Flames Scoring Chances - Game 17 versus Phoenix

Kent Wilson
November 17 2010 10:27PM

Scoring Chances for NHL Game Number 20266

Team Period Time Note CGY Opponent  
CGY 1 16:43   4 12 18 28 34 40 3 20 22 30 53 86 5v5
CGY 1 15:37   8 10 25 27 29 34 6 11 14 17 30 52 5v5
CGY 1 14:37   4 12 13 17 28 34 3 20 22 30 53 86 5v5
PHX 1 11:42   8 15 27 28 34 44 3 12 14 30 53 91 5v5
CGY 1 8:19   8 12 15 27 29 34 6 8 28 30 52 91 5v5
CGY 1 8:18   8 12 15 27 29 34 6 8 28 30 52 91 5v5
CGY 1 8:17   8 12 15 27 29 34 6 8 28 30 52 91 5v5
PHX 1 7:53   8 15 27 29 34 44 6 22 30 52 86 91 5v5
PHX 1 5:54   10 11 25 27 29 34 14 17 30 53 55 91 5v5
PHX 1 5:06   4 25 28 34 40   3 11 13 17 30 53 4v5
PHX 1 4:10   4 25 28 34 40   20 22 30 33 55 86 4v5
CGY 1 3:04   11 12 27 29 34 44 3 28 30 53 86 91 5v5
CGY 2 14:43   4 12 18 28 34 40 3 11 13 17 30 33 5v5
CGY 2 13:58   5 6 13 17 20 34 8 28 30 38 53 55 5v5
CGY 2 12:27   5 6 12 18 34 40 3 11 13 17 30 53 5v5
PHX 2 11:11   4 11 28 34 40   20 22 30 33 55 86 4v5
PHX 2 11:10   4 11 28 34 40   20 22 30 33 55 86 4v5
PHX 2 9:35   4 12 13 17 28 34 3 6 8 28 30 38 5v5
PHX 2 9:21   4 12 13 17 28 34 3 6 8 28 30 38 5v5
PHX 2 9:19   4 12 13 17 28 34 3 6 8 28 30 38 5v5
PHX 2 7:28 Hanzal goal 4 6 11 34 40   3 11 13 17 30 33 4v5
CGY 2 1:14   5 6 10 13 17 34 11 13 17 30 33 55 5v5
CGY 3 19:22   5 6 8 11 25 34 8 28 30 33 38 55 5v5
PHX 3 15:53   6 10 13 29 34 40 3 11 13 28 30 53 5v5
PHX 3 15:52   6 10 13 29 34 40 3 11 13 17 30 53 5v5
PHX 3 12:18   4 11 20 25 28 34 3 20 22 30 53 86 5v5
CGY 3 10:28   4 5 11 20 25 34 3 14 28 30 38 53 5v5
PHX 3 7:07   5 8 12 27 34   3 13 17 30 53 86 4v5
CGY 3 5:27   4 12 20 27 34   3 28 30 53 86   4v4
CGY 3 3:53 Bourque goal 4 8 17 18 27 34 11 22 30 33 55 86 5v5
CGY 3 2:18   4 5 10 11 34 40 11 13 17 30 33 55 5v5
CGY 3 2:17   4 5 10 11 34 40 11 13 17 30 33 55 5v5
PHX 3 1:28   4 5 8 17 18 34 3 8 20 22 30 53 5v5
CGY 3 0:36   4 5 10 12 17   11 28 30 33 55   4v4

 

