Not to worry; this won't last says Myrtle

[Loyal and True]

I think we'd all be even happier about the Flames if they were consistently out-shooting opponents, or at least being on par with opponents in either shots or shot attempts.

As of now they are not. But fortunately they are scoring at a high rate. Right now there are many unanswered questions before I would use the current stats to predict the rest of the season:

They are missing veteran centres Backlund and Stajan who would be winning more faceoffs than Granlund/Byron/etc and playing stronger in neutral zone/defensive zone. This would help us improve our shot differential for sure. When will they get back?

Our schedule, until recently, was dominated by road games and you expect to be outshot a bit on the road where the opponent can take advantage of favorable matchups. When we play more home games, can we out-shoot our opponents by some margin?

Most of our opponents have been Eastern Conference and you would expect those opponents to be weaker than most teams in the West. Can we hang in with the big boys in the West?

[calumniate]

I'm sorry but these 'advanced stats' so far are truly for the birds. Not sure about disclosure here but have had a good evening..

If you're really talking advanced stats these days in the real world, you're looking at big data types such as google, and the tried and true insurance market. Insurance knows stats and it's their business to take on risk. They hire actuarial mathematicians to help them out, which would probably make Tinordi 'I attended and paid attention to university' look like a plug. (who's to say, maybe he's genius!)

I'm no complete math guru but have some knowledge of risk analysis, and that's the area where I see advanced stats having the most benefit at least in the short term. The idea is to basically to trust your decision makers and managers to make decisions, but inform them of their current position and possible outcomes.

To make things easy, our injuries but subsequent depth at the forward position got us out of a bind. But when gio came within a hair of having an eye injury it caused concern. Our risk in the D position is much higher than at forward right now. What do you do? Get those visors and Kevlar on those D asap! Upgrade the D in the farm to mitigate risk.

Some cap teams run very 'risky', the flames did at one point and that's fine. Just like LA right now, they lose a D due to unforeseen circumstances AND counts against the cap? What honestly were the chances? But it's these what if scenarios that can be factored in. That said it's a cruel, generalizing realm. Big data and insurance type coefficients are only getting better. PDo, goal diff and corsi have always been readily available. But I think it's the underlying risk of simply playing the game that's been overlooked.

Kudos to Bob Hartley for stressing speed, hunger and visors lol. Speed maybe not but the farm is hungry and ready, make sure your stars are protected as best as possible, then just go for it and play the game.

It's possibly why they've stressed character recently as well. Hedge against flight risk, doing dumb stuff, causing distractions etc

[calumniate]

Also, at the end of the day the only thing I like about PDO is that it combines offence and defence. If you have a weak link it can be addressed efficiently when looking at overall averages.

[Loyal and True]

Here's a few meaningless stats from stats.hockeyanalysis.com

League-wide last year (1,230 games)

There were 105,739 shot attempts 5-on-5, but 25.6% of those were blocked.
78,665 were not blocked, but 28.15% of unblocked shots missed the net (20.95% of shot attempts)
56,517 of those unblocked shots were shots on goal, but 92.28% of shots on goal were saved the goalkeeper (49.32% of shot attempts)

4,362 of those shots on goal were goals. 7.72% shooting percentage 5-on-5. (4.13% of shot attempts were goals)

Flames last year:
Blocked 30.64% of shot attempts against (way above average).
29.26% of the unblocked shots missed the net (slightly above average)
but goalies only saved 90.89% of the shots on goal (way below average). Poor goaltending cost us almost 30 goals against 5-on-5 last year. (our goal differential was -32 last year overall)

Offensively our shots were blocked/missed/saved at approximately the same rate as league average.

CF% was 46.3% 5-on-5 because presumably not a strong possession team
FF% was 47.7% 5-on-5 because we blocked so many shots
GF% was 44.2% 5-on-5 because of poor save %

Flames this year (19 games)

Defensively, 32.12% of shot attempts are blocked (way high again)
29.72% of unblocked shots miss the net (slightly above average)
but 92.62% of shots are being saved (sustainable) and we are on pace to reduce our 5-on-5 goals against by 30 goals this year. We are on pace to give up an additional 41 shots this year 5-on-5.

Offensively our shots are blocked/miss at about league average, but goalies are only stopping 89.84% of our shots on goal 5-on-5 (unsustainable). We are on pace to score 32 more goals this year 5-on-5. We are on pace to take 73 less shots this year 5-on-5.

