[GT] Garbage Bag Day - Player Availability starts at 10:15 am

[calgarywinning]

One of the worst seasons i've witnessed. Rationalizing won't do it my opinion. Flames have backed themselves into their own corner.

Coach, GM, Player, whoever it is you can't be proud of this steaming turd produced.

[sss1]

Originally Posted by Hockey_Ninja

To add some positivity, Toff posted this on Twitter:

https://twitter.com/user/status/1647682082120794113

Is he saying goodbye with this? Nice gesture, though.

[DeluxeMoustache]

Originally Posted by Strange Brew

So the only data point is cross ice passes. And then your personal observations. And some nebulous “ large volume of fans”. Yourself, Paulie wacknuts, and many others for sure.

I don’t see a team chasing the puck around.

I see a team without a ton of finishers. The players who declined:
Huberdeau
Lindholm - not hard to figure out why
Mangiapane - living off unsustainable shooting percentages

Other players met or exceeded their averages.

Not saying I have the answers, or that I’m even right. I’m just looking at some of the numbers that are actually out there. It’s fine if we see it differently, I won’t ask if you actually watch the games.

Didn’t mean to offend. But they sure as heck did ring the puck around the boards a ton, and get garbage shots from the point

This happened repeatedly and it isn’t in the stats because it isn’t something measured

That’s the whole point. The stats aren’t the be-all end-all

The stats guys know it. There are companies based on this knowledge. The better / more granular stats are paid for


And a guy here or there picking up 5-10 points does not make everything ok. That happens to every team every year.

The guy who has the skill to get 115 and went to 55 is not normal


Quite simply, it’s a cop out to respond to me asking for more stats. My while point is that the existing stats don’t measure the things that are needed to look deeper

[DeluxeMoustache]

Originally Posted by GullFoss

IMO there were four drivers that interacted and compounded to create this result. Honestly, when you think about, finishing 2 points out of a playoff spot is pretty impressive.

1) Subpar Goaltending

2) Bad luck

3) Lack of team finishing, highlighted in part by Huby's production totals down 60 points relative to last year, an NHL record.

When your most talented players have down years, finishing - defined by team shooting percentage - suffers more. More talented players have high than average shooting percentages and they also take higher shot volume. So when your best players aren't playing well, it brings down team shooting percentage a lot more than if your bottom-six players aren't playing well.

4) Losing when you're dominating games is frustrating, and it's probably even more miserable when you have to deal with Sutter and his intensity.

Oh my. All if these, from point 1 through 4 basically says that luck and feelings are more of an impact than strategy

Yikes

Coaching decisions actually have consequences

[GullFoss]

Originally Posted by flamesgod

See, I don’t see Huberdeau’s game being neutered by the coach. I see him having a hard time adapting to playing sound defensive hockey as well as being a major threat offensively. I think he’s having a hard time putting them both together.
So many pundits and fans thought Gaudreau wouldn’t mesh with Sutter because he wouldn’t be a “ Sutter player”. That turned out to be complete garbage.

I agree. Huby and JG aren't really comparable players. Their biggest similarity is that Johnny and Huby are both weak along the boards and lose a lot of board battles. That's not a good recipe for the game Sutter wants to play.

But JG had redeeming attributes to excel in a Sutter system. And JG used those attributes to generate the huge plus/minus we saw from him.

1) JG's had an insane ability to takeaway pucks and force giveaways when the opposing team was transitioning to offense. That's a big parts of JG's defensive game (and offensive game) because the opposition wouldn't even get offensive zone time when Johnny did that.

2) JG was a star at holding possession, which means fewer transitions to offense by the opposing team. And because Johnny was so good at holding possession, he didn't need to be as strong at winning those 50/50 battles along the boards. In contrast, Huby seemed pretty weak at playing a possession game and lost a lot of 50/50 battles. That's the reason he didn't generate sufficient offense in Sutter's system.

3) When the puck was hemmed in the flames zone, JG was weak at accepting breakout passes. Breaking out of the defensive zone is an area where Huby is better. So Huby's defensive play is better than Johnny, but as a winger, that's not a hugely meaningful.

When I watched Huby I was challenged to see a player that could play Sutter hockey this year. And sure, maybe you can change the coach to suit Huby's off-the-rush style. But that style isn't likely to be effective in the playoffs. It's far better to push the player to adapt or trade the player if he can't adapt.

