[PGT] Flames 1 @ Golden Knights 6

[BigThief]

Originally Posted by dissentowner

I'm sorry you don't watch games and live off your stats. .

Log off.

[Bonded]

Originally Posted by BigThief

Log off.

Can’t help himself I guess.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by ComixZone

No it's not.

Landeskog and MacKinnon were both on the team for these three seasons:

14/15: 39-31-0-12 --> missed playoffs
15/16: 39-39-0-4 --> missed playoffs
16/17: 22-56-0-4 --> missed playoffs (Makar)

Landeskog was also around for:

11/12: 41-35-0-6 --> missed playoffs
12/13: 16-25-0-7 --> missed playoffs (MacKinnon)

If losing begets losing, then how was Landeskog able to Captain a Championship? How did MacKinnon overcome three straight years of missed playoffs, including an absolutely pathetic season?

Losing does not bread more losing. Winning, in almost every situation, actually requires losing - and then a significant amount of excellent management.

In all but one of those “losing seasons” they weren’t a losing team as in “we expect to lose every game”. They won as many as they lost, if not more, and just missed the POs (barely). They were the dreaded mushy middle.

So they were trying to win, which is the point about getting used to losing. Creating a culture of losing is hard to get past.

[Mathgod]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

Whatever this lol-worthy nonsense was:



But that aside, I don’t think the stats do a good job of telling the whole story either, not any better or worse than actual production (especially not if you’re going to go through the effort of “running the numbers” in a few scenarios but don’t even set parameters like TOI or F vs D).

For the last 41 games out of players who played more than 9 games he was:
- 1st in GF% despite being 10th in xGF%
- 5th in GF/60
- 3rd in GA/60

There is a difference between what is expected to happen and what did happen. You might look at a player with a discrepancy one way or another and see something unsustainable, but that does not mean the production does or doesn’t exist any more than it would have otherwise.

If a player scores a lucky hat trick at the end of the day it’s a hat trick all the same as a skill one.

I set parameters just fine thanks. I did make a solid case that he had a great 8 games but was bad prior to it. Those 8 games padded his points, GF, and GA stats. He had a bad season before those 8 games.

Looking at your numbers, his high GF% was powered by his low GA/60. And you know who had an even better GF% during that time? Weegar and Pachal (with Miro not far behind). If those defensemen were on the ice for much of the same time Sharky was on the ice, it would make sense that Sharky would end up with a great GF%, wouldn't it? I'm not saying Sharky didn't contribute toward it, I'm just saying he had a lot of help from his defensemen.

And an important question must be asked... if Pachal had the best GF% on the team during the same time period you're spotlighting for Sharky, then are we ready to say Pachal is some great defenseman that we can expect great things from? Or do we say he had a great stretch of hockey, but it's not an indicator of the level of player he actually is? Same kind of question can be asked for guys like Mangiapane, Cheechoo, etc, who rode and unsustainably high shooting % for a while, then their production tumbled once the hot streak was over. I think this is also the case for Sharky. While I hope he proves me wrong, there is reason to believe he won't. Any time GF and GA stats look unusually amazing for a player, while their expected stats are waaaaaay lower, there's reason to believe the player is riding a stretch of good bounces and teammates setting them up for relatively easy goals. But the stretch will end at some point and the production will collapse.

Which brings us to this year. Is Sharky a great player being held back by his struggling teammates? Or has he simply fallen off the high shooting % gravy train? I think it's the latter.

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by BigThief

Don't know if this is directed at me.. but ya some people are funny. There is nothing wrong with pointing out how awful Frost has been but suggesting Bieska only criticized Sharengovic due to some misplaced Belarusian bigotry is a little out there.

Wasn’t directed your way at all.

Originally Posted by Mathgod

I set parameters just fine thanks. I did make a solid case that he had a great 8 games but was bad prior to it. Those 8 games padded his points, GF, and GA stats. He had a bad season before those 8 games.

…

Which brings us to this year. Is Sharky a great player being held back by his struggling teammates? Or has he simply fallen off the high shooting % gravy train? I think it's the latter.

