The Calgary Flames have completed 42 games of their 2021-22 regular season schedule, the equivalent of six seven game segments. Their sixth segment saw them go 5-2-0 over seven games, capturing 10 of a possible 14 points.
Underlying numbers via Natural Stat Trick.
Previous segments:
So far, the Flames have three segments above .500, two segments right at .500, and one segment below .500.

Game by game

(Percentage stats in this table are 5v5 and via Natural Stat Trick.)
Date
Opponent
Result
CF%
SC%
HDC%
xGF%
PP
PK
Jan. 22
Oilers (@)
5-3 L
57.6
60.5
72.2
63.5
1-for-2
1-for-3
Jan. 24
Blues (vs)
7-1 W
76.3
79.6
81.8
82.2
2-for-5
2-for-2
Jan. 26
Blue Jackets (@)
6-0 W
66.1
72.9
84.2
79.4
0-for-3
1-for-1
Jan. 27
Blues (@)
5-1 L
57.3
59.5
71.4
61.4
0-for-3
3-for-4
Jan. 29
Canucks (vs)
1-0 OTW
64.2
55.6
42.9
57.4
0-for-4
3-for-3
Feb. 1
Stars (@)
4-3 W
64.8
59.6
50.0
55.3
0-for-2
3-for-3
Feb. 2
Coyotes (@)
4-2 W
63.3
64.7
58.1
65.0
0-for-2
1-for-1
This
(Last)
5-2-0
(3-4-0)
64.2
(49.9)
65.2
(52.9)
67.4
(52.9)
67.3
(51.6)
3-for-21
(5-for-21)
14-for-17
(16-for-20)
The Flames were better at five-on-five play across the board than they were in the prior segment. In fact, if you go game-by-game, you can make a case that the Flames had a chance to win every game based on their five-on-five – the only battle they outright lost was high-danger scoring chances against Vancouver.
Advertisement
Ad
Why didn’t they? Well, they lost the special teams battle against Edmonton and St. Louis and between that and some not-great puck luck in those games, they were ultimately destined to lose. But overall, they played quite well and it’s hard to critique this segment too harshly. They won five games and they probably deserved to win six if not for special teams challenges.
If you place the playoff cut line at 95 points, the Flames would need about 49 points (48.7) after 42 games to be on track. They have 52 points so far, a smidge over three points ahead of a playoff pace. (A few models are placing the playoff cut line lower than 95 points, so the Flames may or may not be at a playoff pace depending on whatever model you prefer to use.)
Advertisement
Ad

Team stats

Here’s how the Flames compare within the Pacific Division through 42 games (all rankings out of eight teams):
  • Their goals for per game is 3.19, up from 3.09. They’re 3rd in the division.
  • Their goals against per game is 2.48, down from 2.51. They’re 1st (lowest) in the division.
  • Their goal differential is +32, up from +22. They’re 1st in the division.
  • Their power play is at 21.1%, up from 24.6%. They’re 3rd in the division.
  • Their penalty kill is at 84.3%, down from 84.6%. They’re 1st in the division.
  • They’ve taken 9.0 penalty minutes per game, down from 9.6. They’re 2nd (highest) in the division.
  • Their 5v5 xGF/60 is 2.87, up from 2.69. They’re 1st in the division.
  • Their 5v5 xGF/60 is 2.30, down from 2.39. They’re 2nd (lowest) in the division.
  • Their 5v5 xGF is 55.6%, up from 52.9%. They’re 1st in the division.
  • Their 5v5 shooting percentage is 7.65%, up from 7.42%. They’re 4th in the division.
  • Their 5v5 save percentage is 92.60%, down from 92.79%. They’re 2nd in the division.
  • Their 5v5 PDO is 1.002, unchanged from 1.002. They’re 1st in the division.
The Flames are rated top three in basically everything within their division, with the exception of 5v5 shooting percentage (where they’re fourth out of eight teams). Compared to earlier this season, they were a bit better in offensive and defensive underlyings (5v5 xGF/60 and xGA/60) and results (goals for and against per game). They’re one of the best defensive teams in both shot suppression and goal prevention, and their offensive indicators lagging a bit suggests that they need to finish more – which supports the eye test.
They’re one of the best penalty kill teams in hockey, and their power play is respectable. Their goaltending is also quite good despite struggling a bit in the prior segment.
Advertisement
Ad
Overall, the Flames aren’t a perfect hockey club, but their underlyings match their results and they’re fully deserving of where they are in the standings.