[Paulie Walnuts]

Originally Posted by DeluxeMoustache

Didn’t mean to offend. But they sure as heck did ring the puck around the boards a ton, and get garbage shots from the point

This happened repeatedly and it isn’t in the stats because it isn’t something measured

That’s the whole point. The stats aren’t the be-all end-all

The stats guys know it. There are companies based on this knowledge. The better / more granular stats are paid for


And a guy here or there picking up 5-10 points does not make everything ok. That happens to every team every year.

The guy who has the skill to get 115 and went to 55 is not normal


Quite simply, it’s a cop out to respond to me asking for more stats. My while point is that the existing stats don’t measure the things that are needed to look deeper

https://twitter.com/user/status/1644726591325347845

This card suoermatt posted in another thread it's not shot selection but gives you an idea. Missing from the card on another one of her tweets is 27th in high danger scoring chances.

https://www.sportsnet.ca/nhl/article...-shot-quality/

This is an article by Justin Bourne. They are using a NHL advanced stats provider and using player tracking. They will break down playoff teams so we won't get to see our stats but he has a quick blurb that says what everyone has been saying including opposing coaches a lot of volume and hardly any quality. They are tracking some of the stats you talk about.

These stats really make me sour on that xGF model which was becoming evident during the season. To much value on low quality.

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by DeluxeMoustache

Did you not watch the team this season?

They were leaders in all kind of shots.

But they repeatedly rang it around the boards, got it to the point, and took garbage shots into the goalie’s pads. Even got a lot of garbage shots on rebounds from the slot (battles where the opposition is forcing them in terms of time and space)

They dumped sometimes, but often just gained the line wide then put it hard along the boards. So it won’t count as a dump in because it’s dumped after gaining the line

Shot percentage was near the bottom of the league.

Stats are fine because they got lots of shots from high danger places. Often under pressure and easy stops

Well known, other coaches said it, dressed backup goalies, who ended up with great sv% way more often than not. Lots of people said it was boring hockey

They weren’t terrible offensively, middle of the pack. But they have the roster that should be top of the pack

They were 31st in cross zone passes. That is ridiculous.
Having a high skill guy go from 115 points to 55 was not unrelated to the faithful execution of the game plan

This isn’t a narrative, it’s what happened this year.

I can’t believe you are saying they didn’t ring it around the boards often and work it to the point to get traffic in front and get shots on net

To extreme again.

I think most are agreeing that with the high shot volume game plan you get a lot of shots and often weak ones.

No debate there.

But they were 7th in slot shots and 15th in high danger (slot shots deemed more difficult because of a pass, rebound or tip).

So no ... all their slot shots weren't easy. And their mixture of high volume, top ten slot, and 15th ranked high danger put them at 5th for expected goals.

So some issues with the high volume plan for sure, but it's just not true to say it was all easy shots. Too much data supports that's not true.

[Paulie Walnuts]

Originally Posted by Bingo

To extreme again.

I think most are agreeing that with the high shot volume game plan you get a lot of shots and often weak ones.

No debate there.

But they were 7th in slot shots and 15th in high danger (slot shots deemed more difficult because of a pass, rebound or tip).

So no ... all their slot shots weren't easy. And their mixture of high volume, top ten slot, and 15th ranked high danger put them at 5th for expected goals.

So some issues with the high volume plan for sure, but it's just not true to say it was all easy shots. Too much data supports that's not true.

This card has us 27th in high danger chances.

https://twitter.com/user/status/1644706402949013505

Unless you are using 5v5 and this includes power play but that would be a significant difference and make the powerplay look worse lol.

And woof at Nashville amazing what Saros did.

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by Paulie Walnuts

This card has us 27th in high danger chances.

https://twitter.com/user/status/1644706402949013505

Unless you are using 5v5 and this includes power play but that would be a significant difference and make the powerplay look worse lol.

And woof at Nashville amazing what Saros did.

Natural Stat Trick has them 15th in all situations.
Money puck has them 12th.

[Bingo]

And guys I'm not saying I don't have an issue with the high volume game plan, I think it hurt their season.

I'm just not willing to go to the ring around the boards only shots from the perimeter narrative that can easily be dismissed.

Calgary has a talent issue too. The next coach (hoping the move on from Sutter) will only be able to do so much.

[Paulie Walnuts]

Originally Posted by Bingo

Natural Stat Trick has them 15th in all situations.
Money puck has them 12th.

That's a significant difference from middle of the pack to the bottom of the league? Justin Bourne had us at the bottom of the league as well.

[Street Pharmacist]

Originally Posted by Bingo

And guys I'm not saying I don't have an issue with the high volume game plan, I think it hurt their season.

I'm just not willing to go to the ring around the boards only shots from the perimeter narrative that can easily be dismissed.

