the point where I'd be mildly surprised. That's not saying there won't be the odd bad goal, of course, but I'm not expecting him to let in a stinker every night, and by the end of last year, that was the norm.

The Sharks had a surprising breakdown against the Blues last time out, giving up a late SH goal to Carlo Colaiacavo before losing via the skills competition. Evgeni Nabokov fingered Marc-Edouard Vlasic for not blocking the attempt at goal, before walking back those comments the next morning. I guess it's just how things go, but unlike the Gio play, it wasn't the coach grousing. I don't know, Vlasic's a damn good defenceman who plays the toughs every night, and watching that last sequence, there was plenty of blame to go around for the cluster that occurred in the last minute:

As for tonight, the Thornton line will be the obvious center of attention for the Flames, and with Sarich out, I'd expect the Regehr-Phaneuf duo to get first crack, with Bouwmeester involved as well. The two teams have both been good 5 v 5, but the Sharks have excellent special teams, and the Flames' PP goes through stretches where it seems a bit bereft of ideas. If Thursday proved anything at all, it's that the Flames don't have a great margin for error, and they won't out-talent San Jose by any means, so a tidy effort is paramount.

Game time is 8 MT, with coverage on the CBC.

Game 25 Preview: Jackets Return Home to Take on the Flames

Mike MacLean — Sat, 28 Nov 2009 16:49:07 -0000

More photos » by Tony Gutierrez - AP

Browse more photos »

Finally, back home. The Jackets return to Nationwide Arena to face the Flames tonight, after concluding a disastrous five-game road trip. The Jackets won the first game, but then promptly lost four in a row. The team played horrible defensively, and the goaltenders were anything but sharp. Mason however did look good in the last game against Ottawa, making big saves when needed, however he lost focus on the game winning goal for Ottawa, a wraparound by Nick Foligno late in the third. Mase was again haunted by a play that developed from behind the net.

The Flames are a fairly high scoring team, and they play physical. They play a lot like Columbus does when the Jackets are "on", so this on paper is a pretty fair matchup. What remains to be seen is whether or not the Jackets can get their act together in the defensive zone. Something is broken, the effort level isn't there and the goalies haven't been good. These factors need to be remedied immediatly, as the Jackets are losing ground fast. The Preds and Blackhawks are the hottest team in the NHL right now, and the Jackets need to keep pace.

There have been some shakeups to the forward lines. Raffi Torres should be lining up with Vermette and Nash on the first line, and Umby is moving to the second line right-wing position with Jake moving to the third line. Look for recently called-up Alex Picard to see some action on the fourth line. I love his game- tons of jam and he still actually has offensive talent, although he has yet to show it at the NHL level. I fully expect him to take advantage of this chance and have a strong game.

Fearless Prediction: Picard scores his first NHL goal!

Game Time: 7:00pm ET

Opponent's Blog: Matchsticks and Gasoline

Game Page: Flames vs Blue Jackets Coverage

TSN Preview: Flames vs Blue Jackets Preview

TV: FSN Ohio

Radio: WBNS-AM (1460); WWCD-FM (101.1)

More after the jump...

From the Columbus Dispatch:

The Blue Jackets aim to snap a season-high, four-game losing streak. Since Oct. 7, 2005, the Blue Jackets are 7-1-0 against the Flames in Nationwide Arena, including a 2-1 win Oct. 13.

Jackets Links:

Columbus Blue Jackets / Columbus Blue Jackets Schedule

Columbus Blue Jackets Roster / Columbus Blue Jackets Stats

Here are the lineups for tonight's tilt:

Columbus Blue Jackets

Raffi Torres	Antoine Vermette	Rick Nash
Kristian Huselius	Derick Brassard	R.J. Umberger
Jason Chimera	Samuel Pahlsson	Jakub Voracek
Alexandre Picard	Derek MacKenzie	Jared Boll

Fedor Tyutin	Anton Stralman
Rostislav Klesla	Jan Hejda
Marc Methot	Mike Commodore

