Game 64: Avalanche 3, Flames 2 (OT)

by Joe Dunman on Feb 27, 2008 7:02 AM MST in News Comment 27 comments

Am I being set up for disappointment? After last night's come-from-behind victory over the Calgary Flames in overtime, I worry that the Colorado Avalanche are just building me up to be let down in the end. But one thing is for sure, if the Avs play with as much heart and fire in every remaining game of this season that they did last night, things are going to be okay.

Colorado got off to a great start, totally dominating the ice for the first five minutes of the game, during which Ryan Smyth scored his first goal since returning from injury to give his team a 1-0 lead. Unfortunately, the momentum shifted around the ten minute mark and the Flame-Outs started to take over. The Avs had trouble clearing it out of their zone, despite the arrival of newly-acquired but not new-to-the-team Adam Foote. The Flames tied it up around the 15 minute mark and the period ended 1-1.

The second period was more of the same, with Calgary periodically taking over and making it look like they were on a non-stop power play. Even worse, once the Avalanche actually got a power play of their own, Robyn Regehr (yes, a former Av) made a great steal and scored shorthanded on Jose Theodore---who had another very strong game overall.

Luckily, the Avs didn't let the 2-1 deficit get them down. They came out flying in the third period and started to shift the momentum. Adam Foote's impact really started to show, as he and Kurt Sauer tagged up on Jerome Iginla's line and completely shut them down. Foote could be seen directing Sauer on the ice---with great effect. Sauer, following orders, put some great hits on Langkow and Phadouche, forcing Calgary turnovers. And Foote was deep in it too:

That's a real man. Take notes, Dion.

You have to assume that Foote was so effective because Coach Q didn't have time to influence his play. Footer walked onto the bench nearly ten minutes into the game and shortly after hit the ice for his first shift. He had no time to be told all the wrong things to do.

Scott Hannan also had a great game, as did all the Colorado defensemen except for Kyle Cumiskey who had a flub that led to a Calgary goal and sat almost the entire third period on the bench. He had just over seven minutes of ice time. Hannan had over 28. John-Michael Liles finally started doing what he's supposed to be doing, contributing on offense with two assists and some superb power play work.

Speaking of power plays, the Avalanche PP unit won the game, which is almost too unbelievable to type. Milan Hejduk scored with the man advantage in the third period to tie the game at 2 all, and Paul Stastny scored in overtime (off an amazing no-look, backhand pass from Ryan Smyth) after Jerome Iginla tripped the shit out of Liles. The Flames' announcers seemed to think that Liles' full-speed, flying fall was somehow embellished, because they are shameless homers. It wasn't. It was a trip. Shut up.

There was only one fight, a dull stalemate between Scott Parker and Eric Godard (both had less than two minutes of ice time), but there could have been more, except that Dion Phaneuf is a coward. Cody McLeod, to his credit, yapped at Phadouche all game long, and even dropped the gloves and lunged at him, but Dion backed off and tried to get the ref's attention. Are you serious? He put cheap hits on the Avs all night and ran his mouth, and then when called on it he backed down? Against a guy like McLeod who can't even fight well? Pathetic.

The Avs can't rest on their laurels, though, because they play Vancouver tonight. Ruslan Salei is expected to join the team after being traded for Karlis Skrastins on Tuesday just before the trade deadline. I have a feeling Kyle Cumiskey will not be playing.

Stars of the Game:

Robyn Regehr (1g, 0a) WTF?!

John-Michael Liles (0g, 2a)

Paul Stastny (1g, 1a)

A CALL FOR HELP: If anyone still has the Altitude broadcast of the game saved on their DVR or TiVo at home, and can transcribe the post-game show with Sandy Clough, that would be really, really helpful. You can either comment here or drop me a note at milehighhockey [at] yahoo dot com. Thanks!

0 recs | Comment 27 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Read More: win, game recap, flames, avalanche

Comments

Too good to pass up - did everybody see this?

No amount of "hahaha" or "lol" really does this justice:

http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/news_story/?ID...

