Flames Scoring Chances - Game 42 vs Boston Bruins

Kent Wilson
January 05 2012 07:34PM

 

 

 

Final Score: 9-0 L

Final Summary

Corsi

Head-to-head ice

Face-offs

Scoring Chances for NHL Game Number 20584

Team Period Time Note CGY Opponent  
BOS 1 19:45 0 6 7 12 13 20 37 17 18 33 40 46 55 5v5
BOS 1 18:46 Seguin goal 4 10 11 22 37 44 14 19 37 40 44 67 5v5
CGY 1 14:38 -2 4 15 32 37 44 51 11 14 20 22 40 44 5v5
BOS 1 11:11 Krejci goal 4 10 22 37 44   17 18 33 40 46 49 4v5
BOS 1 9:26 -3 8 16 23 33 37 41 11 20 21 22 40 54 5v5
BOS 1 6:33 -3 8 16 23 33 37 41 19 21 37 40 54 67 5v5
BOS 2 18:41 Bergeron goal 4 10 11 22 37 44 14 19 37 40 44 67 5v5
CGY 2 18:08 -4 8 16 23 33 37 41 21 23 40 49 52 54 5v5
BOS 2 17:55 -4 8 16 23 33 37 41 21 23 40 49 52 54 5v5
BOS 2 17:54 Kelly goal 8 16 23 33 37 41 21 23 40 49 52 54 5v5
CGY 2 17:16 -5 6 7 15 32 37 51 11 14 20 22 40 44 5v5
CGY 2 16:41 -5 6 7 13 15 32 37 11 14 20 22 40 44 5v5
BOS 2 15:45 Horton goal 4 12 13 20 37 44 17 18 33 40 46 55 5v5
BOS 2 14:49 -6 6 15 20 23 34 51 14 19 23 40 44 52 5v5
BOS 2 14:37 -6 6 7 12 13 20 34 17 18 33 40 46 55 5v5
CGY 2 11:41 -6 4 11 12 16 34 44 17 18 33 40 46 55 5v5
CGY 2 11:35 -6 4 11 12 16 34 44 17 18 33 40 46 55 5v5
BOS 2 7:39 -6 4 12 13 20 34 44 11 20 21 22 40 54 5v5
BOS 2 5:30 Horton goal 6 11 15 16 34 44 14 17 18 40 44 46 5v5
BOS 2 0:26 -7 7 32 33 34 41 51 19 33 37 40 55 67 5v5
BOS 3 16:30 -7 6 8 10 22 34 44 11 20 22 33 40 55 5v5
BOS 3 14:11 Bergeron goal 4 11 15 16 34 44 19 37 40 44 54 67 5v5
CGY 3 11:45 -8 6 11 32 34 44 51 23 33 40 49 55   5v4
BOS 3 11:18 Paille goal 6 11 32 34 44 51 20 33 40 49 55   5v4

 

# Player EV PP SH
4 J. BOUWMEESTER 18:46 3 5 2:06 0 0 2:35 0 1
6 C. SARICH 22:13 2 5 0:54 1 1 0:34 0 0
7 T. BRODIE 23:31 2 3 0:52 0 0 0:34 0 0
8 B. MORRISON 12:57 1 5 0:14 0 0 0:00 0 0
10 B. COMEAU 11:48 0 3 0:00 0 0 0:18 0 1
11 M. BACKLUND 13:09 2 4 0:40 1 1 1:13 0 0
12 J. IGINLA 16:24 2 4 2:06 0 0 0:00 0 0
13 O. JOKINEN 15:51 1 4 2:06 0 0 0:18 0 0
15 T. JACKMAN 13:38 3 3 0:14 0 0 0:34 0 0
16 T. KOSTOPOULOS 14:33 3 6 0:14 0 0 0:39 0 0
20 C. GLENCROSS 16:31 0 5 2:06 0 0 1:31 0 0
22 L. STEMPNIAK 11:52 0 3 0:00 0 0 0:18 0 1
23 S. HANNAN 8:15 1 5 0:00 0 0 0:00 0 0
32 P. BYRON 11:41 3 1 0:40 1 1 0:41 0 0
33 A. BABCHUK 16:07 1 5 0:14 0 0 0:00 0 0
34 M. KIPRUSOFF 30:45 2 7 3:00 1 1 2:00 0 0
37 L. IRVING 23:06 4 8 0:00 0 0 1:09 0 1
41 R. IVANANS 11:05 1 5 0:00 0 0 0:00 0 0
44 C. BUTLER 18:50 3 7 1:54 1 1 2:35 0 1
51 R. HORAK 12:04 2 2 0:40 1 1 0:46 0 0

 

Period Totals EV PP 5v3 PP SH 5v3 SH
1 1 5 1 4 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0
2 5 9 5 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
3 1 3 0 2 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0
4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Totals 7 17 6 15 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 0

39d8109299a9795cb3b41a4e9b49d501
Kent is a published author and the Nations Network Managing Editor. His work also appears at Hockey Prospectus. Catch him regularly on the FAN960 in Calgary and TEAM 1260 in Edmonton. For questions, complaints, criticisms, etc contact Kent @ kent.wilson@gmail. Follow him on Twitter here.
Sort comments by props
Avatar
Reply #1 Mamie Jacoun January 05 2012, 07:47PM
+1 0 props

Kenya?????? Where's the profound analysis and story on how chances didn't equate to goals?...Wait what's that sound?

Avatar
Reply #2 Mamie Jacoun January 05 2012, 07:48PM
+1 0 props

Kenya ...Kenta. What's the diff

Not kidding on the trainwreck

Avatar
Reply #3 Kent Wilson January 05 2012, 07:55PM
+1 0 props

@Mamie Jacoun

Who ever said chances don't equate to goals? Some games they don't, but in the long run, the teams that outchance, outscore. That's the point of counting these chances, which you notice I do every single game and have for the last three seasons.

Avatar
Reply #4 Mamie jacoun January 05 2012, 08:33PM
+1 0 props

Kent chances are only one variable.....where chances aren't the most reliable is when they aren't reflective of quality and they always discount a tender stealing a game. So perhaps we agree about the long term....but there are times when a hot goalie beats these odds of chances.. I'd bet that when Kipper was stellar when he arrived here and up until the last few years the Flames were outshot and out chanced more often than not.

Avatar
Reply #5 CitizenFlame January 05 2012, 09:11PM
+1 0 props

I think one of Boston's goals is missing. But I can't tell because its hard to count that high. Ouch! I didn't see the game thank God, but considering the score this looks fairly uneventful. Brodie being +/-0, with a +4 corsi, and 1 more defensive zone draw is very impressive.

This team is decimated by injuries and I think leads the league in man games lost to injury but there is no excuse to lose 9-0. The blow-it-up camp is going to be out in full force and its getting hard to argue against. This is starting to look eerily similar to the Oilers a couple of years ago.

It sounds like Gio is getting close to recovery so that is good but this team needs to make a move to bring in a top 4 defender who is both physical and mobile.

Avatar
Reply #6 SmellOfVictory January 05 2012, 10:29PM
+1 0 props

Unless Boston's chances were that much better than Calgary's, the chance count indicates that the Flames got screwed a bit by luck as well. Not that they didn't deserve to lose, but 9 goals on 17 chances is a ridiculous number.

Avatar
Reply #7 CitizenFlame January 06 2012, 03:10PM
+1 0 props

@SmellOfVictory

Thats what I thought as well. Our top end guys didn't get their heads totally kicked in, but the bottom end of the rotation took a s**t kicking. That's not usually the case.

Comments are closed for this article.