# Player EV PP SH
4 J. BOUWMEESTER 20:55 9 5 0:47 0 0 5:17 0 5
5 M. GIORDANO 21:03 8 1 1:33 0 0 3:42 0 1
6 C. SARICH 13:12 4 2 0:00 0 0 1:46 0 1
8 B. MORRISON 10:00 6 3 1:45 0 0 2:22 0 1
10 N. HAGMAN 12:56 5 3 0:50 0 0 0:00 0 0
11 M. BACKLUND 9:52 5 2 0:03 0 0 5:16 0 3
12 J. IGINLA 20:00 10 3 1:15 0 0 0:59 0 1
13 O. JOKINEN 11:23 3 5 1:47 0 0 0:14 0 0
15 T. JACKMAN 5:25 3 2 0:00 0 0 0:00 0 0
17 R. BOURQUE 14:42 5 4 1:50 0 0 0:14 0 0
18 M. STAJAN 15:25 4 1 0:04 0 0 0:02 0 0
20 C. GLENCROSS 8:33 3 1 1:59 0 0 2:56 0 0
25 D. MOSS 8:44 3 2 0:47 0 0 3:31 0 2
27 S. STAIOS 13:26 7 3 0:36 0 0 3:21 0 1
28 R. REGEHR 14:58 3 5 0:12 0 0 5:17 0 4
29 B. MIKKELSON 10:52 5 4 0:21 0 0 0:03 0 0
34 M. KIPRUSOFF 46:22 17 10 2:53 0 0 9:43 0 6
40 A. TANGUAY 15:36 5 2 0:51 0 0 3:52 0 5
44 S. MEYER 4:31 1 2 0:00 0 0 0:00 0 0

 

Period Totals EV PP 5v3 PP SH 5v3 SH
1 7 5 7 3 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0
2 4 6 4 3 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 0
3 7 5 7 4 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0
4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Totals 18 16 18 10 0 0 0 0 0 6 0 0

Head-to-head ice.

Flames managed to make things look respectable with a late flurry, but this is another game where they were snuffed for long stretches. They probably should have been ahead after a solid first period, but once the Coyotes went up by a pair, the Flames managed all of two scoring chances (both skirting the edges of being counted at all) in the next 20 or so minutes of play. That's a sad display in your own building.

That said, the club is getting zero bounces right now. The Wolski goal opened things was so poor I didn't even count it as a chance. The team also had a couple of very opportune scrambles that should have resulted in more than saves and posts. Alas.

Iginla had a big night by the chance count, but it was uneven in terms of actual play. He was highly engaged and effective in first, faded in the second and was mostly a non-entity in the third. A brief flash of hope rapidly extinguished.

39d8109299a9795cb3b41a4e9b49d501
Former Nations Overlord. Current Fn contributor and curmudgeon For questions, complaints, criticisms, etc contact Kent @ kent.wilson@gmail. Follow him on Twitter here.
Avatar
#1 NLR
November 17 2010, 10:44PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

It seemed to me like J Bo was way more active offensively. Has he been given free range by Sutter?

Avatar
#2 John Deere Green
November 17 2010, 10:46PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

Kent, you say that they are getting zero bounces. Isn't the sign of a good club, creating bounces? How often when they play Detroit, Vancouver ect. do you here that they (det., van.) got all the bounces. Also, it's one thing to get the bounces, it's another thing to have the personnel that can actually bury the opportunity.

Avatar
#4 CitizenFlame
November 18 2010, 12:30AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

Uhh... I think the chance counter machine is broken. Steve-frickin-Staios was 7-3 to the good at EV?!

Avatar
#5 R O
November 18 2010, 12:39AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

No PP chances is sad. That said they got phantom called several times and pretty much ought to have brutalized Ryzgalov for 4. Sucks but stay the course. Way better effort than last time.

Avatar
#7 John F
November 18 2010, 09:42AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props
R O wrote:

No PP chances is sad. That said they got phantom called several times and pretty much ought to have brutalized Ryzgalov for 4. Sucks but stay the course. Way better effort than last time.