CF% 44.0% 5-on-5 because presumably not a strong possession team
FF% 45.9% 5-on-5 because we blocked so many shots
GF% 54.2% 5-on-5 because better goaltending and unsustainable shooting percentage

[Cleveland Steam Whistle]

Seems to me looking at it in more detail, as many have pointed out top performing teams should have high PDO's that's what would make them good. Given the Flames performance to date, it makes sense that there PDO is high. As for a future predictor I have the following thoughts:

1. The Flames Save % part of this equation does not seem to be a risk of overachieveing. We are firmly in the middle of the standings for shots allowed and goals against, suggesting we are not benefiting un-fairly from goaltending standing on it's head. Goals against are right on par with shots allowed, no worse or better than it should be. This moving forward should be sustainable.

2. Where there appears to be at risk with this statistic type is our shooting %. Amoung the most goals for despite the being amoung the least shots taken. A risk that our shooting % comes down to reality, so will the goals for and therefore the wins.

So then, the key question one who watches the team need to ask them self, why is the Flames shooting % so high. Do we have a bunch of players on a hot streak just snipping goals left right and center? Are we just getting more of our share of errors handed our way that can't be sustained?

I guess this is the subjective part and maybe I have my homer glasses on, but from what I've seen so far I don't see the risk. This team has earned it's win, we are not getting lucky with sniper shots that can't continue and we are not being outplayed by our oppenents regularily. My take on the high shooting percentage is actually 2 things:

1. The team is actually not taking enough shots when they are pressing in the offensive zone. I haven't left a game yet not saying I didn't think the team over pass. This would reduce the number of shots, but would not be an indicator of being outplayed.

2. I do think the Flames pressure game does cause the opposition to give up more ducks and create gimmie errors.

Of course I wonder if the Flames good play is sustainable, and it might not be. But this is not a Leafs situation alla last year where if you watch the games you aren't sure how they are pulling off the wins because they don't deserve them. It is a situation whether you feel a team that is playing well can keep playing well, but that's something different.

[Street Pharmacist]

Originally Posted by RyZ

Are the numbers improving as the season has progressed? Are games 12-18 yielding similar numbers as games 1-6 or is the team getting better as times has gone on?

What were the teams numbers last season in comparison?

This season:

Games 1-6:

PDO 101.56 corsi% 41.95 corsi +/- -109

Games 7-12:

PDO 103.12 corsi% 46.77 corsi +/- -42

Games 13-18:

PDO 103.22 corsi% 47.34 corsi +/- -42


Total this year after 19 games:

PDO 102.74 corsi% 45.46 corsi +/- - 191

Last year through 19 games:

PDO 97.35 corsi% 97.35 corsi +/- -107


So play is improving. Huge cut down on shot attempts after 1st game stretch (most of that huge discrepancy was the Chicago game). Good increase in shots for from the second to the third section.

Overall, we're getting outshot less as the games go on. That's a good sign, though we're still getting outshot on average by 7 shot attempts per game.

Compared to last year at 19 games, better goaltending and shooting percentage now, though getting outshot quite a bit more

[TheDebaser]

It should be repeated often that Corsi is a possession stat, not a scoring stat. It's primary purpose is to show which team is carrying play, not which team is most likely to score.

[Aarongavey]

So if I understand PDO correctly if a team saves a higher percentage of shots and scores on a higher percentage of shots they have a higher PDO? And it is surprising that the combination of these two things can indicate that a team is having success or lacking success?

I am assuming 100 percent of shots either get saved or go in the net. That means the average PDO would be 100 with a number of teams (on average 15) being above 100. There are usually 2-4 teams a year that are above 102, no reason the Flames cannot be one of those teams this year.

For all the talk about the number of Flames above their career numbers in 5 on 5 shooting percentage, there are 10 Flames that are substantially below their career shooting average.

[T@T]

Originally Posted by TheDebaser

It should be repeated often that Corsi is a possession stat, not a scoring stat. It's primary purpose is to show which team is carrying play, not which team is most likely to score.

If you don't cycle the puck in the corners for 20 seconds at a time your Corsi sucks.

[rage2]

Originally Posted by Aarongavey

So if I understand PDO correctly if a team saves a higher percentage of shots and scores on a higher percentage of shots they have a higher PDO?

