Flames Scoring Chances – Game 4 versus Edmonton

Scoring Chances for NHL Game Number 20065

Team Period Time Note CGY Opponent  
CGY 1 17:34   3 12 18 28 34 40 6 26 27 35 83 89 5v5
CGY 1 15:04   3 4 11 15 20 34 6 13 26 35 67 91 5v5
EDM 1 14:40 Hemsky goal 3 4 12 18 34 40 6 35 77 83 89 91 5v5
EDM 1 13:42   4 8 10 13 27 34 2 4 10 14 35 49 5v5
CGY 1 12:47   5 6 11 15 20 34 6 13 35 67 77 91 5v5
CGY 1 10:59 Tanguay goal 3 12 18 28 34 40 27 35 49 77 83 89 5v5
CGY 1 5:11   4 20 28 34 42   4 6 13 35 67 77 4v5
CGY 1 5:06   3 4 12 18 34   2 16 28 35 49   4v4
CGY 1 4:37   3 4 12 18 34 40 2 16 28 35 49   5v4
CGY 1 3:13   3 4 8 10 13 34 6 16 28 35     5v3
CGY 1 3:07   3 4 8 10 13 34 2 10 35 49 67   5v4
EDM 1 0:24   3 11 15 20 28 34 6 26 27 35 83 89 5v5
EDM 2 19:38 Penner goal 3 12 18 28 34 40 6 26 27 35 83 89 5v5
CGY 2 17:03 Morrison goal 5 6 8 18 34 44 4 13 14 26 35 77 5v5
CGY 2 16:47   5 6 12 18 34 40 2 13 35 49 67 91 5v5
CGY 2 16:37   5 6 12 18 34 40 2 13 35 49 67 91 5v5
EDM 2 15:56   4 24 27 34 42 44 6 16 26 28 35 91 5v5
EDM 2 15:45 Paajarvi goal 4 24 27 34 42 44 6 16 26 28 83 91 5v5
CGY 2 14:36   4 6 8 18 34 40 4 6 10 14 26 35 5v5
CGY 2 12:53   4 6 11 15 20 34 6 16 26 28 35 91 5v5
CGY 2 12:52   4 6 11 15 20 34 6 16 26 28 35 91 5v5
EDM 2 6:37   4 5 12 18 34 40 2 27 35 49 83 89 5v5
EDM 2 6:35   4 5 12 18 34 40 2 27 35 49 83 89 5v5
CGY 2 2:47   5 8 10 13 27 34 6 16 28 35 77   5v4
CGY 2 2:27   5 8 10 13 27 34 6 16 28 35 77   5v4
EDM 3 18:39   4 8 10 13 27 34 4 5 10 14 35 77 5v5
CGY 3 18:00   5 6 11 15 20 34 2 13 35 49 67 91 5v5
CGY 3 16:17   3 12 18 28 34 40 2 27 35 49 83 89 5v5
CGY 3 15:48   5 6 8 10 13 34 2 4 10 14 35 49 5v5
CGY 3 15:33   5 6 8 10 13 34 4 6 10 14 26 35 5v5
CGY 3 15:32 Hagman goal 5 6 8 10 13 34 4 6 10 14 26 35 5v5
CGY 3 14:50   4 15 18 20 27 34 5 16 28 35 67 77 5v5
CGY 3 14:28   15 18 20 27 28 34 5 16 28 35 67 77 5v5
CGY 3 13:50   3 12 28 34 40   2 35 49 83 89   4v4
EDM 3 13:31   3 12 28 34 40   6 26 35 83 89   4v4
EDM 3 13:16   3 12 28 34 40   6 14 26 35 83   4v4
CGY 3 12:35   5 12 13 34 40   6 16 28 35     4v3
CGY 3 12:12 Iginla goal 5 12 13 34 40   6 16 28 35     4v3
CGY 3 11:03   5 6 8 10 13 34 5 13 35 67 77 91 5v5
CGY 3 10:56   5 6 8 10 13 34 5 13 35 67 77 91 5v5
EDM 3 7:33   3 4 8 10 13 34 2 4 6 10 14 35 5v5
CGY 3 3:33   3 12 18 20 28 34 5 27 35 77 83 89 5v5
CGY 3 2:44   5 11 15 20 28 34 2 4 6 10 14 35 5v5

 

