[BACKCHECK!!!]

@Henry Fool

Colorado was good because Varlamov was amazing, and because their defence scored a prodigious (and completely uncharacteristic) amount of points.

Personally, I think Varlamov is one of the most talented goalies in the NHL, and so while he had his best year to date, I don't think that was particularly unsustainable. He hasn't been as good this year, but I don't think that was inevitable, and I think we'll see Vezina-contending seasons from him in the future.

However, the production from their defence was unsustainable, as IIRC it relied on career years from basically everyone, including those who had never been NHL producers before.

Regarding the Flames, if I were to pick a stat that showed the Flames actually were doing well despite poor Corsi/possession numbers, I'd want to see a strong Fenwick Close%. However, Calgary is 23rd in the NHL in Fenwick Close.

Realistically, all of the useful stats that i trust are predicting that Calgary should be a 20th-25th place team.

Sometimes teams buck the trend, sometimes their style of play means that (for example) their Corsi doesn't reflect their possession time, or their possession time doesn't reflect their ability to control play. Sometimes you can pick this out with other stats, sometimes not.

But pretty much the entire advanced stats picture says the Flames are winning more games than they deserve to win.

You can take what you want from that. I am a very big advanced stats proponent, and I honestly don't know what to make of the whole situation. By eyeball, the team looks good to me. The numbers suggest they are going to fall off hard.

If I had to lay money, I'd side with Myrtle, and bet they finish in the bottom 10. But I'm fine with just about any outcome.