Player stats

First, the forwards (all situations, ordered by ice time). Last segment’s figures are in brackets.
Game scores: Positive values indicate positive impact, negative values reflect negative impact.
Player
TOI
G
P
P/60
SH%
xGF%
OZF%
PDO
Game score
Lindholm
146:43
(140:07)
3
(1)
7
(3)
2.86
(1.28)
13.0
(7.1)
60.1
(62.9)
61.5
(53.1)
1.024
(1.006)
1.91
(0.63)
Gaudreau
137:15
(126:19)
3
(5)
11
(13)
4.81
(6.17)
9.4
(20.0)
66.1
(65.9)
72.2
(66.4)
1.073
(1.037)
2.72
(1.62)
Tkachuk
133:21
(118:01)
3
(5)
10
(12)
4.50
(6.10)
14.3
(17.9)
64.5
(68.1)
71.1
(67.7)
1.055
(1.039)
2.33
(1.80)
Backlund
118:27
(121:43)
2
(0)
3
(3)
1.52
(1.48)
6.5
(0.0)
62.9
(53.6)
48.2
(37.7)
0.963
(0.972)
1.46
(0.39)
Mangiapane
107:22
(106:00)
2
(1)
5
(2)
2.79
(1.13)
12.5
(6.7)
62.1
(56.0)
66.2
(58.5)
1.013
(0.928)
1.55
(0.12)
Coleman
104:40
(109:28)
3
(3)
6
(5)
3.44
(2.74)
14.3
(11.1)
63.4
(50.9)
55.2
(50.8)
0.999
(0.893)
1.59
(0.34)
Monahan
103:10
(100:19)
1
(2)
1
(5)
0.58
(2.99)
5.0
(15.4)
68.2
(58.5)
72.2
(65.9)
0.890
(1.052)
0.62
(0.30)
Lucic
96:37
(90:18)
1
(1)
3
(2)
1.86
(1.33)
7.1
(12.5)
68.7
(59.1)
68.1
(56.4)
0.961
(1.007)
0.67
(0.11)
Dube
89:58
(89:10)
0
(1)
0
(1)
0.00
(0.67)
0.0
(8.3)
66.5
(46.9)
54.6
(56.3)
0.890
(0.905)
0.23
(0.05)
Lewis
81:54
(86:58)
1
(1)
2
(1)
1.47
(0.69)
8.3
(14.3)
52.0
(45.5)
59.7
(32.7)
0.990
(0.923)
0.56
(-0.37)
Ritchie
62:55
(51:04)
0
(0)
0
(0)
0.00
(0.00)
0.0
(0.0)
66.9
(50.5)
56.8
(37.5)
0.840
(0.872)
0.10
(-0.36)
Ruzicka
60:30
(10:52)
1
(1)
3
(1)
2.98
(0.00)
11.1
(0.0)
62.0
(30.2)
68.2
(60.0)
1.014
(0.899)
0.81
(-1.30)
Richardson
7:19
(33:37)
0
(0)
0
(1)
0.00
(0.00)
0.0
(0.0)
72.3
(21.8)
60.0
(33.3)
1.000
(0.958)
0.26
(-0.35)
Pitlick

(47:58)

(0)

(0)

(0.00)

(0.0)

(54.2)

(53.9)

(0.894)