Steve Mason

Mathieu Garon

EXTRA: Kris Russell, Michael Blunden

INJURED: Fredrik Modin, Andrew Murray, Derek Dorsett

Calgary Flames

Jamie Lundmark	Olli Jokinen	Jarome Iginla
Nigel Dawes	Daymond Langkow	David Moss
Curtis Glencross	Craig Conroy	Dustin Boyd
Fredrik Sjostrom	Eric Nystrom	Brandon Prust

Jay Bouwmeester	Mark Giordano
Dion Phaneuf	Robyn Regehr
Adam Pardy	Aaron Johnson

Curtis McElhinney

Miikka Kiprusoff

The Curse of the Flying Vee: G22, Flames @ Ducks Post-Game

R O — Tue, 24 Nov 2009 20:49:32 -0000

More photos » by Francis Specker - AP

29 days ago: Calgary Flames' Jarome Iginla, left, celebrates his goal over Anaheim Ducks goalie Jean-Sebastien Giguere (35) during the third period on an NHL hockey game in Anaheim, Calif. on Monday, Nov. 23, 2009. (AP Photo/Francis Specker)

ZoneStart, G22, Flames @ Ducks

Last night's shootout loss to the Ducks hit a bit of a sore spot for me. I'm always annoyed by those little quirky streaks that teams and players randomly go on. You know the ones: Flames always lose on TSN (was that last year?), Khabibulin is a Flame killer, Flames never win afternoon games, Flames never win at the Pond/Joe Louis/Atlanta/Buffalo/ACC... yeah you know the ones.

First
EV Shots On Goal    : 11-6
EV Shots Toward Net : 16-12
EV Faceoff Starts   : 5-3

Second
EV Shots On Goal    : 7-6
EV Shots Toward Net : 10-9
EV Faceoff Starts   : 5-6

Third
EV Shots On Goal    : 17-7
EV Shots Toward Net : 24-14
EV Faceoff Starts   : 4-2

OT
EV Shots On Goal    : 4-6
EV Shots Toward Net : 8-6
EV Faceoff Starts   : 1-2

Overall
EV Shots On Goal    : 39-25
EV Shots Toward Net : 58-41
EV Faceoff Starts   : 15-13

So, the overwhelming consensus seems to be that the Ducks were lucky to win last night's game. On the back of a terrific Flames third period, mostly.

Not to this fan, though. What I saw was that:

We got played to a draw at EV in the first two periods...
On the back of their top unit negating our depth advantage...
And got killed on special teams...
And played a fantastic comeback period in the third with the Ducks playing prevent defense...
But were altogether lucky to be down by only one goal at that point...
And were pretty fortunate to salvage a point from this thing.

I think points #1 to #4 up top there aren't that contentious. Comment if you have a contention, though. But a friendly warning, I'll fight you :-)

But #5 and #6 will probably draw some criticism, just as the assertion that we were unlucky to be down 6-1 to Chicago and unlucky to lose the game in that manner drew some criticism four days ago.

But it's the truth, folks.

We talk about luck here and part of that is knowing that sometimes you just don't get the result in this game that you would have in a thousand other identical games. When you don't have an advantage at EV through two periods and are absolutely destroyed on special teams (to the tune of 1-7 in chances), the odds of losing the game are high, even before turning your playing-to-score switch to TURBO. And not to take away from that third period, it was perfect chase hockey, but the play up to that point would have made comebacks unlikely on most nights.

You don't want to read that, hell I don't want to write it, but if we're to be honest with ourselves, that's what happened.

Game notes:

I may have been overly harsh in my tirade against Olli Jokinen's first period last night. He was a disaster on the second goal, I won't take that back. But Lawrence in the comments is right to point out that his clearing flip pass that led to the Glencross goal was a safe play. We were stupid lucky that we got a breakaway from that, but it was a good defensive play.

