Flames in review: The Big Guns

Robert Cleave
April 24 2011 10:39AM

                

 

In our last installment, we perused the Flames' outshooting  numbers as a team at even strength when the score was tied, as well as examining Miikka Kiprusoff's work during that game state. Today, it's time to look at the primary skaters on the club. 

It's easy to look at Kipper's sub-par numbers and absolve the skaters of a lot of the blame, since the Flames had 52.6% of the shots on goal when the game was tied and still finished -8 in goal differential during that game state. That noted, there's a bit more to things than just firing Miikka under the bus and walking away. The Flames' best forwards weren't perfect by any means, and the most expensive players were as likely to give up a goal as score one. As a reminder, the primary reason that looking at EV tied information is worthwhile is that it strips away a lot of the score effect noise that we might have in normal outshooting data. Again, the data for this review comes from Vic Ferrari's timeonice.com.

The Flames as a whole had Shots/Fenwick/Corsi percentages of .526/.520/.513, which as I noted in the last piece was solidly in the middle of the pack when we looked at the top ten Western Conference teams. As we've often discussed around these parts, most clubs that go anywhere get killer performances from their best players, and the support troops are mostly along for the ride. 

If we just look at the three top seeds in the conference, we'll see that Ryan Kesler's EV tied string was .540/.554/.564, Joe Pavelski's was .566/.582/.567, and Pavel Datsyuk finished with a showing of .576/.591/.610. On the off-chance you were wondering, their ZoneStart percentages were 50.0, 44.5 and 47.7 respectively, so it wasn't like they had the sorts of advantages the Sedins or the top guys with the Blackhawks were gifted with. Pavel Datsyuk missed a bunch of games, meaning that he'll never be in the Hart conversation, but he had a superb season. I'd guess more than a few Coyotes' players might advise you he was the difference in their recent series, provided they aren't too busy surfing the Winnipeg MLS website to offer an opinion.

With that sort of competition from forwards at the apex of the conference, the Flames needed similar performances to have a hope. Before we get to the individual numbers, I'm always cognizant that players can, through ZoneStart or QComp, get a leg up on their teammates in terms of outshooting numbers. What I found interesting when I looked at the Flames QComp and ZoneStart numbers was that there wasn't any one player or group of players that were handed all the heavy lifting to the exclusion of others, but that the distribution was fairly equal amongst the top seven forwards. Here's that group:

 

  Shots% Fwick% Corsi% EVSV% EVSH% PDO
DAVID MOSS 0.562 0.554 0.544 0.919 10.2% 102.1
B. MORRISON 0.461 0.462 0.458 0.916 6.3% 97.9
ALEX TANGUAY 0.493 0.479 0.482 0.907 9.0% 99.7
CURTIS GLENCROSS 0.571 0.552 0.539 0.902 8.8% 99
RENE BOURQUE 0.492 0.490 0.474 0.915 4.6% 96.1
OLLI JOKINEN 0.544 0.526 0.514 0.903 6.8% 97.1
JAROME IGINLA 0.506 0.491 0.495 0.902 8.0% 98.2

 

Before anything else is said, note that Stajan, Hagman and Kotalik, taking up a collective 9.5M against the cap, aren't in this group. That was not optimal, to be kind. Beyond that, it isn't hard to see who was driving the bus in terms of outshooting. The disappointing player in the group was probably Bourque, even accepting that the percentages were a bit cruel to him, since his last couple of seasons were well ahead of this sort of output. We've often mentioned that he looked a bit lost without Daymond Langkow, and I suspect that this season's indifferent performance should be seen as some proof that's really so.

 

OLLI JOKINEN 0.498 0.499 0.498 0.909 7.3%
ALEX TANGUAY 0.513 0.506 0.498 0.905 11.0%
RENE BOURQUE 0.468 0.480 0.482 0.922 7.7%
JAROME IGINLA 0.516 0.515 0.509 0.911 10.1%

 

Edit: I should have added the chart above before I hit publish the first time. It's the overall EV numbers in all game states for Iginla, Tanguay, Jokinen and Bourque. Note that Joker and Bourque have worse overall possession numbers than they do when the game was tied while the top duo' s were better. My suspicion is that those numbers were built because Iggy/Tanguay were used when the Flames were looking for a goal and that Jokinen and Bourque ended up defending their share of leads.

