Flames in seven games: 3-4-0 in sixth segment
By Ryan Pike
3 years agoThe Calgary Flames have completed 42 games of their 56 game 2020-21 regular season schedule. They’re three-quarters through through their schedule. Their playoff homes aren’t quite gone, but the proverbial fat lady is doing her vocal warm-ups.
Underlying numbers via Natural Stat Trick.
Game by game
(Percentage stats in this table are 5v5.)
| Date | Opponent | Result | CF% | SC% | HDSC% | xGF% | PP | PK |
| Mar. 27 | Jets (vs) | 4-2 W | 65.0 | 61.8 | 58.3 | 66.2 | 1-for-2 | 2-for-2 |
| Mar. 29 | Jets (vs) | 5-1 L | 52.2 | 55.9 | 53.9 | 51.9 | 1-for-4 | 2-for-2 |
| Apr. 2 | Oilers (@) | 3-2 L | 55.6 | 66.7 | 45.5 | 47.5 | 0-for-2 | 3-for-5 |
| Apr. 4 | Maple Leafs (vs) | 4-2 L | 53.8 | 46.8 | 42.9 | 43.4 | 0-for-1 | 1-for-1 |
| Apr. 5 | Maple Leafs (vs) | 5-3 L | 53.9 | 56.9 | 45.8 | 52.4 | 0-for-1 | 3-for-4 |
| Apr. 10 | Oilers (vs) | 5-0 W | 55.6 | 65.1 | 75.0 | 61.0 | 1-for-4 | 2-for-2 |
| Apr. 13 | Maple Leafs (@) | 3-2 OTW | 53.5 | 43.8 | 41.2 | 47.4 | 1-for-2 | 2-for-2 |
| This 7 | — | 3-4-0 | 55.6 | 55.6 | 50.5 | 52.5 | 4/16 | 15/18 |
| Last 7 | — | 2-5-0 | 51.5 | 46.1 | 43.2 | 45.8 | 3/20 | 18/23 |
The Flames were definitively better than their opponents twice and won both. They were definitively worse than their opponent once and lost. They were fairly alright and in the mix against their opponents four times and won once.
From an underlying standpoint, the Flames were better across the board than last segment. They were also better on special teams. Based on all this, they were probably deserving of a better standings fate over the last seven games.
Team stats
Here’s how the Flames compare within the (Scotia NHL) North Division through 42 games:
- Their goals for per game is 2.62, down from 2.57. They’re fifth in the division.
- Their goals against per game is 2.98, up from 2.97. They’re fifth in the division.
- Their goal differential is -15, down from -14. They’re fifth in the division.
- Their power play is at 20.4%, up from 19.8%. They’re fifth in the division.
- Their penalty kill is at 80.6%, up from 80.2%. They’re first in the division.
- They’ve taken 8.1 penalty minutes per game, down from 8.5. They’re fifth in the division.
- Their 5v5 xGF/60 is 2.17, down from 2.18. They’re sixth in the division.
- Their 5v5 xGF/60 is 2.05, down from 2.07. They’re second in the division.
- Their 5v5 xGF is 51.5%, up from 51.3% They’re third in the division.
- Their 5v5 shooting percentage is 7.88%, up from 7.75%. They’re fifth in the division.
- Their 5v5 save percentage is 91.21%, down from 91.83%. They’re sixth in the division.
- Their PDO is 0.991, down from 0.996. They’re sixth in the division.
In the previous segment, the Flames got worse at almost everything.
In this segment, they largely stayed the same. Their defensive game and their penalty killing is good. Everything else isn’t great, and their goaltending and ability to generate scoring chances has taken a step back.
Player stats
First, the forwards (all situations, ordered by ice time). Last segment’s values in brackets.
Game scores: Positive values indicate positive impact, negative values reflect negative impact.
| Player | TOI | G | P | P/60 | SH% | xGF% | GF% | OZF% | Game score |
| Lindholm | 126:45 (126:19) | 3 (2) | 7 (5) | 3.3 (2.4) | 14.3 (11.8) | 55.7 (43.6) | 50.0 (43.8) | 50.5 (54.1) | 0.573 (0.691) |
| Gaudreau | 123:19 (119:25) | 2 (2) | 6 (2) | 2.9 (1.0) | 20.0 (14.3) | 54.4 (49.3) | 70.0 (44.4) | 59.3 (71.9) | 0.604 (-0.154) |
| Monahan | 119:33 (123:45) | 1 (0) | 3 (1) | 1.5 (0.5) | 7.1 (0.0) | 63.2 (46.3) | 50.0 (37.5) | 60.0 (68.9) | 0.447 (-0.160) |
| Tkachuk | 112:31 (111:00) | 1 (2) | 3 (4) | 1.6 (2.2) | 10.0 (18.2) | 55.0 (61.3) | 50.0 (63.6) | 60.3 (68.8) | 0.133 (0.941) |
| Mangiapane | 103:55 (111:31) | 3 (1) | 5 (3) | 2.9 (1.6) | 27.3 (20.0) | 60.1 (48.2) | 55.6 (46.2) | 61.5 (69.8) | 0.947 (0.144) |
| Backlund | 101:10 (126:07) | 2 (1) | 7 (5) | 4.2 (2.4) | 12.5 (5.0) | 49.7 (38.1) | 70.0 (37.5) | 40.5 (52.8) | 1.290 (0.164) |