Flames lose game, Phaneuf loses truck
Dion Phaneuf
TSN.ca Staff
2/27/2008 1:53:39 AM
February 26th will likely be a trade deadline day that Calgary Flames' defenceman Dion Phaneuf will remember, but for all the wrong reasons after having his S.U.V. stolen.
The All-Star defenceman had to catch a lift to the Saddledome with Calgary police after making a stop at a local Starbucks for a pre-game coffee. Phaneuf left his SUV running and he came back out just in time to see the perpetrator rolling away.
Phaneuf did not want to discuss the incident following the Flames overtime loss to the Avalanche.
"I'm not going to talk about it. Its out of my hands."
Files from TSN reporter Jermain Franklin were used in this story

by Brad on Feb 27, 2008 9:15 AM MST reply actions 0 recs

Re: Too good to pass up

"left his SUV running..."

What a genius.

by Joe Dunman on Feb 27, 2008 10:05 AM MST up reply actions 0 recs

i have the game DVR'd, Joe

I was going to ask if you'd heard what he said about blogs. If you haven't seen it by the end of the day I'll transcribe it tonight.

It amounts to "Bloggers have no accountability, here's an example of this one getting something wrong. Now I will ignore all of them." It was pretty snotty. I like Clough, but his handling of this is losing him respect points in my book every day. :(

by thedoctor on Feb 27, 2008 9:20 AM MST reply actions 0 recs

Wrong

I'm curious to see what a blogger got wrong. Which blogger said what?

And I love, absolutely LOVE, the "blogger is the boogie-man" type myth that people perpetuate. Like we are out to get them at any turn.

by Jibblescribbits on Feb 27, 2008 9:34 AM MST up reply actions 0 recs

he didn't say which

but he said that blog said that Q had a career record of .500, and his actual winning percentage is .580.

"If I had said that, maybe I'd still have a job -- but I'd have no credibility." Something like that.

by thedoctor on Feb 27, 2008 9:39 AM MST up reply actions 0 recs

I think

I think I remember reading this comment, even though I can't remember where (I may have even written it). The comment was more of a "He's a .500 coach" meaning average, not ".500" is his actual winning percentage.

Besides:

NHL coaches have artificially inflated winning percentages because the OTL doesn't actually count as a loss.
With the Avs he's been:
43-30-9
44-31-7
32-26-6

If you count OT losses as a loss (and I see no reason you shouldn't) he is at a whopping .529 winning percentage. THIS season he's at exactly .500 (with the win last night) so to say he's a .500 coach is certainly an acceptable statement. Especially if you are using .500 as a synonym for Average and not

by Jibblescribbits on Feb 27, 2008 9:59 AM MST up reply actions 0 recs

Re: I think

Regardless of what the comment said, it was a COMMENT. It was not something that I said, or something that Drafty said, or something that Mike said. It wasn't published on the front page, therefore was not said "by a blog."

This is so painfully similar to Bill O'Reilly's rants against Daily Kos because it's a community that allows anyone to comment and publish diaries. Just because a community member says something dumb, or inaccurate, or just hard to clarify, doesn't mean the whole blog loses credibility.

Lame.

by Joe Dunman on Feb 27, 2008 10:07 AM MST up reply actions 0 recs

I agree

I doubt Drafty, Shane, or I said it in our blogs as well. Even if we did, the fact that he used that example is at best misinterpreting it. .500 is a synonym for average, and the statement, wherever it was said used it as such (I've tried to find it, but to no avail.)

by Jibblescribbits on Feb 27, 2008 10:33 AM MST up reply actions 0 recs

Re: I agree

Yeah, nobody on this blog has ever said "Coach Q's lifetime win percentage is exactly .500."

