Anatomy of a Run

Robert Cleave
February 08 2011 04:45PM

               

 

This recent reversal by the Flames has lead to all sorts of rationales being mooted for the uptick in results, from a happier atmosphere in the aftermath of Darth Sutter's removal to just being lucky and plenty of things in between. There's every possibility that every and any of those sorts of explanations are at least partly at the root of the 13-3-4 run that Calgary finds itself on, but it's the role of fortune that interests me most, and why it seemed time for a little deeper look at the Flames since they went to Dallas on December 23rd.

As regular readers know, there's some worthwhile evidence that good old fashioned variance can play a significant part in a team's results. A team can outshoot and have no luck around the net while another squad can throw a few pucks in off shinpads or rear ends. The trick, of course, is to examine how those results are actually being achieved and try to filter out narrative-driven explanations. With that in mind, I decided to review the Flames' work at even strength since that night in the Lone Star State.

When the Flames went to Dallas, they were a team that was 5 days away from tying the can to their GM, seemingly dead for this year and beyond. So, what's happened in the interim to flip the conference standings? When I went in for a deeper look, it was clear that any review needed to be split in to two sets of games. The first set was the 12 game skein from the Dallas game to the disaster at the Dome on January 19th, when the Flames lost to the Wild 6-0. The second is the current 7-0-1 run that started, again, with a night against the Stars, this time in Calgary. I've pulled the numbers from the Time on Ice Corsi sheets in order to parse out empty netters and the like.

 

 

December 23 - January 19: Hard Graft

 

               

 

With the benefit of hindsight, this really was the beginning of the good times, although the turmoil around the club that only seemed to ease with Sutter's dismissal might have distracted all of us from that. The team's EV out-shooting numbers, which had been decent enough all year, finally began to have a few wins attached, but not an obvious way.

Over that 12 game span, the Flames outshot their opposition 334-246 but were actually outscored 27-28 at EV. Now, 27 goals at EV over 12 games is a pretty good average. If a team could manage that sort of action for a year, that would be good for 184 EV goals, which is the pace that the Canucks are currently on, and Vancouver wouldn't be anywhere in that range if they weren't shooting north of 9%. Calgary was doing that while shooting 8.1%, which is lower than their current full season average of 8.4%. In other words, the Flames were earning every last one of those 27 goals for.

That makes it obvious what was going on at the other end, for whatever reason people would like to assign to the problem. 28 GA on 246 shots equals an .886 EVSV%. Not good, to be kind. Kipper, obviously, had his struggles as well as some poor fortune, since there was a run of games where Calgary was deflecting pucks past him like they meant it.

Add that 8.1 shooting percentage to the Flames' 88.6 save percentage, and you get a combined PDO of 96.7 in the 12 games. Teams like Ottawa, New Jersey and the Islanders are down in that range for the year, and given where their records are, you can see why the Flames needed to be launching a pile of shots just to give themselves a chance. One thing that should always be kept in mind is that PDO numbers strongly revert to 100 for teams over time. A club can outrun fortune for a stretch of games, even for a season, but things normally even out.

That series of games was likely a run where the Flames deserved better than a 6-3-3 record, even if 6-3-3 seemed like water to a team dying of thirst. The next batch, though, shows what happens when you get a bit of good luck on the go.

 

January 21 – February 7: Dame Fortune smiles, but maybe not as much as you'd think

 

               

 

For a team that's gone through periods where nothing worked despite the best of efforts, this past run of games must be very enjoyable. The 7-0-1 flurry has vaulted them into 8th place, past a couple of worthy clubs, not the least of whom was last night's victim. While there's plenty of talk about good play and that's not entirely unfounded, the Flames have finally had an extended run on the decent side of the bounces, and the record at least partly reflects that.

At EV, the Flames have been out-shot 156-170, but have scored 18 goals to their opposition’s 14. Shooting 11.5% at EV will fix a lot of ailments under normal circumstances, and that run of good shooting has certainly helped the Flames. In fairness, 6 of those 18 goals came against the Stars on a night where Andrew Raycroft was a bit iffy, but since then, the scoring numbers have been a bit more normal looking. Absent that one game, Calgary has scored 12 goals on 141 EV shots. 8.5% is right where they are for the year, so nothing much special has happened since they rung up Dallas. Even with the numbers all in, 11.5 isn't outrageous for a short stretch. The Flames shot about 15% at EV for October of '09, and other teams have certainly outdone that over 15 or 20 game stretches. Most good teams have it happen at least once a season.