And Olli sure looked better after the thirty-minute mark. Though Iggy even more so, I thought, very hard to push 12 off the puck in that latter half. So that is something. It's been a few games now where that top unit has looked... not severely outclassed in aggregate? Just a bit outclassed now. So we are getting somewhere, and the "baby steps" label might not apply in a couple games. We'll see.
I was not that impressed by Mark Giordano nor Adam Pardy. They looked overmatched when they faced quality - I remember one particular shift in the second vs. Koivu and friends where Pardy gave away the puck under pressure from the forecheck, and Giordano was not able to handle the incoming forwards on the subsequent battle. Kent's count didn't show a chance against but there was definitely pressure.

Giordano in particular was getting the love last night, and not that it's undeserved per se, but it's a bit much to say he was "better than Dion Phaneuf".

Not to be rude, but my ass he was.

Giordano was put in a position to succeed last night: five OFF zone draws and one DEF zone draw at EV. That makes you many things but a liability that night is generally not one of them. And if you're getting put in that gig, you're also getting a lot of minutes against the Marchant types or tired legs, and getting thrown over the boards to assist in the rush, and less so to defend against it. And as little time as your coach can manage against Getzlaf and co. with fresh legs. Easy to look like a star with that kind of ice time. Whereas Phaneuf - he got his share of OFF/DEF positioning too, but in a smaller measure than Giordano, and was as near as you get to a hard match with Regehr against the top Ducks unit.

Context is everything, folks.

Flames Scoring Chance Differentials, Games 1-20

Kent Wilson — Mon, 23 Nov 2009 04:27:46 -0000

More photos » by Jeff McIntosh - AP

Browse more photos »

Scott was good enough to post the Flames scoring chance count through games 11-20 (minus the untelevised Blues game of course) below. Here I've added the differentials for the second set as well as whole data set thus far.

First, games 11-20:

Conroy and Boyd came back down to earth in this segment, while Mark Giordano climbed back up top from the third pairing. Iginla and Jokinen were marginally better in this series, although it still sucks to see the two of them at the bottom of the forward barrel.Of note is the fact that Langkow et al are still on the plus side of things, despite some tough match-ups and lots of own zone draws. One wonders how well they'd do if they weren't having to take on the heavy lifting so often.

On the bad side of things, Cory Sarich has absolutely had his ass handed to him by this measure thus far. It's notable that his regular partner, Jay Bouwmeester, was somehow 12 chances better through this 9 game sample. Hmmmm...

And now, for the whole dataset:

Glencross' big first 10 and passable second 10 has him in the lead while Mr. Sex Panther brings up the rear. Keep in mind, of course, this is all even strength information so excludes all the chances Iginla and Jokinen would be getting on the PP.

Also of note:

- Rene Bourque has been amazing thus far. Here's hoping he's not out for the long-term. Honestly, he's been the Flames best all-around forward over the first quarter.

- Craig Conroy continues to deliver. He's still far superior to guys like Nystrom and Sjostrom.

- I personally like the work of Nigel Dawes. Although he skates with some good players in Langkow and Bourque, I don't think he's merely been a passenger on that line. He was acquired as a "sniper", but his vision and ability to find open teammates in the offensive zone has been a boon to the squad. He isn't a defensive liability either.

Flames Through Ten - M&G Roundtable

Kent Wilson — Wed, 28 Oct 2009 04:55:51 -0000

More photos » by Jeff McIntosh - AP

Browse more photos »

For many reasons, the first 10 games of the season is at once the most important ten game stretch of the season and also the least significant. Most important, because it's the first (and, at the moment, only) information we have about the new team and we humans just love to elevate first impressions. Least relevant, because all sorts of screwy things can happen in a 10 games sample in the NHL season - moreso at the start of the year, when clubs are still ironing out kinks, trying out line combos, auditioning rookies, etc. As such, let's keep in mind that we probably haven't really seen the real team just yet.

With that in mind, the Flames have been...conflicted through the initial decade of contests. Some stats are outstanding (GF, PP) while other are downright lousy (SA, GA, PK). Time and regression will smooth out the peaks and valleys to some degree, but perhaps in the background there is a faint outline of what we can expect from the Flames going forward. Robert, Richard and I asked three questions each to see if we could better identify that outline.