(-0.45)
The most common Flames forward lines were (in descending order):
  • Gaudreau – Lindholm – Tkachuk
  • Mangiapane – Backlund – Coleman
  • Dube – Monahan – Lucic
  • Lewis – Ruzicka – Ritchie
The only changes were in the bottom six: First, Adam Ruzicka supplanted Brad Richardson at fourth line centre. Second, Lucic and Ritchie swapped spots. Those moves gave the Flames three really solid lines, but also put three of the most snake-bit offensive players on one 5v5 line in Sean Monahan, Dillon Dube and Ritchie.
Offensively, Johnny Gaudreau and Matthew Tkachuk carried the mail here. In six segments this season, six players have scored 10+ points in a segment: four were Gaudreau, two were Tkachuk. That’s the 2021-22 season in a nutshell, friends.
Advertisement
Ad
Almost uniformly, everybody performed better in this segment (based on game score) than they did in the previous seven games. But the game score figures also scream what we’ve seen on the ice most of this season: this is a forward group that’s really being carried by its’ top two lines. When Ruzicka has the best average game score outside of the top six forwards, that’s an issue.
Now, the defence (all situations, ordered by ice time):
Player
TOI
G
P
P/60
SH%
xGF%
OZF%
PDO
Game score
Andersson
159:01
(149:27)
0
(1)
4
(2)
1.51
(0.80)
0.0
(6.8)
59.4
(57.0)
68.3
(61.0)
0.961
(0.974)
1.46
(-0.48)
Hanifin
142:49
(142:27)
1
(1)
5
(3)
2.10
(1.26)
6.7
(6.3)
63.8
(52.0)
56.8
(55.0)
0.971
(0.954)
1.79
(-0.58)
Tanev
136:22
(143:52)
2
(0)
5
(2)
2.20
(0.83)
18.2
(0.0)
62.3
(39.8)
50.4
(36.4)
1.055
(1.048)
2.65
(0.39)
Kylington
132:33
(139:30)
1
(1)
2
(4)
0.91
(1.72)
4.8
(4.8)
73.7
(58.5)
60.9
(52.1)
1.058
(1.055)
2.28
(0.81)
Gudbranson
129:19
(128:09)
1
(0)
2
(1)
0.93
(0.47)
7.1
(0.0)
56.2
(46.4)
51.8
(37.1)
0.972
(0.914)
1.27
(0.39)
Zadorov
119:31
(114:46)
1
(0)
3
(2)
1.51
(1.05)
8.3
(0.0)
63.4
(59.9)
64.7
(50.0)
0.970
(0.888)
1.31
(0.23)
The most common defensive pairings were (in descending order):
  • Hanifin & Andersson
  • Kylington & Tanev
  • Zadorov & Gudbranson
The defensive pairings have been set in stone for the past while.
As opposed to the forward group, while there is a drop-off between Oliver Kylington & Chris Tanev and everybody else, nobody’s performing poorly here. Nobody’s experiencing horrible puck luck like Monahan, Dube and Ritchie are in the forward group, and everybody scored a goal last segment. That’s fairly remarkable.
Advertisement
Ad
And finally, goalies (all situations):
Player
TOI
SV%
ldSV%
mdSV%
hdSV%
Avg. GSAX
Markström
399:22
(299:03)
.911
(.901)
.986
(.970)
.827
(.905)
.861
(.778)
-0.14
(-0.27)
Vladar
20:00
(120:00)
1.000
(.857)
1.000
(.968)
1.000
(.810)
1.000
(.688)
0.38
(-1.62)
Dan Vladar played a whole period and got a win, which is remarkable efficiency. Markstrom bounced back nicely from a fairly shaky prior segment and played all but a period. He isn’t quite back to his early-season dominance in net, but he’s absolutely rock-solid right now and giving his team a fighting chance.
But you have to think, based on his history, that his game has another gear above where he’s at right now.

THIS ARTICLE BROUGHT TO YOU BY DAILYFACEOFF

Looking to up your fantasy hockey game? DailyFaceoff has the tools you need for both daily and season-long fantasy leagues, including a lineup optimizer, daily projections, and a whole lot more. Sign up for the DailyFaceoff tools here.