There are other items of interest there, obviously. Brendan Morrison got lit up pretty comprehensively, which certainly exposes the narrative that he was a player that made things work for Iginla and Tanguay as just that, a narrative. Olli Jokinen, despite the toughest QComp numbers, wasn't that bad. In all honesty, given the expectations for him and the role he had thrust on him, he was OK. Seriously. If he plays the same way next year, the team will have received fair value for his 3M a season. It's easy to bust on the guy for any number of reasons, and hitting 15-20 fewer goalposts would be nice, but on my list of evil doers, he's not near the top. That shouldn't preclude anyone from enjoying the inevitable Photoshop competition this off-season, of course.

The guys that carried the mail were Glencross and Moss, which really should be no surprise. Curtis Glencross has his moments where the synapse gap is greater than one might like, but he's a very solid player. His personal SH% this year might well be the high water mark in his career, so I'd advise any GM to be mindful of that fact this summer when he's looking for a contract, but that fact shouldn't obscure his fine overall play. It's also fair to note that David Moss had a few bounces go his way as well. Again, as with Glencross, a bit of good fortune at times shouldn't distract anyone from that excellent outshooting performance. Moss might have been a handy guy to have in the lineup the last few weeks of the year, and with all due respect to our learned friend from Massachusetts, he's a bit better than a C+ player, especially at his cap hit.

As mentioned in the last go-round, the Flames appeared to have three different years. So, as with Kipper's season, here's the top seven forwards by segment:

 

Games 1-35




OLLI JOKINEN 0.540 0.506 0.502 0.907 3.4%
JAROME IGINLA 0.541 0.520 0.538 0.915 5.4%
ALEX TANGUAY 0.545 0.515 0.524 0.925 6.3%
CURTIS GLENCROSS 0.563 0.545 0.529 0.927 4.2%
BRENDAN MORRISON 0.490 0.486 0.473 0.907 5.6%
RENE BOURQUE 0.438 0.441 0.443 0.905 5.4%
DAVID MOSS 0.547 0.539 0.537 0.949 2.1%

 

The outshooting numbers when tied were actually pretty good other than Morrison and Bourque. Stajan, who wasn't included in this set of data, actually played quite a bit with Iginla and Tanguay during this period of the season, and his performance will be examined in the next iteration of the review. No matter, it's certainly clear that the Flames couldn't throw it in the ocean for the first 2 1/2 months. If you want to blame Daz, I guess that's an option, although I can't really endorse it.

 

Games 36-65          
OLLI JOKINEN 0.559 0.547 0.541 0.887 11.1%
JAROME IGINLA 0.478 0.467 0.470 0.906 10.2%
ALEX TANGUAY 0.453 0.454 0.469 0.915 11.8%
DAVID MOSS 0.577 0.571 0.563 0.915 15.6%
RENE BOURQUE 0.523 0.543 0.504 0.921 2.9%
BRENDAN MORRISON 0.432 0.441 0.444 0.920 7.5%
CURTIS GLENCROSS 0.580 0.581 0.580 0.905 14.9%

 

The stretch from the Dallas game on December 23rd to the St. Louis game on March 1st was Calgary's purple patch. Everything was going in the opposition net, unless you were Rene Bourque. Also, take note of Morrison's outshooting numbers. He played major minutes during this period with Tanguay and Iggy, and all three of them went right into the ditch. In contrast, this was a period where Moss and Glencross eventually went alongside Olli Jokinen. They certainly had pucks go in for them, but those possession numbers were still pretty juicy. I suspect they might not have faced the toughs every single night during this period, but they never would have faced less than second liners along the way. 