Kent's questions:

1.) Ridiculous SH% aside, it looks like the depth players are going to be full value again this year. Excepting from Rene Bourque - who may be the star of the first 10 - which sub $2M player were you most impressed with?

R O: Dustin Boyd. He's been given middling responsibilities this year (weaker opposition, middle-of-the-pack in terms shift starting locations) and delivered with several games of consistent scoring chance generation.

Robert: Mark Giordano. He didn't look out of place as Bouwmeester's partner against top opposition, and if the Flames ever decide to move Sarich to free up cap space for a forward, I think the braintrust should take his good play into account.

2.) What's to be done with this Olli Jokinen?

R O: Jokinen's getting a bit jobbed by the bounces (shooting at a 5.7% clip) but he's not doing anything to help himself either (averaging 1.7 shots per game). He's an anchor but these ten games are probably rock bottom for him. Best case scenario is Sutter trading him for a servicable forward and a pick. Realistically I think (hope?) he won't be re-signed.

Robert: I can't really add much to Richard's assessment. He's here until the end of the year, and I hope he gets back to some sort of normal (3-ish shots a game, 10-12 SH%). He's still a lost cause in his own end, and I hope he doesn't play with Iginla, because those two are lethal together, and not in the good way.

3.) Thoughts on Aaron Johnson?

R O: He's only played two games for us so it's hard to say, but his PK work against the Oil did not impress me. On the first goal he was covering Penner in the slot. He then decided to abandon him to watch Gagner pass to Hemsky, and completely missed the backdoor. Granted it's not his responsibility to cover the backdoor but he didn't anticipate it at all, and if the pass had gone to Penner instead he wouldn't have been there either. And that cross-check to Jacques bugged me.

He's a bottom-pairing D and at the end of the day his mistakes probably won't cost us too many points. From an organizational viewpoint I'd prefer to play the D that we developed in-house (Pardy).

Robert: Anton Stralman is a better hockey player. So is Adam Pardy. Staffan Kronwall isn't any worse. He's more likely to play than Kyle Greentree was, so the trade is OK from that regard, but that doesn't make him all that useful. If he's nothing but injury insurance for the rest of the year, I'd be fine with it.

R O's questions:

1.) Among the defencemen, one player stands out as having had the toughest workload - toughest comp, worst zone starting shifts, and his shots for/against haven't been great. Among the forwards, one player has similarly been assigned the most work, and his shots for/against have also suffered.

The defenceman is Jay Bouwmeester, the forward Jarome Iginla. I sure have seen the former good and the latter bad. Your thoughts?

Robert: I'm of the opinion that Iginla suffers a bit when we assess him due to the halo effect of his earlier career. By that, I mean that we all remember him as the guy who smoked all comers up until 06/07, and killed decent comp in 07/08. At some point, we might have to accept that he can't do it alone any more. He's clearly struggled, but he's not in the prime of his career any more, and having a slipshod center like Jokinen did him no favours. He might be a guy that needs to play second lines to get going again. That's not likely to be the answer that people want to hear, but it happens to players as they age, and I'm not sure even having Langkow as his center would be a cure-all.

Bouwmeester's been OK. I try to keep in mind that he spent much of the early part of the year behind Jokinen/Iginla, and those two couldn't drive possession. If a team's top forwards aren't driving things, whoever plays behind them will have their SH for/against be the recipient of collateral damage.

Kent: I think Bouwmeester has been as good as advertised. His underlying numbers reflect playing against the big boys a lot, behind a forward group that couldn't handle the heavy lifting. As the Flames settle in and the match-ups get worked out, I think his stats will improve.

As for Jarome, his ability to win battles and make decisions with the puck in the offensive zone has been lacking. The play dies on his stick a lot right now because he skates into coverage or tries to force low percentage passes. His circumstances have stunk, but he's been part of the problem too.

2.) What are your thoughts on why the Flames struggled at EV out of the gate?