And when a team gets a shutout, that game's PDO really messes with the average. In our case, our Oct 23rd game against Carolina bumped our average up quite a bit.

[EldrickOnIce]

Graphic representation of what fancy stats show for Canadian teams, to Nov 12

(from our friend Travis Yost)

Simply shows why many are predicting a fall.

[BACKCHECK!!!]

And if you take Corsi numbers at face value, that graph tells you Edmonton started the season strong, flagged a little a few games into the season, but have rallied and come back to being an above-average team.

Does that jive with anything in the space time continuum which we are currently occupying?

[Street Pharmacist]

Originally Posted by Aarongavey

So if I understand PDO correctly if a team saves a higher percentage of shots and scores on a higher percentage of shots they have a higher PDO? And it is surprising that the combination of these two things can indicate that a team is having success or lacking success?

I am assuming 100 percent of shots either get saved or go in the net. That means the average PDO would be 100 with a number of teams (on average 15) being above 100. There are usually 2-4 teams a year that are above 102, no reason the Flames cannot be one of those teams this year.

You're right and wrong here. Yes a successful team will likely have a good PDO. After all, individually, sitting percentage and save percentage are measured of skill. However, if you use team shooting percentage, the variation between skillful team and poor team isn't much. Calgary is in uncharted territory here (outside of one lone exception: Toronto in a 48 game season). There's no reason to believe Calgary's shooters ate that Mich more talented than every other teams' in the last ten years (excluding one team in a shortened season).

Also, with the exception of last year, there are never ANY trans above 102 for PDO by seasons end. Without regression, this team would have the highest save%+shooting% in the last ten years except for Boston last year.

For all the talk about the number of Flames above their career numbers in 5 on 5 shooting percentage, there are 10 Flames that are substantially below their career shooting average.

Maybe, but we aren't talking about certain individuals. The average is waaaaay too high, so some of the current scorers are bound to have giant dropoffs.

Again, the only way the wins keep coming, is a) we keep on shooting the lights out better than treams with Crosby and Malkin or Perry and Getzlaf, or b) we start out shooting teams at even strength. That's something I think we've only done 3 times this year

[formulate]

Originally Posted by RyZ

Are the numbers improving as the season has progressed? Are games 12-18 yielding similar numbers as games 1-6 or is the team getting better as times has gone on?

Chart shows Corsi% at 5 on 5, score close (within 2 goals) situations. 5 game rolling average means each data point captures the 5 games leading up to the date on the x axis. Started out quite poorly, fairly steady around a break-even team since the Chicago game.

Spoiler!

Should be noted that using score close situations eliminates a pretty good chunk of playing time (up or down more than 2 goals). Oddly, the Flames are actually worse possession-wise when down 2 or more, so this chart makes their possession rates look slightly better than if war-on-ice used a score-adjusted metric.

This team is (currently) NOT the Leafs 2012-2014.

[EldrickOnIce]

^ Exactly
And there is nothing 'advanced' about that.
It simply makes good, logical sense.

[Street Pharmacist]

Another interesting stat:

Montreal is second in the league for blocked shots with 246. Calgary is first with 301. Wow

[Street Pharmacist]

Originally Posted by formulate

Chart shows Corsi% at 5 on 5, score close (within 2 goals) situations. 5 game rolling average means each data point captures the 5 games leading up to the date on the x axis. Started out quite poorly, fairly steady around a break-even team since the Chicago game.

Spoiler!

Should be noted that using score close situations eliminates a pretty good chunk of playing time (up or down more than 2 goals). Oddly, the Flames are actually worse possession-wise when down 2 or more, so this chart makes their possession rates look slightly better than if war-on-ice used a score-adjusted metric.

This team is (currently) NOT the Leafs 2012-2014.

Interesting! Where can you get that data?

[Fighting Banana Slug]

Thanks to Formulate for providing the Corsi close chart. I do think that this provides some corroboration to the eye-test that the Flames were in fact dependent on some puck luck and outstanding goaltending early, but have held their own since those first few weeks.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by Cleveland Steam Whistle

Seems to me looking at it in more detail, as many have pointed out top performing teams should have high PDO's that's what would make them good. Given the Flames performance to date, it makes sense that there PDO is high. As for a future predictor I have the following thoughts:

1. The Flames Save % part of this equation does not seem to be a risk of overachieveing. We are firmly in the middle of the standings for shots allowed and goals against, suggesting we are not benefiting un-fairly from goaltending standing on it's head. Goals against are right on par with shots allowed, no worse or better than it should be. This moving forward should be sustainable.