 

Games 66-82




BRENDAN MORRISON 0.500 0.500 0.500 1.000 0.0%
DAVID MOSS 0.552 0.528 0.476 0.846 12.5%
JAROME IGINLA 0.486 0.472 0.452 0.870 9.8%
ALEX TANGUAY 0.460 0.450 0.420 0.870 10.9%
RENE BOURQUE 0.547 0.508 0.487 0.930 5.8%
CURTIS GLENCROSS 0.568 0.509 0.481 0.857 4.3%
OLLI JOKINEN 0.524 0.523 0.484 0.923 4.7%

 

The end days were tough on the club in terms of results in the standings, and note that Morrison and Moss played 1 and 6 games respectively. As hard as I've been on Morrison, it's only fair to remember that placing him with Iginla and Tanguay allowed the other forwards to play in better circumstances or with linemates that suited them, so I suppose you could argue that he took one for the team. Placing Mikael Backlund with the duo over the last few games seemed to lift their play, but given that the club played against the bad or disinterested the last 4 times out of the gate, I won't read much into any results they might have obtained. At any rate, the pucks quit going in quite as frequently for the club, and the goaltending during this period let all the air out of a group that was a body or two short. 

 

Overall, the team's top forwards weren't openly awful, but the two "best" players, Iginla and Tanguay, never really dominated in the way that the elite players on other teams did, and in the end, you can only go as far as your top guys. I'm pretty comfortable in saying that their spotty EV play and the struggles of Rene Bourque were the largest non-goaltending contributors to the Flames missing the second season.

 

1a1030a8151ca7a0d81aea58f0fb1dbc
Robert Cleave is a perpetually grumpy Winnipegger.
Avatar
#1 Kent Wilson
April 24 2011, 01:04PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

Good stuff, Bob.

Pat and I will be supplementing this analysis with looks at other stats from all the forwards.

Avatar
#2 Emir
April 25 2011, 07:46AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

A very good read I must say. Gives more light as to why you gave Bourque the D grade. Despite an injury that I think was dealt with carelessly, his shooting % was brutal this year. Very good analysis Rob!

Avatar
#3 Kent Wilson
April 25 2011, 08:47AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props
Emir wrote:

A very good read I must say. Gives more light as to why you gave Bourque the D grade. Despite an injury that I think was dealt with carelessly, his shooting % was brutal this year. Very good analysis Rob!

As was his possession numbers. It was all bad for Bourque this year - and he still scored 27.

I really hope he can find his groove again next year. I don't know what was going on this season - be it the absence of Langkow, a "post-big-contract" malaise or some lingering injury, but he needs to be better and has proven he can be in the past.

Avatar
#4 Tach
April 25 2011, 03:16PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

Bob,

Are the SH% in the three segment break downs personal sh% or on-ice Sh%? If Bourque's numbers are on ice numbers - I would just be dreading being on the ice with him like a black cat or broken mirror.

Also, I am looking at the counting stats, and does anyone else just find the breakdown of goals to assist between players just odd looking. We see Stajan with 6 goals and 25 assists and Morrison had 9 goals and 34 assists- but Bourque has 27 goals and 23 assists and Glencross had 24 goals and 19 assists? I just can't think of any other time when I have seen such broad discrepancy with some players getting a disproportionate number of assists to goals and the others vice versa. I mean, most players get 1-1.5 assists per goal just by eyeballs, but these numbers are out there. Aside from the fact that Stajan didn't appear able to shoot a puck of a pier into the ocean, any thoughts?

Avatar
#5 Derzie
April 25 2011, 03:23PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

To give any credibility to this analysis, do the same for the Canucks and the Oilers for a spectrum of comparison. Not being familiar with the value of Corsi, Fenwick, etc. I get no sense of who did well this year within the team and well relative to the rest of the universe (ie. stuff the GMs care about).

Avatar
#6 Scott
April 25 2011, 04:19PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

In regards to Derzie's comment,

IF Kent is able to do a glossary for some of the stats used on the site, it probably would help me immensely if we had an average or basic idea of the numbers we should expect, to use as comparison. Any insight would help me though, I may be a bit of a lost cause though. haha

Avatar
#8 MC Hockey
April 26 2011, 12:45AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

Need a glossary (or dictionary) to generally explain all the stats within the article to make it meaningful to me. Just a one-liner for each stat in every article would help.

Comments are closed for this article.