Robert: We're hard on Jokinen and Iginla, for good reason, but the second group hasn't gotten much going either, with the notable exception of Bourque. Langkow in particular hasn't looked quite right, and if your top six are struggling or in the case of Moss, hurt, you're likely hooped at EV. That's been the case. Throw in the fact that the team's number one shut down defender, Regher, looked like he was stuck in the mud for the first 7-8 games, and that about covers it. I don't think it's adjusting to the system or anything of that sort. The jury is still out, at least for me, on the line switches. If the Flames can get away with Jokinen playing third-level comp, I'd expect those EV numbers to come around pretty quickly.

Kent: As Bob suggests, I think it was mainly Sutter learning hard lessons about what sort of players he has. In Jersey, he rode Parise-Zajac-Langebrunner in a power versus power role at ES and clearly he thought he had similar weaponry in Iggy/Jokinen this season. Unfortunately, that's not the case, so the club suffered through his learning curve. In addition, with the break up of the Moss-Conroy-Glencross threesome, Calgary no longer boasts a third line that can drive possession in such an efficient manner. Conroy et al. were amongst the league leaders at moving the puck forward last year, which enabled the higher lines (particularly Jarome) to enjoy a whole lot of offensive zone draws.

3.) Do you notice any differences between the new coaching staff and the old coaching staff? Specifically in terms of ice time distribution as well as "systems" play (breakouts, forecheck, D zone coverage).

Robert: This system stuff makes me laugh a bit. It isn't magic out there. What might change between two coaching staffs could be the level of attention to detail, and what the consequences are for poor play. Sutter's been pretty good at rewarding good play from guys like Boyd, and hasn't played Joker/Iggy into the ground when they've been poor. That's what most of us would have liked from Keenan last year. He rewarded freelancing from his top players, as we all know, and I think the team suffered a bit for it. It's hard to expect discipline from people when you won't hold them accountable, and ice time is the one hammer a coach has in the modern game.

Kent: Aside from more blocked shots, I don't see any notable difference between the two coaches system wise. What is different, however, is Sutter's willingness to cede his assumptions to reality and make changes when the results demand them. That's in direct contrast to Keenan's "ride your favorites no matter what" strategy .

Robert's questions:

1) The Flames have a much tougher schedule in November, and Curtis McElhinney is likely to feature more prominently than he has to this point. If he falters, do the Flames simply play Kipper into the ground, call up Irving, or go outside the organization for help?

Kent: I think the Flames will bank on Kipper until he himself falters or gets injured. There isn't much out there right now, so I don't see a better option popping up anyways.

R O: I think they go outside the org. Maybe this is false hope but I know Sutter has the stones to fix a goaltending hole (e.g. getting Kipper in the first place as an alternative to Turek, getting CuJo in 07/08).

2) Dion Phaneuf has some pretty nice boxcar numbers. Is he actually playing better than in the past?

Kent: Phaneuf's offensive game looks the same as ever to me. His numbers are good because just about everything he sends at the net is going in right now. His defensive game has looked "quieter" than usual thus far, and I mean that as a good thing. I don't know if playing with Robyn Regehr (now that he's more like himself) against second tier competition has helped him or if it's a real turn around, but I guess we'll see.

R O: Agree with Kent on the offense. On the defense, I find it hard to come to conclusions because he's not accumulating a lot of minuses, and of course that's when we'll best remember his mistakes. I do know he's let his man go a few times (probably the worst instance being against Chicago) but every D does that.

3) Miikka Kiprusoff currently sports a .903 SV%, which is exactly how he finished last year. Is he playing to the same level?

Kent: I think Kiprusoff looks stronger at ES, which is supported by his .920 ES SV%. That said, I don't trust 10 game samples for judging goalies, because just about every tender in the NHL went through a couple of weeks of looking like an all-star (Kipper had his turn in February). I'm encouraged by his efforts thus far, but he'll have to continue indefinitely to convince me he's halted the decline.