2. Where there appears to be at risk with this statistic type is our shooting %. Amoung the most goals for despite the being amoung the least shots taken. A risk that our shooting % comes down to reality, so will the goals for and therefore the wins.

So then, the key question one who watches the team need to ask them self, why is the Flames shooting % so high. Do we have a bunch of players on a hot streak just snipping goals left right and center? Are we just getting more of our share of errors handed our way that can't be sustained?

I guess this is the subjective part and maybe I have my homer glasses on, but from what I've seen so far I don't see the risk. This team has earned it's win, we are not getting lucky with sniper shots that can't continue and we are not being outplayed by our oppenents regularily. My take on the high shooting percentage is actually 2 things:

1. The team is actually not taking enough shots when they are pressing in the offensive zone. I haven't left a game yet not saying I didn't think the team over pass. This would reduce the number of shots, but would not be an indicator of being outplayed.

2. I do think the Flames pressure game does cause the opposition to give up more ducks and create gimmie errors.

Of course I wonder if the Flames good play is sustainable, and it might not be. But this is not a Leafs situation alla last year where if you watch the games you aren't sure how they are pulling off the wins because they don't deserve them. It is a situation whether you feel a team that is playing well can keep playing well, but that's something different.

Came to post something similar.

As mentioned, save percentage is not an issue and the Flames goaltending has been average.

Their shooting percentage is very high and that can't last, but I would make a couple points on it:

1) They are not a team that fires a lot of shots, they favour the cross-crease passes and pretty plays.Like CSW said, I don’t think a game goes by where I don’t yell that they should shoot more. Their style results in both fewer shots and a higher shooting percentage.

2) They have been generating a lot of breakaways and odd man rushes (high percentage scoring plays) because of a) turnovers and speed, and b) stretch passes.I would expect teams to adjust and reduce the success of stretch passes.We’ll have to see about odd man rushes.

On the other side of the ledger is an issue that I am amazed hasn’t been discussed more.Possession numbers include blocked shots.I understand why.In and of itself, a blocked shot is essentially the same as a missed shot – both represent and offensive attempt.

The problem however, is that the game has changed.Blocked shots have become a defensive strategy for some teams – and the Flames are the flag-bearers of this.Hits used to be a decent indicator of team defense because one of the primary means of attempting to thwart offensive possession was to hit.That has changed and now hitting is not as useful a stat for team defense.

Similarly, blocked shots have morphed from being an indication of offense (and thus why they are included in Corsi), to being an indication of defense.

What I mean by that is that it used to be that a blocked shot represented a shot attempt.Now, more often than not, a blocked shot represents a good defensive play – especially for teams (like the Flames) that employ it as a significant part of their team defense.And here’s the rub: not only is it a defensive play, but it typically results in continued possession (and thus more) shot attempts.However, those shot attempts are low percentage shots.

Why are the Flames winning despite being outshot?It could be luck and an unsustainably high shooting percentage (which is probably part of it), but it is also due to defensive style, which promotes collapsing to the middle and allowing a high number of blocked shots, perimeter shots, and shots in traffic.

[_Q_]

Originally Posted by Street Pharmacist

Again, the only way the wins keep coming, is a) we keep on shooting the lights out better than treams with Crosby and Malkin or Perry and Getzlaf, or b) we start out shooting teams at even strength. That's something I think we've only done 3 times this year

But see the thing is, Calgary is built differently than those teams. I think what happens most of the time, is people attribute individual stats to the entire team which doesn't paint an accurate picture.

Take Pittsburgh for example. You have Malkin, Crosby and possibly Letang that are highly skilled offensively. You would expect them to have higher shooting percentages than the likes of Hudler, Monahan or Glencross. Then you have the next level guys like Sutter and Kunitz who are probably on the same level as most of our forwards and then you have a whole bunch of players that would have a tough time cracking the Flames fourth line. What I'm saying is that the Flames skill is more evenly spread out, while you can argue that Pittsburgh's high shooting percentage is being propped up by a handful of guys. We also forget that Giordano and Brodie have emerged as elite or at least star defencemen that can produce the type of offence that most teams can't match.

So really, there's nothing "unsustainable" when it comes to our high shooting percentage.