Flames Scoring Chances – Game 6 versus New York Rangers

 

 

3-2 SOL

Final Summary

Scoring Chances for NHL Game Number 20087

Team Period Time Note CGY Opponent  
CGY 1 18:56 0 4 12 25 35 40 44 6 17 24 30 42 44 5v5
NYR 1 15:07 Gaborik goal 4 20 25 35 44   4 10 19 21 24 30 4v5
CGY 1 14:09 Iginla goal 5 12 18 23 35 40 5 17 24 27 30 42 5v5
NYR 1 13:41 0 4 13 20 22 35 44 6 10 19 21 30 44 5v5
NYR 1 13:40 0 4 13 20 22 35 44 6 10 19 21 30 44 5v5
CGY 1 11:57 0 6 8 12 16 27 35 4 8 22 26 30 53 5v5
NYR 1 6:20 Prust goal 4 8 12 35 40 44 5 8 22 27 30   5v4
CGY 1 6:01 -1 4 13 20 22 35 44 5 10 21 26 27 30 5v5
CGY 1 5:26 -1 5 6 16 18 22 35 5 21 27 30 45 71 5v5
CGY 1 4:09 Giordano goal 5 8 12 17 35 40 5 17 24 27 30   5v4
NYR 1 1:06 0 5 12 23 25 35 40 5 8 22 26 27 30 5v5
NYR 1 0:05 0 4 13 22 35 44   6 17 24 30 44   4v4
CGY 2 17:18 0 4 8 15 16 35 44 5 24 27 30 40 71 5v5
CGY 2 14:18 0 6 8 10 17 27 35 4 17 24 30 53 71 5v5
NYR 2 10:38 0 5 15 16 18 23 35 10 19 26 27 30 44 5v5
NYR 2 10:31 0 5 15 16 18 23 35 10 19 26 27 30 44 5v5
NYR 2 7:12 0 4 8 10 22 27 35 5 10 21 30 42 44 5v5
CGY 2 5:56 0 4 6 15 16 18 35 5 19 27 30 40 71 5v5
CGY 2 1:22 0 5 15 16 18 23 35 4 17 24 30 42 53 5v5
CGY 3 15:39 0 6 12 25 27 35 40 5 17 24 27 30 42 5v5
NYR 3 13:19 0 4 12 25 27 35 40 5 8 22 26 27 30 5v5
NYR 3 13:17 0 4 12 25 27 35 40 5 8 22 26 27 30 5v5
CGY 3 11:29 0 4 13 20 22 35 44 4 10 19 21 30 53 5v5
NYR 3 3:47 0 13 20 22 23 35 44 6 10 19 21 30 44 5v5
NYR 4 3:15 0 4 13 17 27 35   5 10 19 27 30   4v4
NYR 4 2:52 0 6 8 17 27 35   4 21 30 42 44   4v4
NYR 4 0:01 McDonagh goal 4 5 8 12 35   5 17 24 27 30   4v4

 

# Player EV PP SH
4 J. BOUWMEESTER 23:32 5 8 3:02 0 1 1:07 0 1
5 M. GIORDANO 18:49 3 4 4:59 1 0 0:44 0 0
6 C. SARICH 15:00 5 1 0:04 0 0 0:00 0 0
8 B. MORRISON 16:19 3 3 2:42 1 1 0:30 0 0
10 N. HAGMAN 13:33 1 1 1:54 0 0 0:00 0 0
12 J. IGINLA 15:06 4 4 5:21 1 1 0:00 0 0
13 O. JOKINEN 18:59 2 5 3:36 0 0 0:00 0 0
15 T. JACKMAN 5:31 3 2 0:05 0 0 0:00 0 0
16 T. KOSTOPOULOS 7:12 5 2 0:00 0 0 0:00 0 0
17 R. BOURQUE 13:19 1 2 4:59 1 0 0:30 0 0
18 M. STAJAN 8:13 4 2 0:19 0 0 0:11 0 0
20 C. GLENCROSS 18:45 2 3 0:19 0 0 1:21 0 1
22 L. STEMPNIAK 17:44 3 5 2:33 0 0 0:33 0 0
23 S. HANNAN 17:18 2 4 0:05 0 0 0:44 0 0
25 D. MOSS 10:25 2 3 2:15 0 0 0:37 0 1
27 D. SMITH 14:26 3 5 1:22 0 0 0:00 0 0
35 H. KARLSSON 55:02 11 13 8:06 1 1 1:51 0 1
40 A. TANGUAY 12:22 3 3 5:33 1 1 0:00 0 0
44 C. BUTLER 20:52 4 4 1:22 0 1 1:07 0 1

 

Period Totals EV PP 5v3 PP SH 5v3 SH
1 6 6 5 4 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 0
2 4 3 4 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
3 2 3 2 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
4 0 3 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Totals 12 15 11 13 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 0

Pretty low event evening tonight in terms of chances. Flames had the better of the zone time, particularly in the third, but had troubles converting it into scoring chances efficiecntly. The biggest problem area was the PP, which scored early but was rather punchless for the rest of the evening. The Rangers took five straight penalties and the Flames only chance was the Giordano marker in the first. 

New York generated the only chances of the OT, although their GWG was mostly courtesy a nice bounce off the boards.

Calgary moved the puck north okay tonight, but there’s still a lot left to be desired in their play. Chest high passes in the offensive zone, lots of periphery play and an inability to make three consecutive passes when exiting their own end. Improvement still needed.

  • Section205

    I don’t think Butler was on the ice for the Prust SH goal, which is the only reason why they scored.

    Stupid decision to put Iggy in Defenseman’s position. JBow was basically trapped by himself. If Butler was back there, Bouwmeester would have been able to dish it. We would have won the game.

    Also, PK again blows it on 1st goal. The reason why Gaborik sneaks in is because forwards are not aware of the pointmen. Rangers PK was much better than ours.

    This loss belongs to bad coaching.

    Good games from backup goalie and 4th line – Karlsson, Jackman, Stajan, TK.

    Last game, the scoring chance chart ignored about 3 flames chances that I would have counted. I’m gonna guess we have the same differences in opinion tonight, although I have not yet reviewed the tape. I respect that Kent is not swayed by homerism, but perhaps errs on the other side.

    • Yeah, it’s a pretty strict definition I go by. I legitimately missed one that I caught later – Jackman got a shot and rebound at one point and I only caught the initial shot.

      There’s always a few shots that are right along the edge of the area. I’ve decided to err on the side of caution this year, so when I’m in doubt after multiple viewings, I go with
      “no chance”.

      Sometimes it depends on the camera angle too. If I had a better view, I think I could be even more accurate.