You didn’t, but if you’re going to get defensive about someone pointing out the issue with comparing xGF/60 of a guy who played 41 games to a guy who played 1 then we can just agree to disagree because that seems silly to me.

For the rest, why are those the two options? Who has argued the former, and what does the latter even have to do with what we’re talking about?

Someone said Sharangovich was on a run of 90 bad games, and the only rejection to that was that it wasn’t true, which even your counter argument (which itself was a response to a comment that was actually about Farabee) agrees with.

[Mathgod]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

comparing xGF/60 of a guy who played 41 games to a guy who played 1

Not what I did at all. I made sure to filter out any player who had too few games/minutes to be a fair comparable.

For the rest, why are those the two options? Who has argued the former, and what does the latter even have to do with what we’re talking about?

Someone said Sharangovich was on a run of 90 bad games, and the only rejection to that was that it wasn’t true, which even your counter argument (which itself was a response to a comment that was actually about Farabee) agrees with.

Well you made a comment that Sharangovich is "the third most productive member of this team" and made it seem like he wasn't bad last year, two ideas I pushed back against.

And yes I do think he was riding a temporary, unsustainably high shooting percentage, which entirely explains his production last year. The numbers bear that out.

[heep223]

Sharangovich has been bad. The whole team has been bad. Bieksa called out sharangovich for being bad and gave a glaring example of a lack of compete. These things are simultaneously true, I don’t think it’s more complicated than that

[UKflames]

Well that was a tough watch. Vegas has 2-3 really high skilled guys that are several notches above our best players, and they did all of the damage goals wise.

Picking on Sharkey is low hanging fruit, I think they should be calling out Kadri, as we seem to be back to the selfish, hold onto the puck, try to go through 3-4 players on your own, before losing the puck Kadri agzin. He is the last person Coranato should be playing with, who needs someone to give him the puck in a position to shoot, Kadri doesn't do that.

Yes the whole team looks uninspired at the moment, but a bad season is what we need to draft more skill.

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by Mathgod

Well you made a comment that Sharangovich is "the third most productive member of this team" and made it seem like he wasn't bad last year, two ideas I pushed back against.

No, I made that comment about “Player X” which in that case was Farabee, and made it seem like Sharangovich had a strong back half last year as a rejection that he’s 90 games into playing terrible, which he did.

Doesn’t mean it was sustainable. Doesn’t mean he isn’t playing terribly this year, which I also said.

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by Mathgod

Ok, let's dig a little deeper and consider the context.

In the final 41 games last season,

- His 5 on 5 xGF/60 was 2.32, which ranked 15th on the team.
- His 5 on 5 xGF% was 48.45, also 15th on the team.
- His 5 on 5 shooting % was 13.64, the highest on the team.

On the 5 on 4 PP, his xGF/60 was 5.11, ranked last on the team among those with at least 50 PP minutes. GF/60 was also last on the team at 4.3.

If you do the same analysis for his final 21 games,

- 5 on 5 xGF/60 was 2.72, ranking 7th on the team.
- 5 on 5 xGF% was 53.44, ranking 3rd on the team.
- 5 on 5 shooting % was 17.24, the highest on the team.

On the 5 on 4 PP, his xGF/60 was 4.53, ranked 8th out of 9 skaters with at least 25 PP minutes. GF/60 was 3.37, 7th out of 9 skaters.


So the stronger case comes from the final 21 games. Though even in that case, his PP numbers are not good, and his 5 on 5 production appears to mostly born out of an unsustainably high shooting percentage. For context, his shooting % this season is 0% (0 of his 9 shots have gone in).

Let's run the numbers one more time, this time for the final 8 games where he produced 8 points...

- 5 on 5 xGF/60 was 3.91, ranking 1st on the team.
- 5 on 5 xGF% was 64.95, ranking 2nd on the team.
- 5 on 5 shooting % was 21.43, ranking 3rd on the team.

