Flames in seven games: 4-3-0 in ninth segment
By Ryan Pike
4 years agoThe Calgary Flames have completed 63 games of the 2019-20 regular season calendar. They’re 68.3% of the way through their season, and so we continue examining their performances in bite-sized seven game morsels. In the first segment of this season, they went 3-3-1. In their second segment, they went 3-3-1. In their third segment, they went 4-2-1. In their fourth segment, they went 2-4-1. In their fifth segment, they went 6-1-0. In their sixth segment, they went 2-4-1. In their seventh segment, they went 6-1-0. In their eighth segment, they went 2-4-1.
In their ninth segment, they went 4-3-0.
Underlying numbers via Natural Stat Trick.
Game by game
(Percentage stats in this table are 5v5
| Date | Opponent | Result | CF% | SC% | HDSC% | PP | PK |
| Feb. 10 | Sharks (@) | 6-2 W | 44.8 | 54.7 | 47.6 | 3-for-6 | 0-for-1 |
| Feb. 12 | Kings (@) | 5-3 L | 45.3 | 43.5 | 47.8 | 0-for-3 | 1-for-1 |
| Feb. 13 | Ducks (@) | 6-0 W | 40.4 | 42.6 | 54.6 | 0-for-2 | 4-for-4 |
| Feb. 15 | Blackhawks (vs) | 8-4 L | 62.0 | 60.5 | 68.4 | 1-for-4 | 3-for-3 |
| Feb. 17 | Ducks (vs) | 6-4 W | 60.8 | 64.5 | 70.8 | 0-for-4 | 2-for-2 |
| Feb. 21 | Bruins (vs) | 4-3 L | 52.3 | 44.7 | 35.7 | 0-for-2 | n/a |
| Feb. 23 | Red Wings (@) | 4-2 W | 60.5 | 54.9 | 72.2 | 0-for-2 | 2-for-2 |
The Flames played three games at home (1-2-0) and four on the road (3-1-0). For those who like to keep track, the Flames had four wins and three losses in regulation, and never went to extra time during this segment.
The Flames out-chanced their opponents four times and generated more high danger chances four times. They scored four power play goals and allowed just one (way back on Feb. 10, the first game of the segment).
With 70 points through 63 games, the Flames are chugging along at slightly below a surefire playoff pace. Four wins per segment translates to roughly 72 points though 63 games (and 94 points over a full season). So the Flames are a smidge below a strong playoff pace. As they’ve been for months, their win-one, lose-one alternation has kept them in the playoff pack but hasn’t allowed them to gain any separation or breathing room.
Team stats
The Flames have a 32-25-6 record through their first 63 games. They remain a very inconsistent hockey club, as they have been since the 2019 All-Star Break.
- Their goals for per game is 2.87, up from 2.66. They’re 21st overall in the NHL and 10th in the Western Conference.
- Their goals against per game is 3.10, up from 3.04. They’re 20th in the NHL, and 9th in the Western Conference.
- Their goal differential is -9, up from -16. They’re 22nd in the NHL, and 11th in the Western Conference.
- Their power play is at 19.9%, down from 20.3%. They’re 18th in the NHL, and 8th in the Western Conference.
- Their penalty kill is at 81.5%, down from 81.5%. They’re 12th in the NHL and 6th in the Western Conference.
- They’ve taken 9.1 minutes of penalties per game, down from 9.4. That’s 11th-most in the NHL, and 5th-most in the Western Conference.
- Their 5v5 CF/60 is 58.51, up from 58.36. It’s the 9th highest in the NHL, and 5th highest among Western Conference teams.
- Their 5v5 CA/60 is 57.33, down from 57.50. It’s the 23rd lowest in the NHL, and 11th lowest among Western Conference teams.
- Their 5v5 CF is 50.5%, up from 50.4%. It’s the 14th highest in the NHL, and 6th among Western Conference teams.
- Their 5v5 shooting percentage is 7.52%, up from 6.86%. It’s 23rd in the NHL.
- Their 5v5 save percentage is 91.66%, down from 92.06%. It’s 18th in the NHL.
- Their PDO is 0.992, up from 0.989. It’s 24th in the NHL.
What can we say that we haven’t said in the prior eight segments? The Flames are an inconsistent, frustrating hockey club. They have a good penalty kill (top half of the league) and generate shot attempts at a high level (top 10). But a lot of aspects of their game are statistically mediocre to poor: their power play (bottom half), their shooting (bottom third), their goaltending (bottom half), their shot attempt suppression (bottom third).
We’ve been writing this same combination of stuff all season, because the story has remained very consistent in that respect – aside from their goaltending, which slid from the top half to the bottom half of the league over the past seven games.
Player stats
First, the forwards (all situations, ordered by ice time).
