Are the Calgary Flames destined to collapse?

[MissTeeks]

Or are they the most underrated team?

http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports...odie/73029398/

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by Cali Flames Fan

I thought the article was excellent and does so well in being articulate about what the stats actually mean, how to interpret the information, and not get too bogged down in endless line after line of numbers.

If all advanced stat articles were written like that one, the average fan would have a much better understanding of things.

I didn't disagree with a single thing he said.

I agree ... I thought it was the best analytics piece on the team I've ever read. Like Lambert a month ago, they dug deeper than Corsi to bring in a much more sustainable reason of discipline as to why the Flames had success.

some of the fancy stat crowd have hurt their cause by being belligerent to anyone that thinks the numbers are only part of the story for sure, but I think we have to equally careful of not hammering every analytics piece without actually reading it.

I had what seemed like a 90 minute argument on twitter yesterday about Hiller and the fact that many feel he's not the guy to keep regardless of better stats. I still think it's both ... what do the stats say? what do your eyes tell you?

[Erick Estrada]

Originally Posted by Bingo

I had what seemed like a 90 minute argument on twitter yesterday about Hiller and the fact that many feel he's not the guy to keep regardless of better stats. I still think it's both ... what do the stats say? what do your eyes tell you?

Well to be honest your argument is flawed when it comes to goaltenders which is by far the easiest position to grade based on stats alone because they have a single job and that's to stop pucks and there are no style points. If you have two goaltenders behind the exact same team and one is putting up better GAA and SV% as it matters not which one makes the flashier saves as the stats tell the tale on which one is better at stopping pucks.

[Jason14h]

I'm so bored of this. CORSI is probably the worst thing to happen to hockey since modern goalie equipment

Like most sports analytical statistics it needs to grow. That doesn't mean it is useless. It means it must be used as a tool to examine trends and team performance, but not 100% predict future results.

This article was fantastic at examining other aspects.

The biggest overlooked aspect for the Flames last year was PP vs PK time.

[AcGold]

So Gaudreau's not boring Sean Monahan. Whoever it is has reached legendary troll status.

[Street Pharmacist]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

Well to be honest your argument is flawed when it comes to goaltenders which is by far the easiest position to grade based on stats alone because they have a single job and that's to stop pucks and there are no style points. If you have two goaltenders behind the exact same team and one is putting up better GAA and SV% as it matters not which one makes the flashier saves as the stats tell the tale on which one is better at stopping pucks.

Yes, and I agree with you. The issue is that one years' stats aren't always reproducible, and the other guy was arguing you could simply look at stats and ignore all else

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

Well to be honest your argument is flawed when it comes to goaltenders which is by far the easiest position to grade based on stats alone because they have a single job and that's to stop pucks and there are no style points. If you have two goaltenders behind the exact same team and one is putting up better GAA and SV% as it matters not which one makes the flashier saves as the stats tell the tale on which one is better at stopping pucks.

It is still far from perfect.

In his final season with the San Jose Sharks, Miikka Kiprusoff was statistically worse than both his teammates, Vesa Toskala and Evgeni Nabokov, and then emerged as the best goaltender on the planet. Henrik Lundquist had the worst save percentage and GAA in NYR last season.

So then, I beg to differ: No, the stats do not invariably "tell the tale on which one is better at stopping pucks," and this is why there is a not insignificant number of Flames fans who would prefer Karri Ramo to Jonas Hiller.

[driveway]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

The goaltending wasn't outstanding last season but it was average or even marginally better than average. Any regression here could be disastrous as it's probably a given they aren't going to be as successful at coming back late in games as last year as things like this always seem to even out so it's important that they are leading more games going into the 3rd period and keeping the GAA as low as possible.

It's pretty easy to argue our goaltending was below, to significantly below, average.

We ranked 18th in 5v5 team save% (.918), 7th in 5v4 (.948), and all the way down in 26th for 4v5 (.851).

[heep223]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

Well to be honest your argument is flawed when it comes to goaltenders which is by far the easiest position to grade based on stats alone because they have a single job and that's to stop pucks and there are no style points. If you have two goaltenders behind the exact same team and one is putting up better GAA and SV% as it matters not which one makes the flashier saves as the stats tell the tale on which one is better at stopping pucks.

Tbh your argument is flawed because a goalie could have middling stats but a knack for making timely/clutch saves. You can't measure that with stats alone.

[stamps]

the no good national sports media in this country sure like to kick the Flames..... IMO Sportsnet and TSN have a bias against this city and it seems like they are almost cheering and hoping for Flame failure .... it will be all the more sweet when the Flames show them up this year ...

[BigRed]

No.

"A closer look, however, reveals a club that should be capable of surprising anyone who’s not paying attention."


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Erick Estrada]

Originally Posted by heep223

Tbh your argument is flawed because a goalie could have middling stats but a knack for making timely/clutch saves. You can't measure that with stats alone.

Timely saves is an excuse PBP announcers like to use when a goaltender having a bad game makes a save at the end of the game he was expected to make in the first period.

[Erick Estrada]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

It is still far from perfect.

In his final season with the San Jose Sharks, Miikka Kiprusoff was statistically worse than both his teammates, Vesa Toskala and Evgeni Nabokov, and then emerged as the best goaltender on the planet. Henrik Lundquist had the worst save percentage and GAA in NYR last season.

So then, I beg to differ: No, the stats do not invariably "tell the tale on which one is better at stopping pucks," and this is why there is a not insignificant number of Flames fans who would prefer Karri Ramo to Jonas Hiller.