Good shooting luck factored in, it's in net where things have turned hard in Calgary's favour. After Karlsson's 4 for 17 showing against Dallas, Kipper has run with things, allowing 10 goals on 153 shots. That's a EVSV% of .935. His full season numbers read .913 at EV even with this latest run included, so you can see where having Miikka in harness has sent the club into orbit. His good work has allowed the team to roll right through being outshot 5 of the 8 games in question. Even with Karlsson's numbers added, the Flames' EVSV% for the 8 games is .918. Their full season numbers are a combined .909, where a decent number would be in the range of .920. Kipper finished last year with a personal number of .928 at EV, so it isn't like he can't make that sort of standard.

11.5 SH% + 91.8 SV% = 103.3, which is a hefty PDO, and not sustainable for a year unless you're last year's Capitals, who finished with a team PDO of over 103. Of course, toss the Dallas game from Calgary's run and you have 8.5 + 93.5, or 102.

That 102 figure is also high, but there are a few teams every year that operate in that neighbourhood for a full season. The Bruins, Canucks, Flyers and Stars are all in that range for the year as we speak, and that's something to remember. The Flames have had a nice few weeks. A few clubs live this way as a matter of course. Teams like Minnesota and Nashville are over 101, and if anyone thinks that those are super teams that have high percentages on merit, well...

 

               

 

Let's add the whole mess and see where we are. The Flames have scored 45 EV goals on 490 shots, for a EVSH% of 9.2. That would be very good for a full year, likely in the top five or so league wide. At the other end, the Flames have allowed 42 goals on 416 shots for a smooth .899 EVSV%. That number would be almost certainly be in the bottom five for a full season. 9.2 + 89.9 equals a PDO of 99.1 since December 23rd. If 100 is normal, the Flames are, for the whole of the run, still a bit under the number.

What's the reality for the Flames going forward? I doubt that they'll shoot 9% for the rest of the year, but if they can get decent goaltending, they still have a bit of bounce left to get back to even. Behind the Net shows them with a full season 5v5 PDO of 98.9, so all they've really done in that regard is tread water, even through this burst up the standings. The fact that the Flames are even in the hunt at the moment suggests to me that they're likely a little better team than we've spent the year giving them credit for being. Great? Hell, no, and they'll still need a revamp of the roster in short order. But they aren't a bad team, people, and they're at least as worthy a playoff outfit through the first two thirds of the year as any other team in that cluster of squads between the Wings and the Oilers.

1a1030a8151ca7a0d81aea58f0fb1dbc
Robert Cleave is a perpetually grumpy Winnipegger.
Avatar
#1 maimster
February 08 2011, 05:33PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

Nice summary, Robert. I've been completely out of the loop this year but I do check in occasionally to glean the collective wisdom of Flamesnation. Your last two sentences sum up the Flames as well as any could.

There's been a lot of ink (well, virtual ink) spilled about the wisdom of tearing down versus treading 8th place water (and count me on the side of 'anything but tearing down'). But as much as I can pay attention right now, I want to cheer for a team that can win on almost any night with effort I can get behind (like during the LA game which I managed to catch on Saturday). For all their faults, the Flames have been providing that for a decent stretch now.

Avatar
#2 Palt
February 08 2011, 06:04PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

Rene Bourque for Zach Bogosian? Could it happen?

Avatar
#3 Kent Wilson
February 08 2011, 06:06PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props
Palt wrote:

Rene Bourque for Zach Bogosian? Could it happen?

I...suppose it could. Something to consider.

Avatar
#4 FireOnIce
February 08 2011, 07:11PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

Bourque + Steady Steve for Bogosian sounds good. Perhaps throw in Kotalik for his booming point shot.

Avatar
#5 Scott
February 08 2011, 07:34PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

Rumours are that they would want alot for Bogosian, I'm not sure they'd accept just Bourque, but through in hagman or staios, and that would be a done deal for me.

This would be a great move for this team moving forward, a young defensemen, which hopefully in different situations could continue developing. Word is that he has regressed for the last season and a half, so it would be a gamble in that respect.

Avatar
#6 Scott
February 08 2011, 07:38PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

Great article BTW, I'm always fascinated when the stats show a different side of the story.

Great work.

Avatar
#7 Kent Wilson
February 08 2011, 07:42PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

@Scott

Actually, Bogo hasn't really regressed...his circumstances are just brutal.