Interested in hearing comments from folks. Flames seemed to out play the opponent again last night and another loss mainly due to an outstanding goaltending performance. Although our goaltending has been good it hasn't been great. I can't recall too many games where our goaltending stole one. I'll probably incur the wrath here but I'm seeing Kipper as not in the upper echelon this year. Now before everyone jumps all over me I like Kipper but just presenting facts. Save % seems to correlate to wins; Save % Wins Thomas Bos .959 10-1 Garon Columbus .951 4-1 Miller Buf .905 5-6 Kipper .905 6-9

Miller has been fighting injury and by all accounts got off to a slow start. So far there has been nary a comment on the goaltending and the contribution to success or lack thereof. Kipper at $5.8 million is among the highest paid goalies in the league. A few weeks ago on Matchsticks and Gasoline I saw an analysis of quality starts where Kipper ranked well down the pack. Since we are putting all performances under the microscope should we not look goaltending as well. I know Kipper is very popular and deservedly so based on the past but I would be interested in hearing comments on how his performance (based on facts and not emotion) is being viewed.

Avatar
#8 Rain Dogs
November 18 2010, 10:30AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

@John F

It would be foolish of me to say sv% doesn't correlate with wins...at some level

It would also be foolish to say wins don't correlate with sv% at some level.

Look, there are many out there who will quickly point out that a goalie with great stats, plays on a great team (heard this crit. or Brodeur a million times yet?)

BUT

Those same people, rarely, if ever, will believe that a crappy team has some influence on sv%. If one is true, the other must be.

Let's take the 6 worst teams in the league and their starters (also considering we are using a brain-killing small number of games)

NYI - Roloson - 926ev (.916) FLA - Vokoun - .920ev (.924) CGY - Kiprusoff - .910ev (.905) EDM - Khabi - .908ev (.879) TOR - Giguere - .905ev (.895) NJ - Brodeur - .902ev (.901)

That's a list of some of the best, most accomplished goalies in the NHL over the last ten years. I think it's foolish to say that if the lower guys (Kip, Khabi, Giguere, Brodeur) had just saved a couple more pucks, their teams would suddenly be great? Nope, these are flawed teams...bottom of the barrel teams.

Has Kiprusoff been elite this year? No. Do his stats flatter him today? No. Is he performing under career levels? Yes.

The difference we are talking about, however, is 4 goals. 297/322 vs 293/322. 6 goals is a win. So, that's not even one game. Or it's a better team game in a 7-2 blowout vs Wash... 6 GA.

Can Kipper be better? Sure, of course, but it's a little early to start throwing him under the bus.

He's performing at the shooters equivalent off one or two goals of pace. Not ten.

Of his 9 losses. The team has been shutout twice. The team has scored 1 or 2 goals 5 times. That's 7 of 9 losses (7GF) with no goal support...avg 1.00 GF/PG.

We just have to start realizing that the whole team right now, is BAD. Plain and simple. It's no one person. The Flames are just playing very poor hockey right now, that's going to result in few GF, more GA, and lots of losses.

Avatar
#9 John F
November 18 2010, 11:03AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

I would agree that a team's poor performance can influence a goaltender's performance independently of a pure statistical evaluation.

Also admittedly we are dealing with a fairly small sampling.

The main purpose for bringing it up is that the skaters/team/mangement has getting a great deal of negative press with no scrutiny on the role that goaltending has contributed to success or failure of the team.

There has been a number of games this year where the Flames have outplayed the other team and still lost. Arguably based on team play they should have a few additional wins.

I was also careful to ensure that it was only a discussion and I'm definitely not advocating "throwing Kipper under the bus", but he receives a lot of accolades and should also be accountable.

Avatar
#10 Rain Dogs
November 18 2010, 12:15PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

@John F

Certainly, the goaltender should be held accountable, especially if their performance is lacking when the team is executing the system well.

However, that's not often, if at all, the case with the Flames right now.

That said, to date, sure Kiprusoff could improve his game. He's been good but not great. But he's certainly helped the team more this season than hurt them, regardless of what voodoo measures one consults to try to prove one way or another.

Part of the problem with him not getting a huge amount of scrutiny is because goaltending is inherently difficult to evaluate, beyond "he should have had that" or "that was the save of the year." Both which are meaningless beyond highlight reels.

