Tuesday, May 02, 2006


Flames-Ducks Game 6 review

**What a shot by Yelle to score the opening goal! That's the kind of offensive skillz we've come to know and love from the man who scored 4 goals this year. I think he could have blown it over the goal line with more velocity.

**Yelle again: that was a bad penalty. In the context of the 2006 Playoffs, I thought the refs did a decent job (except for calling back that Ducks goal in the 1st, of course). There was some cosmic hockey justice, in that the only PP goal of the game was scored on Yelle's dumb penalty: that and Rob Niedermayer's high-sticking penalty were the only fouls that were legit, no-brainer calls under any standard of enforcement.

**Counterintuition: the idea of throwing an OT game is irrational, but I think I could construct a case advising the Flames to decline the powerplay early in the game, before everyone has had at least two shifts. Whatever sense of urgency the Flames enter the game with just seems to dissipate on and after an early PP. When you go on the PP 23 seconds into the game, the basic result is that ten of your top players take their first shift with a "patient" mentality rather than a frantic one. I don't know if this is unique to the Flames, but I hate the way it sets the tone, especially the ~82% of the time when it doesn't result in a goal.

**Don Wittman: isn't it time to rest up for curling season yet? The CBC (and everyone else) keeps the same broadcast team following a whole series. Logistical concerns aside, I assume the primary rationale is that they can more readily refer back to earlier moments of the series at relevant times. Well, I've decided that this is a bug of the system, not a feature. Wittman is driving me mental referring back to the same six incidents/comments over and over again.

I've also mentioned his over-reliance on the stat sheets. Last night, he deemed it worthy of mention that "Joe DiPenta is the only Mighty Duck not to have registered a shot on goal in this series". Come on now. There is simply no one to whom a team's 6th D failing to record a SOG in 5 games is interesting, in any way. (Now that I've brought it up, wait for it: some time when DiPenta touches the puck in Game 7, Wittman will mention that "he recorded his first shot of the series in Game 6".)

**Selanne was pretty awesome, and yet still a bit snakebitten. The goal that got called back was a beauty. The goal he did score was a nice shot, although Kipper was out of position. And on both 5-on-3's, he had nice chances but fanned just enough to give Kipper a chance to stop them (likewise with Scott Niedermayer; if the Flames had ended up winning that game, those two guys would have been beating themselves up over the missed opportunities).

**Looks to me like Phaneuf has probably shaken off his slump, or whatever you want to call it. There was a nice moment (in the 2nd, I think) where he came around Kipper with the puck and coasted just for an instant. At that moment, when he's playing poorly and/or tentatively, he glides a bit more and chips the puck up. When he's playing well, he accelerates. Last night, he accelerated. He also smoked Todd Fedoruk again -- man that guy has taken some licks.

(Supporting data point: it looks like Sutter is rolling all 6 D again. They had a pretty tight range of ice time last night, from Leopold's 17:40 up to Hamrlik's 22:30.)

**The Flames didn't test Bryzgalov enough. A lot of credit for that goes to the Ducks' skaters, but Jarome should have thrown more than 1 shot on him, and Simon has got to hit the net when he fires it.

**Byron Ritchie has played in all 6 games so far, but if Lundmark (and/or Macdonald) is going to be inserted for Game 7, I don't think Ritchie has done enough this series to hold his spot. Leclerc needs to stay in.

The Flames had their opportunities, but last night, the better team won. Tomorrow, however, is another day.


I think the Iginla fight in the first couple of minutes set a bad tone for the Flames. It seemed to lower their spirits.


I love how Iginla supposedly sends these "messages." Maybe he's just kind of stupid?

What kind of message is sent by taking a beatdown from Beauchemin in the first? Even if he does win he puts Calgary's best player in the box for five min. Was Calgary really that desperate for a boost at that point in the game?

Furthermore, does he really think that showing absolutely zero class at the end of the game by running a guy on a delayed offside is worth anything either? If anything Anaheim must be a little more jacked to send the Flames home.

Headscratching stuff there.

Iginla has always played with that kind of edge. Free shot at the end of the game I guess.

I was stunned to see Beauchemin hand him his ass, though. And to think I was pissed about that Fedorov trade...

I'm surprised you didn't offer any comments on the third-period officiating; I myself thought it was very well called. I can't stand it when players knock the net off intentionally, and it's something they need to call more of (especially late in a game like that).

Agreed on the Warrener call. He made it look good, but he wasn't pushed at all.

The Leopold penalty (i.e. why the Warrener one made it a 5-on-3) was weak though, I thought. Shoved Lupul in the chest, but Lupul's chin strap was really loose and his helmet flew back. Made it look like Leopold punched him in the face, which is why I assume the call was made.

I agree on Wittman, the guy is driving me freakin' nuts. He beat the first goal thing to death and kept going on and on about how much ice time SNied has been getting and whether or not he has "any gas left in the tank", come on Niedermayer is an athlete and paid several million, I think the guy can handle a few extra shifts, hell even Pronger could handled a few extra shifts.

I thought the Flames were deflated after the disallowed Salanne goal, I guess they were missing the killer instinct.

Go Flames Go

I don't think you have alot of room to complain about anything after the "goaltender interference" call that cost the Ducks a goal. You used up all your penalty karma for this year and next year on that one.

Huh??? Someone doesn't understand penalty karma (playing without a helmet?).

When a team (Ducks, in this case) scores a goal and has it disallowed, and then goes on to win the game, that's even-up right there.

If the Flames had won because that goal was disallowed, then you might have a case. Right now you just have a case of something else. My guess is you're a scared and hungover Oilers fan.

When a team (Ducks, in this case) scores a goal and has it disallowed, and then goes on to win the game, that's even-up right there.

That may be true for the Ducks, but if it happened to the Flames, we'd be hearing about it until the next lockout.

Game seven redemption--only one of these teams gets it this year. Go Ducks.

Game 7 redemption.

That is really the key, isn't it.

In the 7 skillion Flames playoff disasters of the 1990s the sort of stuff that happened last night (the 5 on 3s, the apparent disinterest of the Flames, a bizarre call on a disallowed goal -- granted these usually go against the Flamers in the playoffs, but even up is fair play, a heart breaking - off the defence man's skate and in - flukey game winner, etc etc and etc) usually happens to the Flames in Game 7.

This year all that bad voodoo happened in game 6.

Last year the bad first round voodoo happened in game 6. All in all, I am karmacally encouraged. I am going to shut my big fat trap about bringing on the backup, though.

Overall, the Flames looked tired and the penalties called were due to being a half-step behind in the plays. Others were good observation on the part of the refs, one handed tugs on jerseys and the like.

Good on the ducks for persisting/galvanizing after the non-goal goal.

Are we still on track for a quad upset Calgarella? Have fun on Wednesday night!

No way! I'm pulling out all the voodoo stops.

The curse of the game 1 disallowed goal will come back in the form of an angry Dustin Penner to put the Flames down once and for all!


Post a Comment

<< Home

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?