Avatar
#8 Scott
February 08 2011, 08:02PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

@Kent Wilson

Well, lets hope so. It does sound like they are expecting him to be something he is not. You would think the Thrashers would understand how to develop players properly, but it sounds like he has been mishandled.

Of course we won't know for sure until his circumstances change, and hopefully that means coming to Calgary.

Avatar
#9 SmellOfVictory
February 08 2011, 08:18PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

I think you guys are either overvaluing our players or undervaluing what Atl thinks of Bogosian.

If it were a trade centred around Bourque, the Flames would have to throw in one of their non-Staios defencemen at the very least. That said, if it took Bourque, Sarich, and a 3rd round pick, I'd still think Atlanta got fleeced. I would bet a full twenty dollars that Bogosian becomes a good top-2 defenceman in the next 3-4 years, and that is worth a streaky injury risk plus a good deal of other assets.

Avatar
#10 Kent Wilson
February 08 2011, 08:23PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

@SmellOfVictory

That's a fair assumption, but NHL managers in pursuit of much-needed post-season berths do stupid stuff like this all the time. Including the franchise in question - in 2007 they dealt Braydon Coburn to the Flyers for...Alexei Zhitnik! who was 35 years old at the time.

So, yeah...you never know.

Avatar
#11 Scott
February 08 2011, 08:26PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

@SmellOfVictory

Haha, I don't think we are overvaluing our players! But I do think ATL would be willing to add experience in exchange for their young guy. As mentioned above, Bourque would be a valued depth asset, as he is a 25+ goal guy, and staios would be a short term fix for them. I think if we included Staios we would have to add a higher pick, like a 2nd or 3rd, but if we use Sarich instead, maybe a 4th or 5th would be sufficient.

Avatar
#12 B
February 08 2011, 09:47PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

...maybe Borque and Stajan get traded in a package for someone.

...random thought. Patrick Kane reminds me of a young Alex Tanguay. I think Patrick Kane is overrated. That being said, I think Tanguay and Kane are both good players (and exceptional playmakers).

Avatar
#13 jr_christ
February 08 2011, 09:54PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

It looks like if the flames can finish their final 27 games with a record (likely a top 3 record for the remainder of the season) of 16-8-3 they can squeeze into 8th.

Unfortunately that 2 - 3 more games played than other teams kind of puts a damper on things.

Will be interesting to see what they do. I am REALLY hoping they play the Canucks. Would he a very exciting 4 games for sure.

Avatar
#14 jr_christ
February 08 2011, 09:56PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props
B wrote:

...maybe Borque and Stajan get traded in a package for someone.

...random thought. Patrick Kane reminds me of a young Alex Tanguay. I think Patrick Kane is overrated. That being said, I think Tanguay and Kane are both good players (and exceptional playmakers).

Only difference is kane is 21 and tanguay is 31 and Kane's offensive output in his first 4 NHL seaons will likely be better than tangauay's best 4 totalled.

No real comparison at all. Kane is playing injured and is still better than Tanguay.

Avatar
#15 Jarom
February 09 2011, 08:01AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

Do we really need Bogosian? Don't we have some very nice young D men waiting and growing on the farm? Im thinking Atl is going to want more than we'd be comfortable offering for him. Im not sure we really need him at this point.

Avatar
#16 Kent Wilson
February 09 2011, 08:48AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

@Jarom

Probably don't really need him. No one the Flames have in the system currently projects as well as Bogosian though. He would also instantly make someone like Sarich expendable. Although I think the Flames should try to move Sarich's contract at some point because it's poor value, he'd still have to replaced by someone who can play the game respectably now.

Avatar
#17 backburner
February 09 2011, 10:29AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

I think that is the kind of deal Flames need to make at the deadline. Land good young talent.

Avatar
#18 B
February 09 2011, 10:38AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

@jr_christ

...I KNOW Kane is younger, that is why I made the point in the first place (Kane reminds me of a "YOUNG" Tanguay). I'm not necessarily comparing their level of play at this particular point in time.

...Kane has an adjusted per season average of 77 pts (26g 51a) and Tanguay 68pts (22g 46a). They are both pass first left wingers with speed that play a perimeter game.

...you may not think Kane is overrated, but no comparison at all, give me a break.

Avatar
#19 B
February 09 2011, 10:39AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

...Bogosian has minimal hockey sense. Whatever you give up for him at this point you'd be over paying because of his draft class and physical tools.

Avatar
#20 Monaertchi Gaudnett
February 09 2011, 12:27PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

@ RC

I prefer 55378008 to 37818.

Comments are closed for this article.