Too early to panic about Markstrom

[GranteedEV]

Originally Posted by Manhattanboy

Just go with Vladar. Marskstrom has shown he hasn't got it these days. Maybe it will take 2 weeks or a month or more. This is not complicated. He is a liability right now and its costing us games.

But if we get Bedard it'll all have been worth it

[The Cobra]

Originally Posted by Kidder

So through 13 games he again sits at just 6 wins. Save percentage and GAA way worse this year, but makes sense with the lack of shutouts.

So, the difference between spinning a shut out vs 4 goals is just random?

[JohnnyB]

I really wonder what happened with him. He was excellent all last season and in the first round, and then it's like he just changed overnight into a different goalie. He went straight from winning games for the team to losing games for the team. It wasn't a gradual decline at all. It was just like a switch was flipped.

[alnigi]

Originally Posted by JohnnyB

I really wonder what happened with him. He was excellent all last season and in the first round, and then it's like he just changed overnight into a different goalie. He went straight from winning games for the team to losing games for the team. It wasn't a gradual decline at all. It was just like a switch was flipped.

Similar to Demko so far this season.

[Backstop]

A goal! Calgary scores! 60 Seconds later the other team scores, what happened?

Although we can often identify player x lost his man and player y has a wicked wrister, a large portion of a fortunate event occurring is random and falls into the category of luck, this is simply because there is no other category to put it in.

We tend to dismiss luck as it's messy, unpredictable and we don't like things we can't measure and quantify, but we have to accept its usage for lack of a better bucket to put fortuitous events in.

When all the factors are right and the perfect shot hits the crossbar and deflects down (and in) it's arguably reasonable to say it could have just as easily gone up, that's luck. Now add in the goals that deflect off player a to player b and in, another unplanned yet fortuitous event, luck.

So how do you account for luck and how do you gauge your goalie when looking at stats if you need to know is he ineffective or do a lot of lucky goals go in?

There is no perfect measurement for luck, the commonly accepted closest stat for taking luck into account and measuring a goalies ability to stop pucks as well as a teams ability to score is PDO.

PDO is simply a teams 5 on 5 shooting percentage and save percentage measured over a specified time interval.The mean average of PDO is ~100 (sometimes 1.00), in other words, across the league the average goals and saves per team, neither good nor bad is ~100.

-A number greater than 100 is good shooting and goaltending (lucky) and expected to win
-A number below 100 is poor goaltending and shooting (unlucky) expected to lose

Large sample sizes are required to reduce the effect of luck as much as possible and boil the results down to a measurement of a teams ability to score goals and stop shots and by extension their chances of winning.

The Flames PDO is currently 1.00, if you accept PDO as a reasonable stat then the Flames don't need to replace Markstrom.

**I am not a stats guy or an analytics guy, this is just a quick and dirty attempt at explaining PDO's ability to reasonably quantify luck vs skill in a game that includes a lot of luck and why it's the stat I generally refer to. I am sure there are some regulars here that can explain PDO and the math behind it in better detail as I'm no expert.

[Aarongavey]

Originally Posted by Backstop

A goal! Calgary scores! 60 Seconds later the other team scores, what happened?

Although we can often identify player x lost his man and player y has a wicked wrister, a large portion of a fortunate event occurring is random and falls into the category of luck, this is simply because there is no other category to put it in.

We tend to dismiss luck as it's messy, unpredictable and we don't like things we can't measure and quantify, but we have to accept its usage for lack of a better bucket to put fortuitous events in.

When all the factors are right and the perfect shot hits the crossbar and deflects down (and in) it's arguably reasonable to say it could have just as easily gone up, that's luck. Now add in the goals that deflect off player a to player b and in, another unplanned yet fortuitous event, luck.

So how do you account for luck and how do you gauge your goalie when looking at stats if you need to know is he ineffective or do a lot of lucky goals go in?

There is no perfect measurement for luck, the commonly accepted closest stat for taking luck into account and measuring a goalies ability to stop pucks as well as a teams ability to score is PDO.

PDO is simply a teams 5 on 5 shooting percentage and save percentage measured over a specified time interval.The mean average of PDO is ~100 (sometimes 1.00), in other words, across the league the average goals and saves per team, neither good nor bad is ~100.

-A number greater than 100 is good shooting and goaltending (lucky) and expected to win
-A number below 100 is poor goaltending and shooting (unlucky) expected to lose

Large sample sizes are required to reduce the effect of luck as much as possible and boil the results down to a measurement of a teams ability to score goals and stop shots and by extension their chances of winning.

The Flames PDO is currently 1.00, if you accept PDO as a reasonable stat then the Flames don't need to replace Markstrom.

**I am not a stats guy or an analytics guy, this is just a quick and dirty attempt at explaining PDO's ability to reasonably quantify luck vs skill in a game that includes a lot of luck and why it's the stat I generally refer to. I am sure there are some regulars here that can explain PDO and the math behind it in better detail as I'm no expert.

The Flames current PDO is .974, second worst in the league.

https://www.naturalstattrick.com/teamtable.php

It would be nice if it was 1.00 though.

[Backstop]

Originally Posted by Aarongavey

The Flames current PDO is .974, second worst in the league.

https://www.naturalstattrick.com/teamtable.php

It would be nice if it was 1.00 though.

I used the PDO off Quant hockey, visually .974 is pretty much this...

[Barnet Flame]

Originally Posted by Hot_Flatus

Right. After 13 starts, which in at least half he has been more than decent, we might as well call him cooked (whatever that means?). All the seasons propping up the Canucks with .915 save percentages amount to 1 good season as well?