Calgary has a talent issue too. The next coach (hoping the move on from Sutter) will only be able to do so much.

I think the disparity in data collection for all the different sites makes the argument tricky too. Naturalstattrick uses location and NHL event data only. That means that a high danger scoring chance is anything from the home plate area, out slightly out if it happened right after a neutral zone event (rush chance) or other shot (rebound).

Micro stat tracking can break that further out to include passes and other movement. It's telling that Calgary was 31st for cross ice passes. That would likely be a Darryl issue that could easily be solved.

But yeah, it's not just a bunch of perimeter shots, that is easily disproven. I do think though, that there's very little creativity and predictable means savable

[Cali Panthers Fan]

Originally Posted by Paulie Walnuts

https://twitter.com/user/status/1644726591325347845

This card suoermatt posted in another thread it's not shot selection but gives you an idea. Missing from the card on another one of her tweets is 27th in high danger scoring chances.

https://www.sportsnet.ca/nhl/article...-shot-quality/

This is an article by Justin Bourne. They are using a NHL advanced stats provider and using player tracking. They will break down playoff teams so we won't get to see our stats but he has a quick blurb that says what everyone has been saying including opposing coaches a lot of volume and hardly any quality. They are tracking some of the stats you talk about.

These stats really make me sour on that xGF model which was becoming evident during the season. To much value on low quality.

I agree with the lack of creating high danger chances offensively, but all I'm getting from the card is that our defense was leakier overall, and our goaltending was pretty brutal.

All are factors in the missed playoffs. The strategy is sound overall, but it does need some tweaking in order to change those key metrics. Forwards helping out the defense needed to happen more often as well (looking at you Kadri).

Chalk it up to underperformance and lack of correction to that performance. Chalk it up to lack of adaptation to systemic play not yielding results.
Chalk it up to a stubborn coach who lost the room early on.

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by Street Pharmacist

I think the disparity in data collection for all the different sites makes the argument tricky too. Naturalstattrick uses location and NHL event data only. That means that a high danger scoring chance is anything from the home plate area, out slightly out if it happened right after a neutral zone event (rush chance) or other shot (rebound).

Micro stat tracking can break that further out to include passes and other movement. It's telling that Calgary was 31st for cross ice passes. That would likely be a Darryl issue that could easily be solved.

But yeah, it's not just a bunch of perimeter shots, that is easily disproven. I do think though, that there's very little creativity and predictable means savable

Natural stat trick is a scoring chance attempt on anything from the slot and a high danger shot attempt in the slot (home plate) on a pass, deflection or rebound.

Both are assigned likelihood of a goal and tabulated to expected goals.

If you're high in scoring attempts but less so in high danger I do think your best shots are too predictable.

But being top 15 in high danger suggests they're still getting some dangerous looks.

I think the Flames high volume strategy is creating a lift to the expected goals that needs to be adjusted, but I'd doubt that adjustment moves them from 5th to 32nd.

[kyuss275]

Any word when we will hear from Sutter and Tre?

[Paulie Walnuts]

Originally Posted by Cali Panthers Fan

I agree with the lack of creating high danger chances offensively, but all I'm getting from the card is that our defense was leakier overall, and our goaltending was pretty brutal.

All are factors in the missed playoffs. The strategy is sound overall, but it does need some tweaking in order to change those key metrics. Forwards helping out the defense needed to happen more often as well (looking at you Kadri).

Chalk it up to underperformance and lack of correction to that performance. Chalk it up to lack of adaptation to systemic play not yielding results.
Chalk it up to a stubborn coach who lost the room early on.

I said it from the start that our defence didn't look as clean as last year and it seemed like we spent more time chasing and not checking to get the puck back and send it up ice. I think overall the defenceman mucked it with awful reads leading to breakdowns.

I know everyone is loving big Z and he's a fun guy but he's an adventure he makes some really bad reads leaving gaping holes in our coverage. Many times he comes in as the second pressure leaving his check without any help.

I don't know if you watch basketball but I think offence and defence in hockey and basketball is similar that it's a group effort on both ends just because one has label doesn't mean that's the singular focus.

Being quick and good defensively will lead to a quicker offence.

This is the area whwre it gets gummied up for me. Last year thr top line played a rush game amd drove to middle. This year we go wide and settle for shots or shoot on set goalies.

Guys like Huberdeau need to be given the green light to play to their strengths that's why they are stars and have elite skill. Trying to mold them into checkers isn't why he's being paid 10.5 per season.

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by Paulie Walnuts

I said it from the start that our defence didn't look as clean as last year and it seemed like we spent more time chasing and not checking to get the puck back and send it up ice. I think overall the defenceman mucked it with awful reads leading to breakdowns.

