Wednesday, April 02, 2008
It's a great -- daaayyy -- to be alive
Here's a slightly tweaked version of the baseball standings, showing the highest and lowest possible final seedings for each team. The Flames can finish 3rd, 5th, 6th, 7th, 8th, or 9th. Break it down:- A single point earned by the Flames, or surrendered by the Canucks, puts the Flames in the playoffs as they would finish ahead of Van City. (Put another way, the worst case scenario for Saturday night's Hockey Night in the Carhole game is that the Flames need to make it to OT to qualify.)
- They are 3 points ahead of Nashville (92-89), with each team having 2 games remaining. If they tie at 93 points, the Preds have the tiebreaker with 1 more win. If they tie at 92, the Flames have the tiebreaker (better H2H record).
- They hold no tiebreakers against Colorado, but control their own destiny being 1 point back with a game in hand: they need 2 more points in their two remaining games than Colorado earns in their Sunday game hosting Minny (so winning out would guarantee a finish ahead of the Avs).
- They hold no tiebreakers against Dallas, and surpassing them seems unlikely. The Stars have a home & home vs. Phoenix on Thu/Fri, then are in San Jose on Sunday. I know I ought to be scared of facing the defending champs in the first round, but screw it: Go Coyotes.
- They need to win both their remaining games, and have the Wild lose in Denver on Sunday, to catch the Wild for the NW title, although they *can* afford for one of those Wild losses to be in OT.
- a W takes 8th and 9th out of the picture (guarantees at least a 7-seed)
- an OTL takes 3rd and 9th out the picture (guarantees playoffs, starting on the road)
- an L takes 3rd out of the picture (and might have me thumbing through the "Levels of Losing" prior to Saturday's game)
Go Flames. (Go Blues and Coyotes, Goilers.)
UPDATE: Two more things...
1) Really nice play by Phaneuf on the winner. That's not an easy shot to execute: any lower, it's blocked by Reasoner; much higher, it's harmless and gloved easily. And he got it there with some mustard.
2) Ferraro isn't perfect, but he is a darn sight better than almost everyone else who does his job. I just loved that moment in the middle of the 2nd when he broke the silence with, "This is a man's game -- there is no free ice out there." As a colour commentator, well, that's a colourful phrase. As an analyst, that was a bit of analysis that was brief, clear, on-point, and accurate.
If the south crew was doing the game, I can pretty much tell you exactly what Charlie Simmer would have said at that moment: "Again Roger, the Flames are really going to have to be committed to keeping their intensity level consistent if they want to have success here."
# posted by Matt @ 11:46 am 
Comments:
'Goilers' doesn't sound nearly as revolting all of a sudden... weird...
Andy, are you still going to be in town on Thursday?
I know I ought to be scared of facing the defending champs in the first round, but screw it: Go Coyotes.
I don't know if Anaheim is the team to fear, frankly, but I'd suspect that based on CGY's record against the Wild this season, that there might be an appetite to face Minny first round.
In other words, not so much out of the fear of Anaheim, but rather out of the opportunity for Minnesota, that I'd think 6th fits the Flames' chances better.
But to each his own. I'll say this: I'd rather see an ANA-CGY first-round matchup than the ANA-DAL that is likely. Stars enjoy killing the Ducks lately.
It's mainly a superstition thing, Earl. I feel like it's bad karma to hope for a lower seed (worse finish) with the idea that the matchup is better.
Also, while the Flames are 6-1 against the Wild this year (5 W in regulation), that seems like one of those things where the momentum could swing back *really* hard.
There are a couple of reasons to hope for a Wild matchup, though:
1) They have an awfully mediocre goal differential given their points total.
2) Anecdotally (based on interviews with Minnesota reporters), the Wild are scared shitless of Kipper and see him as superhuman. He's waaay in their heads.
I'm also a big Ferraro fan. He doesn't just emphasize the obvious which seems to be colour guys' default setting whenever there is a pause, but he'll throw some savvy, veteran aquired, non-intuitive stuff in there too.
I feel like it's bad karma to hope for a lower seed (worse finish) with the idea that the matchup is better.
That's definitely a fair sentiment, but don't forget Sweden in the most recent Olympics. They were able to strategically arrange their first-round match-up and never looked back.
It's not a sure-fire strategy by any means, but it does have some precedent and can be a useful ploy (granted, only in retrospect does it get to be called "useful").
I totally understand the momentum argument, though, particularly when it comes to the Wild. They're a scary bunch of occasional scorers.
Man, just read through Simmons' Losing Levels, a couple of those examples gave me the piss shivers. The guy definitely drilled down into the sportfans' Id for that one.
Ferraro is the best as he is not a former Oiler player or a life long follower of the team. Is is the most objective sportscaster I have seen do the job and is by far the best colorman in the business.
I do not at all get the love for Ferraro. I suppose he is a good analyst and if I cheered for the Oil I would love him as he is a flaming Homer.