On the 5 on 4 PP, his xGF/60 was 3.51, ranked 6th out of 10 qualifying skaters. GF/60 was 4.12, 10th of 10 skaters.


So what this is really about is an 8 game stretch to close out the season where he played excellent 5 on 5 hockey. And his best games in that stretch were vs Anaheim x2, vs SJ x2, and vs a Kings team phoning it in on the last day of the season.

Prior to that 8 game stretch, he was struggling mightily. The numbers clearly bear that out, and I remember us quite often talking about how bad he was playing.

2nd on the team in actual production in the second half of the season.

Last 41 games ...

Kadri 1.79 Pts/60
Sharangovich 1.68 Pts/60

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by dissentowner

I'm sorry you don't watch games and live off your stats. Or you do watch games and choose to ignore the truth. Either way it doesn't change the reality that everything comes from the perimeter.

That's a weak sauce and ignorant way to handle people that disagree with you.

I now don't watch the games?

Look at how insane that post is above.

- I'm sorry you don't watch the games
- ignore the truth
- doesn't change the reality

Do you see how close minded you are? You need to suggest there is something insidious with me because I don't agree with you?

[Royle9]

I will add (and I'm trying to find it) that Huska himself has said on multiple occasions, the idea is to generate pucks to the net from the outside/point as that's the way they will generate the "most" offence.

So that could be interpreted as a perimeter style of play, however he's clearly not controlling the players and stopping them from doing anything else creatively, but players generally try and listen to the coach, play within the system(s) or end up in the doghouse.

I do think we need to greenlight a single line for full offence where at all possible, similar to how Sutter gave the greenlight to Johnny's line. We need to find a way to generate more offence and typically the east/west zone playmaking does that. It just so happens that we now have a d-man who is used to playing that style and put up record numbers doing so.

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by Royle9

I will add (and I'm trying to find it) that Huska himself has said on multiple occasions, the idea is to generate pucks to the net from the outside/point as that's the way they will generate the "most" offence.

So that could be interpreted as a perimeter style of play, however he's clearly not controlling the players and stopping them from doing anything else creatively, but players generally try and listen to the coach, play within the system(s) or end up in the doghouse.

I do think we need to greenlight a single line for full offence where at all possible, similar to how Sutter gave the greenlight to Johnny's line. We need to find a way to generate more offence and typically the east/west zone playmaking does that. It just so happens that we now have a d-man who is used to playing that style and put up record numbers doing so.

First off he's allowed to think whatever he wants.

I think it's offside to suggest anyone that disagrees with you is flawed, lying, blind, or doesn't watch the game. It's weak as hell.

As far as the perimeter goes. If you don't have the skill you coach to get pucks through. That doesn't mean a coach believes the perimeter is the way to go, but knows he only has a handful of players that can do anything but. It's roster specific. It would make zero sense to tell guys that could play in the dangerous areas not to go there. Lunacy.

[Flame On]

Originally Posted by Bingo

That's a weak sauce and ignorant way to handle people that disagree with you.

I now don't watch the games?

Look at how insane that post is above.

- I'm sorry you don't watch the games
- ignore the truth
- doesn't change the reality

Do you see how close minded you are? You need to suggest there is something insidious with me because I don't agree with you?

Is it as close minded as calling everyone who agreed with a hockey professional and their own recent eye tests as simply piling on as a dog-pile? That kind of close mindedness?

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by Flame On

Is it as close minded as calling everyone who agreed with a hockey professional and their own recent eye tests as simply piling on as a dog-pile? That kind of close mindedness?

That's an opinion.

We encourage those here.

I didn't suggest anyone that thought Sharangovich was the worst player on the team or that Bieksa was 100% right was flawed in their thinking or lying or not being truthful.

[Royle9]

Originally Posted by Bingo

First off he's allowed to think whatever he wants.

I think it's offside to suggest anyone that disagrees with you is flawed, lying, blind, or doesn't watch the game. It's weak as hell.