Double lame.

by Joe Dunman on Feb 27, 2008 10:36 AM MST up reply actions 0 recs

Yeah

I searched my archive, and I was also looking through here to find it... I couldn't find the comment i thought I remembered. He had to look awfully hard for something extremely marginally inaccurate

by Jibblescribbits on Feb 27, 2008 10:44 AM MST up reply actions 0 recs

Re: I have the game DVR'd, Joe

Yes, please transcribe it for me. And I guess I'll have to start listening to his silly show every day now.

by Joe Dunman on Feb 27, 2008 10:28 AM MST up reply actions 0 recs

transcript

Kyle Keefe: Well, I guess we need to talk to Sandy real quick, because after the last coach's comments, I guess the blogs just went crazy. Sandy what happened?

Sandy: Well what we did was respond to some ah...very...ah..specific criticism that was made of Joel Quenneville and the criticism went so far as to suggest he should be removed from his job and both Peter and I felt the need to respond to that criticism, I did so with a specific reference against people who are unaccountable, unchallenged, and anonymous. We here on the set are always challenged, we're always accountable, and we're hardly anonymous and so the reference I used I felt was appropriate and I'd uh, say it again, uh, there's no particular reason to do so tonight --

Peter Whateverhisnameis interjects over Sandy: I liked that reference. chuckle

Sandy: --but there is a difference between criticizing a coach's tactics or strategy and calling for his ouster and then mis-stating on the blogs to which you refer (nods to Peter) his coaching record. He is not a .500 coach, his career winning percentage is .580, his career winning percentage with the Avalanche is .580, and if any one of the 4 of us tried to portray a coach with a different career winning percentage than the one in fact he had, we would possibly have our jobs, but we would have no credibility and these people don't deserve to have any credibility either.

Kyle: Alright, there we go, so that's settled. moves on

You owe me a beer for this, Joe! Also, listening to it again, I don't think you're out of line banding together with the other blog editors and requesting a retraction -- he's making a straw man and putting words in your mouth in the worst way.

by thedoctor on Feb 27, 2008 6:42 PM MST up reply actions 0 recs

Re: transcript

This is highly appreciated, sir. Kudos and kittens to you.

That transcript doesn't say much for the level of journalism on Altitude's post-game show.

by Joe Dunman on Feb 27, 2008 9:29 PM MST up reply actions 0 recs

whew

I'm glad someone has it. After bringing it up yesterday, I felt it would have been a moot point since unfortunately I only caught the last bit.

InYoFace Hasek! InYoFace

by InYoFace on Feb 27, 2008 12:39 PM MST up reply actions 0 recs

What a win

I was really unsure about acquiring Foote for a first rounder. I still am, but yesterday was beautiful. Sakic was great too.

I hope I remember my freaking password now lol I keep forgetting it.

Go Avs go! Get a win tongight!

by James on Feb 27, 2008 9:23 AM MST reply actions 0 recs

omg lol

he's bashing blogs on the radio right now. Joe, you are a dope that thinks you know everything but actually lives too far away to know anything.

He's harping on the fact that Q hasn't had any players to work with as well. I'm pretty close to calling in, but my boss is one cube over. :( maybe i'll text him.

by thedoctor on Feb 27, 2008 9:47 AM MST reply actions 0 recs

Re: omg lol

Did he specifically name me?

by Joe Dunman on Feb 27, 2008 10:04 AM MST up reply actions 0 recs

no

i suppose he could be referring to jibble or DD too. regardless, i sent him this:

Sandy,
The argument that bloggers don't have valid points because they're 500 miles away is silly. These people stay up late every night on the east coast to watch games on center ice. If anything, they're far more dedicated than fans here.
And your argument last night that blogs lack accountability is a bit off. Certainly, blogs lack consequences on the scale that you and other journalists do, but they're held accountable by their readers to a high degree. Unlike you, there's no one screening their calls -- the comments readers make are there for everyone to see. If you're wrong, people will let you know in a highly public manner.
Finally, regarding Q -- no one is debating he's not had a lot to work with. I still take issue with several issues though:

He juggles lines obsessively, killing chemistry, especially in the first part of this year. Fortunately, he's mellowed out on this in the second half of the year, so it's a less valid concern.

He sits on leads. Can you really tell me stopping all offensive pressure the moment you get a lead is a valid strategy? We lost a lead last night, and vs. Edmonton too!