I know everyone is loving big Z and he's a fun guy but he's an adventure he makes some really bad reads leaving gaping holes in our coverage. Many times he comes in as the second pressure leaving his check without any help.

I don't know if you watch basketball but I think offence and defence in hockey and basketball is similar that it's a group effort on both ends just because one has label doesn't mean that's the singular focus.

Being quick and good defensively will lead to a quicker offence.

This is the area whwre it gets gummied up for me. Last year thr top line played a rush game amd drove to middle. This year we go wide and settle for shots or shoot on set goalies.

Guys like Huberdeau need to be given the green light to play to their strengths that's why they are stars and have elite skill. Trying to mold them into checkers isn't why he's being paid 10.5 per season.

The Panthers (from what I understand) were playing a run and gun style that is pretty unique to the NHL in 2022.

Huberdeau moving anywhere (or staying with Maurice coming in) would mean adopting more a defensive look to his game.

That isn't on Sutter ... it's hockey.

I just don't see how he's not given a green light, and there is literally zero to support that he's being told to play a different way beyond the blueline other than F3 responsibilities.

A coach doesn't instruct a player to turn the puck over, be late on a forecheck or blindly give the puck away with a backhand spinorama.

That's on the player.

I like the guy, I think he bounces back but as I've said every other time you bring this up ... to me (just an opinion without fact) this is 15% on the coach, and 85% on the player.

[Hot_Flatus]

Originally Posted by Ashasx

I don't know if it's all because of Darryl. I think they want to win and see that there is no path to that with his core.

This is the big question, and as fans, are we actually expecting that the team brings back everyone, or signs everyone significant to long term deals when many of them have so badly performed?

[Hot_Flatus]

Originally Posted by Bingo

The Panthers (from what I understand) were playing a run and gun style that is pretty unique to the NHL in 2022.

Huberdeau moving anywhere (or staying with Maurice coming in) would mean adopting more a defensive look to his game.

That isn't on Sutter ... it's hockey.

I just don't see how he's not given a green light, and there is literally zero to support that he's being told to play a different way beyond the blueline other than F3 responsibilities.

A coach doesn't instruct a player to turn the puck over, be late on a forecheck or blindly give the puck away with a backhand spinorama.

That's on the player.

I like the guy, I think he bounces back but as I've said every other time you bring this up ... to me (just an opinion without fact) this is 15% on the coach, and 85% on the player.

Yep. And it's 100% on him to be better because any half decent coach should be expecting the exact same things out of him that Daryll has. Florida cut ties with him since they felt he was part of the reason the team could not get over the hump in the playoffs.

If Huberdeau cannot produce more than 15G and 50 some points while being even a remotely responsible 200ft player, than he isn't worth his weight in the least.

[Paulie Walnuts]

Originally Posted by Bingo

The Panthers (from what I understand) were playing a run and gun style that is pretty unique to the NHL in 2022.

Huberdeau moving anywhere (or staying with Maurice coming in) would mean adopting more a defensive look to his game.

That isn't on Sutter ... it's hockey.

I just don't see how he's not given a green light, and there is literally zero to support that he's being told to play a different way beyond the blueline other than F3 responsibilities.

A coach doesn't instruct a player to turn the puck over, be late on a forecheck or blindly give the puck away with a backhand spinorama.

That's on the player.

I like the guy, I think he bounces back but as I've said every other time you bring this up ... to me (just an opinion without fact) this is 15% on the coach, and 85% on the player.

Panthers seems to be the same type of team.

Again playing him to his strengths first talking about patience and time and blowing up the lines and stapling him to Kadris wing a player who doesn't pass the puck.

Cutting his ice time down by almost 4 minutes? The powerplay didn't even run through him even though he has been a top producer.

Like I said before teams are playing their stars a lot and letting them stir the offence that doesn't happen with Sutter. What use is a 10.5 million Huberdeau because Sutter doesn't want to utilize him like should.

I don't see other teams doing that guys that produce a ton of points. Did Tampa ask Kucherov to change his game?

You just had a poster say we should trade him if he can't player Sutter hockey. Really we should dump a superstar because Darryl Sutter is to stubborn to adapt with the times.

Yes the player shares part of the blame but coaching plays a big part in the game now. The guy came in with the right attitude he even said he was ready to commit to playing better two way hockey after getting swept by Tampa. People around him said that he carries himself like a star. He wasn't used that way, don't know many stars playing 16:30 per game. Its not a earn your ice time either he was getting limited minutes as soon as the season started.