Well Kipper went to a different team and didn't play enough games with the Sharks to conclude anything so apples to oranges and Lundquist in fact had an off year by his standards last year (in the regular season) and Talbot's stats are better because he actually played better than Lundquist did in the regular season. Are you trying to argue that there's an eye test goaltenders also have to pass in addition to stats?

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

Well Kipper went to a different team and didn't play enough games with the Sharks to conclude anything so apples to oranges
and Lundquist in fact had an off year by his standards last year (in the regular season) and Talbot's stats are better because he actually played better than Lundquist did in the regular season.

It is NOT "apples to oranges." You are missing the point, which is this: based on your totally arbitrary metric for evaluating goaltenders, SJ should not have regretted trading Kiprusoff, where I think it is clear that some in the organization did for a long time. Likewise with NY: The Rangers—by your metric—would have been best served to keep Talbot and trade Lundquist. It's the same with Montreal: when the Canadiens chose to build around Price and traded Halak after a sensational playoff performance, it was thought by some to be a mistake. In retrospect, it clearly was not.

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

Are you trying to argue that there's an eye test goaltenders also have to pass in addition to stats?

Not exactly. What I am saying is that there are a whole range of factors which need to be considered when evaluating or comparing goaltenders. I would actually counter argue that goaltending is not an easy position to evaluate, and the wild fluctuation in year-to-year performances that is rather common among professional goalies would clearly show as much. It is never as simple as merely pinning your hopes on the player with the highest save percentage.

[FlamesAddiction]

I don't know what to expect this season to be honest. I just know that a couple of seasons ago, I was happy knowing (or believing) that in the 2015-2016 season, we would be in the middle of a full rebuild. I was mentally prepared to suck for a few years. The fact that things are interesting now to say the least, is still nothing but gravy to me.

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

Well to be honest your argument is flawed when it comes to goaltenders which is by far the easiest position to grade based on stats alone because they have a single job and that's to stop pucks and there are no style points. If you have two goaltenders behind the exact same team and one is putting up better GAA and SV% as it matters not which one makes the flashier saves as the stats tell the tale on which one is better at stopping pucks.

Yes and no

and believe me I'm not discounting stats at all.

But a guy could have a .915 save percentage by having 10 games all within a range of .905 to .925

Or a guy could have a save percentage of .915 with four shut outs, and 5 games where he gave up 5 or more.

One is consistent but average.
One is erratic but able to steal games.

Stats say they are the same but you may have a lean based on whether you want the steady guy, or want to work with the erratic guy.

[Street Pharmacist]

Five thirty right blog wrote about goalies last year. Basically, all but the elite goalies have consistent numbers. If that's your criteria, it's difficult

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by Street Pharmacist

Five thirty right blog wrote about goalies last year. Basically, all but the elite goalies have consistent numbers. If that's your criteria, it's difficult

Inconsistent?

Yes. I agree.

[Cali Panthers Fan]

What everyone is saying about goaltending numbers is very true: Context is important.

Look at a style of play and that will tell you whether the goaltending numbers are good or bad. For example, watch Talbot's Save Percentage plummet this year when he goes from the top defense in the league in NY to the worst defense in the league in Edmonton. Will he have changed anything drastically in his game? Probably not. Will his level of play decline as the season goes on? History tells us yes as we look at what happened to Scrivens. He was lights out making 40 high quality saves a night when he first arrived. A year later, he looks mediocre at best because his confidence is shot. He can no longer put together those 40 save highlight reel nights because he's worn out, both physically and mentally. Then all you have to do is look at Devan Dubnyk's career to know what having a poor defense will do to a goaltender. I don't need to bother illustrating the details at this point, but a good defense, or defensive system, will bolster a goaltender long enough for him to gain confidence and figure out how to be a winner. It can also prop up mediocre goaltenders as it has in L.A. and Boston in terms of a backups numbers. I mean, Chad Johnson had a season of .925 Sv % in 27 games. He's nowhere near that good.

There's a significant mental portion to goaltending that is hard to teach. Confidence is a major factor above and beyond a skill set. How do you evaluate that? It's difficult, but posture, frantic movement in the crease, visible reactions to goals all can help paint a picture of what a goalie is thinking. The more calm and cool a goaltender is under pressure, the more reliable they tend to be. The ability to raise your game in pressure packed situations, rather than crumbling under the pressure, is why some goalies have infinitely higher value than others. For example: Reto Berra was awful in 3rd periods, letting in weak goals when the other teams were pushing for a tying or leading goal. Hiller might let in a weak 1st period goal, but often gets stronger as the game goes on. The timing of letting in a weak goal matters a lot to a team's psyche, as well as the goaltenders. I would argue that since the Flames let in lots of shots from the outside, but few high quality chances, that a .915 Sv % is not very good. A .920 or higher percentage is probably what you should expect from the Flames' system of defense. However, if you're on a team that doesn't give up anywhere near 30 shots per game, but when they do allow shots they are in the slot for a high percentage scoring chance, then on that team having a .905 Sv % is probably pretty good.

Then there are goaltenders who rarely let in a weak goal. They are far and few between, but those would be the elites of the league like Price, Rinne, Lundqvist etc.

tl/dr: Context is important in goaltending.

[Resolute 14]

Originally Posted by Street Pharmacist

I don't think anyone read the article. Willis basically says if they do "regress" it won't be by much. People see stats and get blinded.

The question the title poses is "Are the Flames destined to collapse?"

His answer was "I wouldn't bank on a big regression"


Is that wrong?

When Sportsnet uses the headline to be so deliberately provocative, not many people are going to waste the time to read the article. In this case, I saw the headline, saw who wrote the article, and immediately lost any desire to read the article itself. If that actually represents a disservice to Willis in this specific case, then he can look at his own past history and the editorial decisions of his bosses for why.