| Lucic | 95:51 (112:07) | 0 (1) | 3 (4) | 1.9 (2.1) | 0.0 (9.1) | 54.7 (46.9) | 60.0 (53.9) | 45.3 (71.4) | 0.499 (0.367) |
| Nordstrom | 95:45 (11:01) | 1 (0) | 2 (0) | 1.3 (0.0) | 7.1 (0.0) | 44.6 (13.3) | 40.0 (n/a) | 31.3 (55.6) | 0.479 (0.070) |
| Ritchie | 89:45 (55:13) | 1 (0) | 1 (0) | 0.7 (0.0) | 9.1 (0.0) | 46.0 (36.2) | 20.0 (0.0) | 55.2 (36.4) | -0.036 (-0.663) |
| Ryan | 86:19 (80:12) | 0 (1) | 0 (1) | 0.0 (0.8) | 0.0 (9.1) | 48.9 (34.7) | 28.6 (20.0) | 53.3 (64.3) | -0.059 (0.286) |
| Bennett | 80:58 (101:24) | 1 (0) | 6 (0) | 4.5 (0.0) | 16.7 (0.0) | 45.3 (42.1) | 53.9 (0.0) | 54.9 (67.2) | 0.827 (-0.353) |
| Dube | 65:49 (87:24) | 0 (1) | 0 (4) | 0.0 (2.8) | 0.0 (20.0) | 56.2 (50.3) | 14.3 (85.7) | 55.2 (64.7) | -0.390 (0.791) |
| Leivo | 44:58 (61:34) | 1 (0) | 1 (0) | 1.3 (0.0) | 20.0 (0.0) | 73.8 (48.7) | 100 (0.0) | 50.0 (72.4) | 0.825 (-0.060) |
| Rinaldo | – (19:03) | – (0) | – (0) | – (0.0) | – (0.0) | – (55.8) | – (n/a) | – (83.3) | – (0.125) |
The five most common Flames forward lines were (in descending order):
- Gaudreau – Monahan – Ritchie
- Tkachuk – Lindholm – Dube
- Tkachuk – Lindholm – Gaudreau
- Lucic – Backlund – Nordstrom
- Lucic – Backlund – Mangiapane
The Flames, individually, played fairly well, but there’s a gap between the six guys that are looking good by the numbers and the rest. Playing well are Lindholm, Gaudreau, Tkachuk, Monahan, Mangiapane and Lucic. (Dube and Leivo had good underlyings but didn’t play much.) Playing not as well are Backlund, Nordstrom, Ritchie and Bennett.
Bennett’s gone to Florida, which probably will end up in Dube and/or Leivo growing their roles. But the challenge the Flames have is the aforementioned gap: it makes it tougher for the Flames to have a strong 60 minutes when their fourth line (and even a chunk of their third) isn’t carrying play to the degree the rest of the forward group is.
Now, the defence (all situations, ordered by ice time):
| Player | TOI | G | P | P/60 | SH% | xGF% | GF% | OZF% | Game score |
| Giordano | 162:27 (161:31) | 2 (2) | 5 (2) | 1.9 (0.8) | 14.3 (10.5) | 53.1 (32.4) | 52.9 (26.7) | 42.9 (50.4) | 0.580 (-0.297) |
| Hanifin | 150:48 (153:45) | 0 (1) | 3 (5) | 1.2 (2.0) | 0.0 (6.3) | 49.7 (55.0) | 38.5 (46.2) | 53.6 (69.1) | 0.004 (0.379) |
| Andersson | 147:45 (142:55) | 0 (0) | 0 (2) | 0.0 (0.8) | 0.0 (0.0) | 50.2 (37.2) | 58.3 (36.8) | 59.3 (61.4) | 0.051 (-1.037) |
| Tanev | 142:25 (161:52) | 0 (1) | 1 (1) | 0.4 (0.4) | 0.0 (11.1) | 43.1 (36.5) | 37.5 (30.0) | 35.8 (45.2) | -0.044 (0.561) |
| Stone | 114:00 (-) | 1 (-) | 1 (-) | 0.5 (-) | 8.3 (-) | 43.4 (-) | 41.7 (-) | 47.2 (-) | 0.159 (-) |
| Nesterov | 65:25 (77:01) | 0 (0) | 0 (2) | 0.0 (1.6) | 0.0 (0.0) | 57.5 (42.5) | 50.0 (50.0) | 53.5 (64.3) | 0.435 (0.298) |
| Valimaki | 43:58 (101:16) | 1 (0) | 2 (0) | 2.7 (0.0) | 33.3 (0.0) | 46.6 (43.7) | 57.1 (50.0) | 60.0 (75.0) | 0.727 (0.091) |
| Kylington | – (26:33) | – (0) | – (1) | – (2.3) | – (0.0) | – (40.9) | – (50.0) | – (83.3) | – (-0.055) |
The three most common defensive pairings were (in descending order):
- Hanifin & Tanev
- Giordano & Andersson
- Nesterov & Stone
Giordano and Andersson took a step forward, Hanifin and Tanev took a step back, and Michael Stone emerged from the taxi squad to be a replacement level third pairing defender. Like with the forward group, the problem here is the drop-off in performance.
It’s also a challenge that Valimaki played half as much this segment as he did in the prior seven. He’s young, good, and needs to play to improve and find consistency.
And finally, goalies (all situations):
| Player | TOI | SV% | ldSV% | mdSV% | hdSV% | Game score |
| Markstrom | 277:25 (351:00) | .884 (.887) | 1.000 (1.000) | .861 (.846) | .690 (.776) | -0.764 (-0.763) |
| Rittich | 136:03 (56:34) | .883 (.939) | 1.000 (.889) | .810 (.917) | .824 (1.000) | -0.733 (0.780) |
Markstrom started five of seven this segment, getting chased once. Rittich started twice, played once in relief, and ended the segment with Toronto. Markstrom stayed basically the same overall, while Rittich back-slid a bit.
Needless to say, a pair of sub-.890 goaltenders won’t cut it.
Recent articles from Ryan Pike