I get the frustration, but Markstrom had nothing to do with the loss last night. The Flames failed to do nearly enough offensively again and it wouldn't have mattered if the bolts had scored 5.

If you want to be mad at someone, maybe start looking at skaters that aren't pulling their weight to give the team some cushion to work with defensively. In this league it's a lot easier to defend and play goal when you've got a lead.

This team is going to be in tough and its going to be a slog all year. I think it was clear after all the changes - if they can slowly build and peak with more consistent scoring later in the year, they will be a tough out in the post season with the roster they now have. Don't expect them to be 15 games over .500 though, its probably not in the cards.

No. The Bolts scored three.

Two were empty netters.

[Aarongavey]

Originally Posted by Backstop

I used the PDO off Quant hockey, visually .974 is pretty much this...

https://www.quanthockey.com/nhl/stan...d=none&ed=none

Quant hockey has the Flames PDO at .969. I do wish the Flames has a 1.00 PDO though.

[The Cobra]

Originally Posted by alnigi

Similar to Demko so far this season.

Part of Demko's problem is presumably the fact that Vancouver has been just so bad.

[dammage79]

Only Issue I have so far with Markys slow start is that Dutters thrown Vladars "1 a week" starts out the window to get Marky going. That's about it. Other than we are seeing FLA Markstrom instead of Vancouver Markstrom.

[dammage79]

TBH, when we (the royal "we" as in the Flames and us fans) signed Markstrom my biggest concern was we would eventually see the Icky Goaltender Markstrom was in FLA. Just didn't think we'd see it in the 1st half of his contract.

[robertsfan]

I’m on the bus with the folks who think the Oilers broke Markstrom, or at least his confidence.

[Wastedyouth]

Originally Posted by Aarongavey

https://www.quanthockey.com/nhl/stan...d=none&ed=none

Quant hockey has the Flames PDO at .969. I do wish the Flames has a 1.00 PDO though.

Oof,

The double correction. Rough day haha.

[kevman]

Originally Posted by Aarongavey

The Flames current PDO is .974, second worst in the league.

https://www.naturalstattrick.com/teamtable.php

It would be nice if it was 1.00 though.

That's 5 on 5.

All strengths they're .961, which is worst in the league by .014.

[Kasi]

The question really is whether the poor PDO is just bad luck or also a factor of our playing style. I think we can do a better job of cutting down high danger chances to match the shot suppression we do (I think we’ve been prone to brain farts this year) but unless players start going to the middle of the ice and we start doing some cross ice passes I have a hard time thinking the Flames shooting percentage will be anything more than mediocre. And that is a reflection of the playing style Sutter likes.

[DeluxeMoustache]

..^Edit: just saw Kasi’s post which was posted as I was typing this. I agree

The thing about PDO is that it is interpreted by many as luck, but also can be systematic

There are two components - shooting percentage and save %

Shooting percentage - the Flames have a low shooting percentage. They also put up over 40 perimeter shots on Tampa, not getting to the tough areas.
On one hand, a really low shooting percentage is expected to regress to the mean
On the other hand, the really low shooting percentage reflects how they have been playing

Save percentage - similarly, the Flames are keeping shot totals against reasonable, but giving up a high number of high danger chances. I assume someone could show data on high danger chances vs shots allowed that would show something systemic. Plus there has been the odd stinker.
From a luck standpoint, you don’t expect the odd stinkers to be as frequent. Otherwise, I think the low save percentage has been a product of how they are playing

The way the Flames have failed to bring the effort and attention to detail for a full 60, the PDO is reflective of their play. They can’t just outwait it. They need to play better so they can change it

[Flaming Horse]

We don't need to over analyze Markstroms play. He has just been bad. Not very good at all. Sure he has made some big saves but he has let way to many questionable goals in and too many early goals. Almost every game he has been outplayed by the other goalie. He is suppose to be the difference maker and give the flames an advantage over most teams but has become the weak link.He has been given plenty of time to get it going. The flames as a team need to get it going. Give Vladar the net for a couple and see what he can do and then go from there. Its all about wins and we need some. Just stop the puck.

[kevman]

Originally Posted by DeluxeMoustache

..^Edit: just saw Kasi’s post which was posted as I was typing this. I agree

The thing about PDO is that it is interpreted by many as luck, but also can be systematic

There are two components - shooting percentage and save %

Shooting percentage - the Flames have a low shooting percentage. They also put up over 40 perimeter shots on Tampa, not getting to the tough areas.
On one hand, a really low shooting percentage is expected to regress to the mean
On the other hand, the really low shooting percentage reflects how they have been playing

Save percentage - similarly, the Flames are keeping shot totals against reasonable, but giving up a high number of high danger chances. I assume someone could show data on high danger chances vs shots allowed that would show something systemic. Plus there has been the odd stinker.
From a luck standpoint, you don’t expect the odd stinkers to be as frequent. Otherwise, I think the low save percentage has been a product of how they are playing

The way the Flames have failed to bring the effort and attention to detail for a full 60, the PDO is reflective of their play. They can’t just outwait it. They need to play better so they can change it

That's simply not true.

The Flames are allowing 11.06 HDCA/60 which is good for 6th (But essentially tied for 4th with Seattle and Pittsburgh, 11.04 and 11.03 respectively.) In total shot count they're 4th in the league holding teams to 27.31 SA/60.

Calgary gives up 0.40 HDCA/SA which is pretty average. Carolina is the worst at allowing .45 HDCA/SA and Pittsburgh is the best at 0.33 HDCA/SA.

[Erick Estrada]

Yeah Markstrom has had things easy relative to a lot of other goaltenders. He’s just having a career worst season and it’s as simple as that.