As far as the perimeter goes. If you don't have the skill you coach to get pucks through. That doesn't mean a coach believes the perimeter is the way to go, but knows he only has a handful of players that can do anything but. It's roster specific. It would make zero sense to tell guys that could play in the dangerous areas not to go there. Lunacy.

Sorry Bingo, wasn't implying anything to do with diss's posts and the manner in which he gets the aggressive undertones about it. My apologies for any confusion.

I would like to think I don't partake in those myself, I often come from the realization that people are all entitled to their own opinions and the fanbase will never all see eye to eye on these types of issues.

Simply looking for the perimeter comment by Huska.
I know its been said was all I was trying to point out.

[Goriders]

Originally Posted by Royle9

I will add (and I'm trying to find it) that Huska himself has said on multiple occasions, the idea is to generate pucks to the net from the outside/point as that's the way they will generate the "most" offence.

So that could be interpreted as a perimeter style of play, however he's clearly not controlling the players and stopping them from doing anything else creatively, but players generally try and listen to the coach, play within the system(s) or end up in the doghouse.

I do think we need to greenlight a single line for full offence where at all possible, similar to how Sutter gave the greenlight to Johnny's line. We need to find a way to generate more offence and typically the east/west zone playmaking does that. It just so happens that we now have a d-man who is used to playing that style and put up record numbers doing so.

Might need some different players to pull off what you are suggesting

[Royle9]

Originally Posted by Goriders

Might need some different players to pull off what you are suggesting

Not wrong.

I think we have a "few" guys that could play this style. Essentially you need strong east/west players with vision and the ability to generate high danger chances.

Huberdeau had major success prior to joining the Flames underneath Andrew Burnette's highly offensive system in Florida.
Coronto would be my trigger man for this line, easily the most effective shooter on our roster and has already shown he can score effectively in the NHL.

The real question is who centers this line (our weakest position sadly) so you have to probably default it to Kadri to start, maybe Frost given opportunity as well as he has great vision as well.

Its a line combination that we've seen, but not without being in that defensive structure first.

I'll be the first to admit and I've said it before many times that the Flames #1 issue is they lack star power, Huberdeau was that prior to joining CGY and switched from the most offensive system in the NHL to arguably one of the most defensive systems and was forced to change how he plays entirely.

Sadly acquiring star power from a Calgary perspective will be quite challenging as you need to draft and develop, with better chances drafting in the top 3.
Get lucky via UFA market and overpay, or via trade which means you're trading away equal assets to try to acquire one.

In the last 3 decades how many have we seen?

Iginla - acquired via trade - Developed into a Star player in CGY
Kiprusoff - acquired via trade - Developed into a Star player in CGY
Johnny - late round draft pick - Developed into a Star in CGY
Tkachuk - early 1st round draft pick (thanks Dim Jim) - Developed into a Star in CGY
Monahan - Early 1st round draft pick - Best center we've had in decades but wouldn't call him a Star

TLDR: It's going to be a long road and the team is going to need to suck if we want to have the best shot at finding more star power.

[Bonded]

Originally Posted by Bingo

First off he's allowed to think whatever he wants.

I think it's offside to suggest anyone that disagrees with you is flawed, lying, blind, or doesn't watch the game. It's weak as hell.

As far as the perimeter goes. If you don't have the skill you coach to get pucks through. That doesn't mean a coach believes the perimeter is the way to go, but knows he only has a handful of players that can do anything but. It's roster specific. It would make zero sense to tell guys that could play in the dangerous areas not to go there. Lunacy.

100%. I think he is coaching to the roster he has and he did better than expected last year. The team played way better defensively last year which supported Wolf and now we are seeing what happens when they regress defensively. The run and gun would be all run and no gun imo.

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by Flame On

Is it as close minded as calling everyone who agreed with a hockey professional and their own recent eye tests as simply piling on as a dog-pile? That kind of close mindedness?

Are we suggesting calling a dogpile a dogpile is close-minded? lol

Y’all wild, here’s the definition:
a barrage of criticism, insults, etc. directed at someone or something by many people