As well, he's the only guy on the ice who has almost no ability to take a shift off, or float around doing nothing for a period, so people "see" his efforts. Just because Iggy looks like he's floating doesn't mean he isn't trying, but we just don't "see" it.

For Kipper to get markedly better, the execution in front of him needs to better. But just because he can't be much of an active part of that execution doesn't mean he can't be better.

Things are getting a little better though. Our last six games we are 1-5, but are running at 2.67 GAA (the pace of the 14th best in the league) which is not bad considering we've lost almost all those games.

Problem is, in those six games we scored 2.33G/PG. The pace of the 29th best in the league. ...again, even though we're 12th in the league in shots. Snakebit? Bad luck? Shitty players? I dunno.

Avatar
#11 John F
November 18 2010, 12:25PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props
Rain Dogs wrote:

Certainly, the goaltender should be held accountable, especially if their performance is lacking when the team is executing the system well.

However, that's not often, if at all, the case with the Flames right now.

That said, to date, sure Kiprusoff could improve his game. He's been good but not great. But he's certainly helped the team more this season than hurt them, regardless of what voodoo measures one consults to try to prove one way or another.

Part of the problem with him not getting a huge amount of scrutiny is because goaltending is inherently difficult to evaluate, beyond "he should have had that" or "that was the save of the year." Both which are meaningless beyond highlight reels.

As well, he's the only guy on the ice who has almost no ability to take a shift off, or float around doing nothing for a period, so people "see" his efforts. Just because Iggy looks like he's floating doesn't mean he isn't trying, but we just don't "see" it.

For Kipper to get markedly better, the execution in front of him needs to better. But just because he can't be much of an active part of that execution doesn't mean he can't be better.

Things are getting a little better though. Our last six games we are 1-5, but are running at 2.67 GAA (the pace of the 14th best in the league) which is not bad considering we've lost almost all those games.

Problem is, in those six games we scored 2.33G/PG. The pace of the 29th best in the league. ...again, even though we're 12th in the league in shots. Snakebit? Bad luck? Shitty players? I dunno.

Agree.

Avatar
#12 Tach
November 18 2010, 03:41PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

@Rain Dogs

While I think the performance of the rest of the team is equally indefensible, if Kipper's save pct was .920 the Flames would have allowed 6.45 fewer goals, or 0.43 goals per game fewer. Calgary would actually be a net positive GF/G - GA/G.

Take those six goals off of three games (Loss to PHX 5-4, Loss to SJS 4-3, Loss to Detroit 4-2) and we are looking at 5 - 6 more points and not having discussions about a rebuild.

Lots of blame to go around here and Kiprusoff is not immune.

Avatar
#13 Rain Dogs
November 18 2010, 05:23PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

@Tach

Sure, fair enough. But do you not think you're looking at things in some twisted vacuum? Plus, when did I say Kiprusoff was immune? Consider that we are a team that has lost 7 of 8.

I could easily counter with:

...If the Flames allowed X less shots ...If Iggy scored 10 more goals ...If the Flames scored 12 more goals ...If elephants grew on trees. ...If Kipper had a .980 sv% we'd win the cup every year. ...If, if, if

Generally 6 goals is worth a win. So maximum, you're looking at two points, or one game, and at this point, that's bogus. You can't just pick and choose 'convenient' games to remove 6 goals from. How bout, the team shows up and we take them off the Wash. game. We still lose 3-2 and have the same record. Oh what? That doesn't help your argument?

At this point, if the Flames as a WHOLE team scored 6 more goals, they jump up to being the sixth highest GFA team at 3.06/gm.

If 12 forwards and 6 d, can't make a 6 goal difference in 17 games, why should 1 player be expected to make that difference?

Our main problems still, as usual, are non-playoff-team caliber scoring, poor execution of 'the system' and lack of consistency.

Comments are closed for this article.