# Player EV PP SH
3 I. WHITE 13:29 7 6 2:54 2 0 0:00 0 0
4 J. BOUWMEESTER 17:38 6 8 2:54 2 0 4:33 1 0
5 M. GIORDANO 15:28 11 2 2:39 4 0 2:46 0 0
6 C. SARICH 14:53 13 0 0:00 0 0 3:19 0 0
8 B. MORRISON 13:49 7 3 2:02 3 0 0:00 0 0
10 N. HAGMAN 12:56 5 3 2:02 3 0 0:00 0 0
11 M. BACKLUND 11:16 6 1 0:07 0 0 2:51 0 0
12 J. IGINLA 14:52 8 6 3:24 3 0 0:00 0 0
13 O. JOKINEN 13:23 5 3 2:37 5 0 0:20 0 0
15 T. JACKMAN 13:08 8 1 0:07 0 0 0:00 0 0
18 M. STAJAN 13:56 11 4 2:49 1 0 0:00 0 0
20 C. GLENCROSS 12:23 9 1 0:07 0 0 3:02 1 0
24 C. CONROY 4:46 0 2 0:00 0 0 2:53 0 0
27 S. STAIOS 13:22 2 4 2:00 2 0 0:00 0 0
28 R. REGEHR 17:34 7 4 0:07 0 0 5:06 1 0
34 M. KIPRUSOFF 46:08 23 12 5:33 6 0 7:52 1 0
40 A. TANGUAY 14:05 7 6 3:21 3 0 2:51 0 0
42 B. SUTTER 6:10 0 2 0:00 0 0 2:08 1 0
44 S. MEYER 5:59 1 2 0:00 0 0 1:39 0 0

 

Period Totals EV PP 5v3 PP SH 5v3 SH
1 9 3 5 3 2 0 1 0 1 0 0 0
2 8 5 6 5 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
3 14 4 12 4 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Totals 31 12 23 12 6 0 1 0 1 0 0 0

Flames dominated this one all around. Curtis Glencross was a monster at ES in particular. Other items of interest:

– Iginla was decent in the offensive zone, but he gave a lot back going the other way.

– Steve Staios somehow ended up underwater.

– Backlund’s number is nice, but again he’s benefitting from playing with Glencross and, to some extent, Jackman both of whom are truly driving things on that line.

  • Robert Cleave

    Dennis had them 25-13 CGY, 21-13 at EV, and Edmonton was 4-17 when Hemsky wasn’t on the ice. That team has been getting a reality check since the opener.

  • Robert Cleave

    It was nice to watch a real hockey game, I’ll say that much. I would also like to defend Backlund (to the death, I say); he did give away the puck a number of times, but he didn’t look terrible defensively and while his shot choice is pretty awful so far as RO mentioned, he’s a good passer.

  • Had a great time watching this game. I was thinking to myself when we were down 3-2, even if the Flames don’t win this one, at least it’s been a great game to watch and you can tell they were trying out there.

    They killed it, Backlund looked pretty good, his line was trucking out there.

    Great effort all around (minus Staois, he actually didn’t look good at all) Can’t wait for Moss, Bourque & hopefully Lanks back at sometime.

  • Backlund hasn’t been “bad” in that he doesn’t drag his line down. I just bring him up because his SC numbers are s misrepresentation of his play. Curtis Glencross (and Jackman, surprisingly) are driving things on that third line and they’re exaggerating Backlund’s results. He’s mostly along for the ride.

    Once Moss gets back and bumps Jackman to the 4th line, the Flames might just have a rather functional bottom end (assuming Ivanans doesn’t play any more).

  • Re Backlund,

    I think he has been good (Well, third line good anyways) from his own end in to about the top of the opposing faceoff circles, but as R O nailed in his assessment, he takes low percentage shots way too much. He needs to maintain possession and/or drive the puck to the net in those scenarios, plus improve on his play off the puck when his teammates have control in the offensive end.

    As for Jackman, I don’t see him driving things out there, except maybe once the puck gets in the zone he is capable of not giving it away. He has hands of stone going to the net though and generates no speed through the neutral zone.

    Glencross is the only part of that line that contributes end to end.

    • Yeah, Jackman isn’t the engine that Glencross is. That said, he makes smart plays and is hard on the puck. I’d still prefer Moss though.

      On Backlund, if you go back and look at scoring chance counts from the first 5 games last year you’ll see Dustin Boyd’s numbers are through the roof as well (he played with Conroy and Glencross and they killed things in a similar manner).

      Now, I still like Boyd and I think he had a little something to do with it last year, but the truth is (again) the other two guys (Glencross in particular) were driving things.