[Game Takes] Flames 6 Yotes 3

[Bingo]

https://www.calgarypuck.com/2023/02/...mes-6-yotes-3/

- Flames down 3-1 in the second despite being up 30-7 in shots
- Score five unanswered to win the game
- Rooks shine with goal and assist for both Pelletier and Duehr
- Lindholm with 500 points
- Toffoli with goal 24

[looooob]

Zebulon with 500
Two second period points for Elias Lindholm as well, giving him 500 in his NHL career.
The 5th overall pick is 3rd in his draft class trailing only MacKinnon and Barkov, and just ahead of Sean Monahan.
That’s 312 points in 345 games with the Flames (.904 points per game) compared to 188 points in 374 games with Carolina.
Has to be one of the top three trades in Flames history with Iginla? Kiprusoff? Mullen?

well its pretty incredible isn't it? unless I've missed something the only 3 players acquired by trade with more points in Calgary Flames silks are Iginla, Lanny (you meant to mention him I'm sure) and Mullen


just in behind are 2 others worth mentioning Gilmour (first trade) and yup Conroy


non forwards I guess Regehr, and to a lesser extent Sarge come to mind

[Jordan!]

That was a super fun tank game right there. Mullett was fun as hell too. At least from the bleacher side I was on.

Nice to chat with a ton of Calgary folks again

[Bend it like Bourgeois]

The ice time was almost evens for everyone, esp the forwards.

I guess if you’re steamrolling the opponent that’s expected, but happy to see 4 lines and 3 pairs going.

[Strange Brew]

Originally Posted by Bend it like Bourgeois

The ice time was almost evens for everyone, esp the forwards.

I guess if you’re steamrolling the opponent that’s expected, but happy to see 4 lines and 3 pairs going.

People go nuts over that when they lose and every fourth line shift is questioned. Apparently you can only play the fourth line between the 8 and 12 minute mark of the first and second periods. And never within a minute or two following a goal.

Tonight that line was great. Everyone was for the most part.

[Strange Brew]

"Has to be one of the top three trades in Flames history with Iginla? Kiprusoff? Mullen?"

Acquiring Lanny deserves to be mentioned there.

And trading for Gilmour (+Hunter) won this team a Stanley Cup.

[Dion]

Good to see Duehr and Pelts in the scoring. They are a part of the future of this team.

[Draug]

Maybe, just maybe, we should play more young players players more often!

[GullFoss]

Expected goals against: 2
Actual goals against: 3

Yet another game with below average goaltending.

[DeluxeMoustache]

Originally Posted by GullFoss

Expected goals against: 2
Actual goals against: 3

Yet another game with below average goaltending.

*sigh*

#### sakes, people don’t get statistics

Each of those mainly nonsense 18 first period shots, easily handled, contributed a portion of a goal to the “expected goals” count

The shots that were likely to go in went in on both sides tonight

Tell me this. Did you expect Tanev’s own goal?

[DeluxeMoustache]

I struggle with the Fancy Stats takeaways, Bingo

Anybody who watched the game saw the 18-3 shot advantage after 1 and 1-0 score to be exactly in line with the score.

Only Lucic’s goal was expected (by reasonable viewers, not models)

The puck changed direction multiple times with Duehr’s feed to Looch, but otherwise, 17 easy shots. (Not well placed. Mostly in to the pads. You’ve heard this before)

Vladar’s 4th shot, well in to the second, was a PP one timer, cross ice, and the shot well placed (you have heard this many times before). Statistically worth a fraction of an expected goal, but that shot as placed is going in

Awesome that they got the win.

[Displaced Flames fan]

Originally Posted by GullFoss

Expected goals against: 2
Actual goals against: 3

Yet another game with below average goaltending.

Tanev put one in his own net.....so......your math is below average.

[Freddy]

Originally Posted by GullFoss

Expected goals against: 2
Actual goals against: 3

Yet another game with below average goaltending.

…my guess is you didn’t watch the game and the stats support your cynical bias.

[Strange Brew]

If you dominate possession the way the Flames did in the first, it's fair to expect more than a 1-0 lead IMO. The Flames aren't great at translating possession into high quality scoring chances that end up in the back of the net and that is part of the story.

[Enoch Root]

Tanev put one in his own net. That is not on Vladar, and shouldn't be considered in his save percentage analysis.

Also, Toffolli hits the cross bar, then the puck goes the other way for a 2 on 1. If Toffoli's shot goes in, it would have been 7-2 instead of 6-3.

Sometimes it IS just puck luck.

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by DeluxeMoustache

*sigh*

#### sakes, people don’t get statistics

Each of those mainly nonsense 18 first period shots, easily handled, contributed a portion of a goal to the “expected goals” count

The shots that were likely to go in went in on both sides tonight

Tell me this. Did you expect Tanev’s own goal?

Do you just copy and paste when Vladar starts?

Stats are the stats in a single game. The goalie gave up more than the expected chances suggest he should have.

It's a decent indicator, and I think he'd like the third one back, I wouldn't fault him on the own goal or the powerplay snipe for sure.

People noticing a game in / game out trend all season are full marks for doing so.

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by DeluxeMoustache

I struggle with the Fancy Stats takeaways, Bingo

Anybody who watched the game saw the 18-3 shot advantage after 1 and 1-0 score to be exactly in line with the score.

Only Lucic’s goal was expected (by reasonable viewers, not models)

The puck changed direction multiple times with Duehr’s feed to Looch, but otherwise, 17 easy shots. (Not well placed. Mostly in to the pads. You’ve heard this before)

Vladar’s 4th shot, well in to the second, was a PP one timer, cross ice, and the shot well placed (you have heard this many times before). Statistically worth a fraction of an expected goal, but that shot as placed is going in

Awesome that they got the win.

Man I hate crap like the bolded.

"I have an opinion and if you disagree you didn't watch the game!"

The Flames had a 14-5 edge in home plate shots in the first period, that could and should easily mean more than one goal.

Five high danger shots in the first puts them well over the pace of the average NHL game.

[DeluxeMoustache]

Originally Posted by Bingo

Do you just copy and paste when Vladar starts?

Stats are the stats in a single game. The goalie gave up more than the expected chances suggest he should have.

It's a decent indicator, and I think he'd like the third one back, I wouldn't fault him on the own goal or the powerplay snipe for sure.

People noticing a game in / game out trend all season are full marks for doing so.

Thanks. Never thought I’d get full marks from you lol

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

Tanev put one in his own net. That is not on Vladar, and shouldn't be considered in his save percentage analysis.

Also, Toffolli hits the cross bar, then the puck goes the other way for a 2 on 1. If Toffoli's shot goes in, it would have been 7-2 instead of 6-3.

Sometimes it IS just puck luck.

Honestly I think a lot of it is puck luck.

This year to the bad, last year to the overwhelming good.

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by DeluxeMoustache

Thanks. Never thought I’d get full marks from you lol

I was referring to the guy that was annoyed that it was another game with the goalie giving up more than expected.