I wish someone would tell him when he is doing BoA games that the opponent also plays in the home market of Rogers Sportsnet West.
Colourful he may be, objective he is not.
(Simmer is hapless, though)
Are you planning on going somewhere to watch the games? And if yes, where. I have a work function, but it ends at 7:00...
If you wanted to have some pints and watch the games with a Flames fan...
I agree with Peter on Ferraro. He is a homer. His colour is pretty good but my way of thinking is a real good colour guy never brings a bias. I think Simpson is a good example of a colour guy who shows that even with being an ex-Oiler you don't have to sound like one. Ferraro sadly does.
Personally, I'm more than happy with what Ferraro says. My problem is he talks through every possible minute of the effing broadcast.
I do not at all get the love for Ferraro. I suppose he is a good analyst and if I cheered for the Oil I would love him as he is a flaming Homer.
I kind of think that Ferraro got sucked into the run. The Vancouver game a few weeks back, I thought that he was noticeably homerish, which (to my ear) was a change from the norm.
That said, even if he's a homer, he's a good analyst, which puts him ahead of almost everyone else.
Post a Comment
<< Home
'Goilers' doesn't sound nearly as revolting all of a sudden... weird...
Andy, are you still going to be in town on Thursday?
I know I ought to be scared of facing the defending champs in the first round, but screw it: Go Coyotes.
I don't know if Anaheim is the team to fear, frankly, but I'd suspect that based on CGY's record against the Wild this season, that there might be an appetite to face Minny first round.
In other words, not so much out of the fear of Anaheim, but rather out of the opportunity for Minnesota, that I'd think 6th fits the Flames' chances better.
But to each his own. I'll say this: I'd rather see an ANA-CGY first-round matchup than the ANA-DAL that is likely. Stars enjoy killing the Ducks lately.
It's mainly a superstition thing, Earl. I feel like it's bad karma to hope for a lower seed (worse finish) with the idea that the matchup is better.
Also, while the Flames are 6-1 against the Wild this year (5 W in regulation), that seems like one of those things where the momentum could swing back *really* hard.
There are a couple of reasons to hope for a Wild matchup, though:
1) They have an awfully mediocre goal differential given their points total.
2) Anecdotally (based on interviews with Minnesota reporters), the Wild are scared shitless of Kipper and see him as superhuman. He's waaay in their heads.
I'm also a big Ferraro fan. He doesn't just emphasize the obvious which seems to be colour guys' default setting whenever there is a pause, but he'll throw some savvy, veteran aquired, non-intuitive stuff in there too.
# posted by 
: April 02, 2008 1:11 pm
: April 02, 2008 1:11 pm I feel like it's bad karma to hope for a lower seed (worse finish) with the idea that the matchup is better.
That's definitely a fair sentiment, but don't forget Sweden in the most recent Olympics. They were able to strategically arrange their first-round match-up and never looked back.
It's not a sure-fire strategy by any means, but it does have some precedent and can be a useful ploy (granted, only in retrospect does it get to be called "useful").
I totally understand the momentum argument, though, particularly when it comes to the Wild. They're a scary bunch of occasional scorers.
Man, just read through Simmons' Losing Levels, a couple of those examples gave me the piss shivers. The guy definitely drilled down into the sportfans' Id for that one.
# posted by : April 02, 2008 1:27 pm
: April 02, 2008 1:27 pm Ferraro is the best as he is not a former Oiler player or a life long follower of the team. Is is the most objective sportscaster I have seen do the job and is by far the best colorman in the business.
I do not at all get the love for Ferraro. I suppose he is a good analyst and if I cheered for the Oil I would love him as he is a flaming Homer.
I wish someone would tell him when he is doing BoA games that the opponent also plays in the home market of Rogers Sportsnet West.
Colourful he may be, objective he is not.
(Simmer is hapless, though)
# posted by : April 02, 2008 2:55 pm
: April 02, 2008 2:55 pm Are you planning on going somewhere to watch the games? And if yes, where. I have a work function, but it ends at 7:00...
If you wanted to have some pints and watch the games with a Flames fan...
I agree with Peter on Ferraro. He is a homer. His colour is pretty good but my way of thinking is a real good colour guy never brings a bias. I think Simpson is a good example of a colour guy who shows that even with being an ex-Oiler you don't have to sound like one. Ferraro sadly does.
Personally, I'm more than happy with what Ferraro says. My problem is he talks through every possible minute of the effing broadcast.
I do not at all get the love for Ferraro. I suppose he is a good analyst and if I cheered for the Oil I would love him as he is a flaming Homer.
I kind of think that Ferraro got sucked into the run. The Vancouver game a few weeks back, I thought that he was noticeably homerish, which (to my ear) was a change from the norm.
That said, even if he's a homer, he's a good analyst, which puts him ahead of almost everyone else.
# posted by : April 03, 2008 3:18 pm
: April 03, 2008 3:18 pm Post a Comment
<< Home