Game scores: 0.950 and above is considered great; 0.450-0.950 good; 0.150-0.450 fine; -0.150-0.150 bad; under -0.150 awful.
| Player | TOI | Goals | Points | P/60 | SH% | CF% | GF% | OZFO% | Game score |
| Lindholm | 1241:55 | 27 | 50 | 2.42 | 17.8 | 52.0 | 48.4 | 53.0 | 0.759 |
| Gaudreau | 1185:52 | 16 | 52 | 2.63 | 8.6 | 57.1 | 55.0 | 68.1 | 0.816 |
| Monahan | 1141:48 | 19 | 43 | 2.26 | 12.7 | 56.0 | 52.2 | 67.9 | 0.632 |
| Tkachuk | 1132:52 | 20 | 51 | 2.70 | 11.6 | 58.9 | 56.3 | 61.0 | 0.898 |
| Backlund | 1125:25 | 12 | 35 | 1.87 | 8.9 | 50.6 | 50.9 | 50.9 | 0.524 |
| Ryan | 899:28 | 10 | 28 | 1.87 | 10.6 | 46.9 | 55.2 | 42.6 | 0.449 |
| Lucic | 817:37 | 6 | 17 | 1.25 | 8.1 | 54.4 | 54.7 | 53.3 | 0.280 |
| Mangiapane | 813:06 | 15 | 27 | 1.99 | 16.3 | 54.1 | 52.6 | 46.9 | 0.566 |
| Bennett | 573:22 | 8 | 12 | 1.26 | 10.8 | 53.4 | 51.3 | 53.3 | 0.329 |
| Jankowski | 547:34 | 5 | 7 | 0.77 | 15.6 | 42.7 | 25.6 | 30.8 | 0.143 |
| Rieder | 541:32 | 4 | 10 | 1.11 | 6.0 | 44.3 | 28.6 | 42.5 | 0.254 |
| Dube | 485:33 | 5 | 15 | 1.85 | 9.1 | 46.7 | 57.1 | 49.3 | 0.347 |
| Frolik | 453:16 | 5 | 10 | 1.32 | 11.4 | 48.3 | 31.4 | 46.8 | 0.247 |
| Rinaldo | 152:22 | 3 | 5 | 1.97 | 15.6 | 43.6 | 50.0 | 48.8 | 0.143 |
| Quine | 88:15 | 1 | 1 | 0.68 | 8.3 | 51.6 | 33.3 | 49.1 | 0.179 |
| Czarnik | 81:30 | 2 | 3 | 2.21 | 22.2 | 54.6 | 75.0 | 58.9 | 0.394 |
| Robinson | 61:10 | 1 | 1 | 0.98 | 16.7 | 47.2 | 50.0 | 46.2 | 0.250 |
The only big change is the usage story is that Andrew Mangiapane has jumped up to eighth in aggregate ice time. You can really see the clustering in usage here, and how little it’s really changed under Geoff Ward. His only big change has been leaning on Mangiapane more in the top six.
The big story in the past seven games has been the uptick in offense for Mangiapane and Mikael Backlund. Backlund’s doubled his season goal output and his shooting percentage hasn’t fully normalized to his career average yet.
Aside from that? Same old story. Matthew Tkachuk, Johnny Gaudreau and Elias Lindholm are the team’s top forwards, followed by Sean Monahan, followed by Backlund and Mangiapane. Derek Ryan sld back into his own tier, followed by Dillon Dube and Sam Bennett, then a clump of so-so players below them.
The Flames’ most common line combinations at 5v5 are:
| Gaudreau | Monahan | Lindholm |
| Lucic | Ryan | Dube |
| Mangiapane | Lindholm | Tkachuk |
Now, the defence (all situations, ordered by ice time):
| Player | TOI | Goals | Points | P/60 | SH% | CF% | GF% | OZFO% | Game score |
| Hanifin | 1364:09 | 5 | 21 | 0.92 | 4.1 | 50.2 | 46.0 | 48.7 | 0.426 |
| Giordano | 1293:10 | 5 | 27 | 1.25 | 3.5 | 51.3 | 51.8 | 49.4 | 0.718 |
| Andersson | 1238:51 | 4 | 19 | 0.92 | 3.5 | 53.6 | 48.7 | 60.6 | 0.422 |
| Brodie | 1158:18 | 1 | 16 | 0.83 | 1.8 | 50.4 | 48.2 | 44.7 | 0.393 |
| Hamonic | 1059:43 | 3 | 12 | 0.68 | 3.6 | 43.4 | 39.3 | 34.2 | 0.348 |
| Kylington | 657:55 | 2 | 7 | 0.64 | 5.4 | 48.0 | 43.8 | 60.0 | 0.123 |
| Stone | 521:42 | 2 | 6 | 0.69 | 3.6 | 42.5 | 40.0 | 45.0 | 0.155 |
| Davidson | 85:52 | 0 | 0 | 0.00 | 0.0 | 46.7 | 40.0 | 60.4 | 0.154 |
| Yelesin | 49:58 | 0 | 0 | 0.00 | 0.0 | 54.1 | 50.0 | 60.9 | 0.125 |
The bad news: the Flames spent the entire segment without Mark Giordano and most of the segment without Travis Hamonic. (Welcome to the NHL, Alexander Yelesin!)
The good news: Rasmus Andersson and Noah Hanifin have been leaned on, heavily, and they’ve performed well. TJ Brodie has also been leaned on and has seen an uptick in his underlyings.
There’s really no huge game score disparity between Michael Stone, Oliver Kylington, Brandon Davidson and Yelesin. So it’s a bit troubling that Stone has been leaned on so heavily, but he’s a veteran and plays a simple, predictable game, so you can kind of wrap your head around it if you try.
Get well soon, Mark and Travis.
And finally, goalies (all situations):
| Player | TOI | SV% | ldSV% | mdSV% | hdSV% | Game score |
| Rittich | 2554:10 | .908 | .960 | .875 | .846 | 0.667 |
| Talbot | 1230:48 | .914 | .969 | .912 | .784 | 0.793 |
Things look a bit ugly here given that both guy got shelled during this period – the Chicago loss mucked up both of their underlyings. Talbot is the better goalie but the gap between them isn’t huge – and Rittich has appreciably better high danger numbers, which suggests that’s why he’s been getting key starts down the stretch.
Recent articles from Ryan Pike