R O: It depends on what theory you subscribe to. Last year he was worse at EV but better on the PK. One would intuit that PK goaltending is harder (and it is) but special teams analysis is like looking into a crystal ball. His EV number is a definite arrow in the right direction. His game still looks chaotic (e.g. he recovers from a save attempt at the speed of glass) but I trust the numbers - ten save percentage points is basically a goal every five games which I'm not sure any fan can pick up. That said, we are drawing a lot of conclusions from ten game-lines of data.

Reach-Arounds and Shafts in the Face: G10, BoA @ Calgary Post-Game

R O — Mon, 26 Oct 2009 05:06:46 -0000

More photos » by Jeff McIntosh - AP

Take off your damn helmet, Gio.

The question on everyone's lips going into last night's edition of the Battle was: "revenge"? Thanks to Pat Quinn's asinine remarks about how (back in the day) he used to use the onion on his belt to beat people, there was some question of whether Jarome Iginla was going to get hosed by grease, so to speak. And so he did.

Oh, and the Flames dominated the Oil. That's not news though.

Breakdowns

First
EV Shots On Goal : 8-6
EV Shots Toward Net : 11-10
EV Faceoffs Starts : 7-3

Second
EV Shots On Goal : 9-7
EV Shots Toward Net : 12-11
EV Faceoff Starts : 1-5

Third
EV Shots On Goal : 7-4
EV Shots Toward Net : 10-11
EV Faceoff Starts : 5-2

Overall
EV Shots On Goal : 24-17
EV Shots Toward Net : 33-32
EV Faceoff Starts : 13-10

Note: I'm doing the breakdowns a bit differently this time around. Shots on goal and toward net are listed as CGY-OPP (i.e. 10-5 means the Flames outshot the opponent, 5-10 means the Flames got outshot). The faceoff notation is thus: Flames_OZone_Starts - Flames_DZone_Starts. And of course Kent does the Flames scoring chances which just adds another layer of data.

This game was fucking awesome. An improvement at EV over the Columbus game, which was already a terrific effort. The first period was played to a standstill, the second was dominant and the Flames shutdown strategy in the third actually worked for once. The Oilers didn't get an EV shot for the last 10 minutes of the third, which the coaching staff must have been happy about.

Of course by that point the outcome was a forgone conclusion, the Oilers were mailing it in, and they're not exactly a good team anyway (the roster were flu-stricken - plus, they're the Oil). But this is a game that the Flames should have dominated, and they did. So give the Flames a slow clap because the boys deserve it.

It wasn't all tequila and strippers though. Here are some things the Flames need to work on:
- The PK is still bleeding goals and chances at a rate that this fan is not proud of. The first Oilers PP goal caught three guys (Kipper, Johnson and another PKer) watching the puck and not even remotely close to anticipating the wide-open backdoor play. Johnson's PK work in particular doens't impress me very much.
- Jokinen's a bum.
- The top line struggled a bit. I didn't notice but other commenters saw Glencross struggling. Myself, I saw Iginla lose a couple puck battles in the D-zone. His O-zone work wasn't great, he got two 10-cent chances but there was no sequence that I could remember in which he converted any sort of half-wall battle into a chance below the face-off dots. Disappointing night even though his numbers were ok.

Aside from their generally excellent EV play, here are some observations about the Flames strengths:
- The Flames first PP was uber dangerous and a big factor was the fact that Phaneuf was able to advance from his point position. The Oilers weren't pressuring the points and it cost them. The second PP saw an Oilers adjustment on the PK, but I think that can be broken with better pressure from the forwards.
- Boyd and Bourque were incredible. They had turns where they looked like Iginla-of-old out there. Boyd especially - when did he steal that off-the-boards move from Iggy, and when is he going to give it back?
- Bouwmeester's defensive stick work is a thing of beauty.
- How about that Kipper eh? Talk to me when game 70 rolls by but he's having himself quite the little run at EV (1 EVGA in his last three starts and a 0.981 EVSV%) - as if that'll last but let's enjoy it while it lasts.