What about his goalie juggling the last few years? Even I can see that his goalies perform the best when they're given consistent starts, why the alternating for half the year?

Why send Richardson down in favor of players like Jones? Richardson's handling in particular is mystifying to me.

Matt

no on air read. /shocked

by thedoctor on Feb 27, 2008 10:47 AM MST up reply actions 0 recs

.500

In blogs (not comments) this was the closest I could find to someone saying Q was .500:

Shane, of Avs Talk, wrote this on Feb 24th:

In the month of February the team is 4-5-2 and have dropped down to 9th in the Western conference, 4 points back of Nashville for the 8th and final playoff spot. If the team wants to avoid another 15-2-2 run only to miss the playoffs again, they better start playing well above .500.

So umm yeah. This Clough guy has lost some credibility with me

by Jibblescribbits on Feb 27, 2008 10:54 AM MST up reply actions 0 recs

he also...

confidently stated that all you bloggers have no lives, and that these calls for Q's head are fickle reactions to short term outcomes. He claimed that any rational person knew the difference between criticizing a coach and calling for him to be fired immediately (which I agree with, he's just putting words in you guy's mouths).

I wonder what he's reading, because I don't think any of that is occurring on this blog, Jibble's, or ITCS. there's even been extensive discussion about who we would replace him with (which, I believe resulted in everyone agreeing he should be let go this offseason when the options are greater). nor has this been knee-jerk reactions -- the calls for his head are based on 3-4 years of work and under-achieving.

by thedoctor on Feb 27, 2008 11:02 AM MST up reply actions 0 recs

I particularly

Waited for months before I called for his head. Ahh but falling back on the stereotypes :

"They live in their mother's basements. They have no lives. They are on the internet so they can't possibly be rational and well-educated"

Whew. Good thing he's credible

by Jibblescribbits on Feb 27, 2008 11:06 AM MST up reply actions 0 recs

In defense of Sandy

I actually admire Sandy. Of all of the sports journalists in this town, he is probably the most knowledgeable and outspoken. And he has enough passion and knowledge about hockey to be willing to talk about it, unlike many of the other clowns on the radio. I don't always agree with everything he says, including his staunch defense of Q in this case (interesting that he hasn't mentioned THE WORST POWER PLAY IN THE LEAGUE during these exchanges), but I do enjoy listening to him and he is one of the few guys in town who gives the Avs the play they deserve.

by Bob in Boulder on Feb 27, 2008 10:43 AM MST reply actions 0 recs

agreed, Sandy is awesome

he's still lost some points with me.

still good he talks about the Avs a lot. Erv and Joe HATE hockey.

by thedoctor on Feb 27, 2008 10:48 AM MST up reply actions 0 recs

Re: In defense of Sandy

Which makes his recent effort to alienate any fans that disagree with him all the more perplexing.

by Joe Dunman on Feb 27, 2008 10:50 AM MST up reply actions 0 recs

re: fan alienation

Frankly, Sandy has never been afraid of alienating fans who disagree with him. His style has always been very abrasive. I guess it just takes a while getting used to, and after a while, you just know that it comes with the territory. I just enjoy the fact that he has enough passion about the sport and the team to talk about them. Unlike most of the other clowns on the radio in this town. Listening to Irv, Joe and Jim attempt to discuss hockey in the afternoons is just painful. So usually they don't even try.

by Bob in Boulder on Feb 27, 2008 11:38 AM MST up reply actions 0 recs

well!

I got a very long and clearly well thought out reply from Sandy. I've asked him if he'll let me post it here, since it's fairly heated. I'll keep you all updated.

One point in particular that I will mention here -- he claims he never got an email from you, Joe, about the debate, he simply saw it in the comments here (answers our question as to whether he visits here, I guess). I'm guessing it simply went to a wrong email -- could you resend it to him at thesportsguys@fan950.com ? that's what i used, and he clearly received it.

by thedoctor on Feb 27, 2008 11:47 AM MST reply actions 0 recs