And some general game notes:
- How about that McGrattan-Macintyre fight, eh? I don't like our current goon iteration - I don't mind a player with goon in him but he better be able to play hockey, like Georges Laraque or something - but that was a very entertaining tilt. McG's still useless (two shifts, 1:01 ice time - picking up a +1 was injustice) but he's good at fighting.
- I might be the minority in saying the officiating was pretty even (except for one glaring exception which is elucidated below). The Oil fans are complaining but the PP ledger ended up 8-3 in favor of the Oil - what the fuck more do they want? And some Flames fans are complaining but 4 of the 8 PPs came in the end of the second, and 3 of them were deserved (and the 4th - the second Sarich minor - was just plain bad luck that Stortini split open again). There were missed calls on both sides but these were mostly balanced out (again with a glaring exception) and the flow of the game was not interrupted.
- Mark Lee and Kevin Weekes might not be the most insightful CBC play-by-play duo, but "reach-around" and "shaft in his face" were priceless quotes.

Now I have three hockey ethics issues I want to rant about. In ascending order of importance:
1.) Aaron Johnson's crosscheck to JF Jacques' head bugged me a lot. It was dirty and unncessary and unbelievably dangerous. Shame on him.
2.) Mark Giordano needs to remove his helmet in the fight against Smid. He just has to. It's a point of honor, you do it as a sign of respect for your opponent, and Smid had just obliged him. I hope El Capitan took him aside for that.
3.) The Zack Stortini run on Iginla was a fucking farce. A helpful Oiler fan has provided a clip of the run on Youtube, which they are trying to pass off as evidence that the hit was a clean legal check.

BULLSHIT.

- The hit was late. I don't care if the Oil fans are calling it "less than a steamboat late", the fact of the matter is that there is no way for Stortini to use the hit to gain possession since Iginla had relinquished the puck, and so it is penalizable. And it should have been, because...
- The hit was dirty. Don't fucking tell me that hit was just "finishing the check". I wasn't born fucking yesterday. Stortini comes in with speed, he is aiming to injure and it is just plain good luck that Iginla turns and receives the check in the chest. If Iginla had not turned Stortini would still have hit him straight into the boards.

What the hell, Stortini? A better player than you will ever be learned the hard way in 03-04 the consequences of eye-for-an-eye. There is a difference between the split-second bad decisions that often happen in a league as fast as the NHL, and the bush-league ... thing that you tried.

Season Opener Post game

Kent Wilson — Fri, 02 Oct 2009 04:53:11 -0000

More photos » by Jeff McIntosh - AP

Browse more photos »

Well, the Flames escaped with a 5-3 win, but it was clear by the end of the game that the team still has a ways to go before the theoretical defensive rebirth under Brent Sutter is realized. While Calgary came away with two points, they were fundamentally outplayed in the second half of the game and it was only a potent power play and some good goaltending by Kipper that kept them in the win column.

The game began well enough, with the Flames drawing the first 3 penalties and scoring on two of them. Mark Giordano and Rene Bourque hooked up on both of them and the Flames looked like the better squad. That trend carried into the 2nd, where the Flames 4th line frequently outplayed the opposition, culminating in a Brandon Prust tally.

Things fell apart from then on, however. The penalties started going the other way and the Canucks started to take the play to the Flames at 5on5 besides. In the third, the Flames first line of Iginla, Jokinen and Moss - who had been silent all night - become an obvious liability until Sutter broke them up later in the period. Vancouver was far and away the better team for the remainder of the game and ended up outshooting the Flames 42-22. Kipper had a puck squeak through him in the Burrows goal, but was better than solid otherwise.

Overall, there was some good signs from some of the foot soldiers (Gio, Bourque, the 4th line), but some of the concerns I raised in the pre-season were in evidence tonight. The first line did nothing at ES through 2 periods and then were overwhelmed by the Sedins when the going got tough. Staffan Kronwall looked every bit like a 7th defenseman as well.

It was good to break the curse, but the Flames will have to be much better going forward if they expect to come up with more wins. Sutter's expressed goal as coach is to limit shots and goals against and the club failed at that task utterly this evening.