Only Florida has allowed more goals per game than the Flames

[JayP]

Originally Posted by DeluxeMoustache

No. Don't start this again. Is this the guy who made a ham handed attempt at correlating shot distance and quality and determining that quality had no bearing on save percentage? Any model only as good as its assumptions and this guy can't derive significant enough inputs to get meaningful outputs.

Goodness. Step back, man. Think about what you are saying. Watch the Flames and think about what you are doing. Blaming Kipper for a deflection off a skate. Deflections go in all the time and saves are often a function of positioning. You are actually suggesting a backdoor tapin by a guy who breezed through the crease to establish position without Bouw flinching is on Kipper.

You're always the one criticizing these studies (which is fair), but you love to throw out baseless claims about what other goalie's save% would be under the Flames system (ie; Patrick Roy in his prime would be below .900) without anything to back it up. You can't have it both ways.

Kipper clearly has been brutal this year. Our defense is terrible, but it would have to be historically bad to be the only reason our goalies combined save% is so low. It's not one or the other - our high GA is truly the sum of the parts. Kipper and the team defense have both not been nearly good enough.

[DeluxeMoustache]

Originally Posted by JayP

You're always the one criticizing these studies (which is fair), but you love to throw out baseless claims about what other goalie's save% would be under the Flames system (ie; Patrick Roy in his prime would be below .900) without anything to back it up. You can't have it both ways.

Kipper clearly has been brutal this year. Our defense is terrible, but it would have to be historically bad to be the only reason our goalies combined save% is so low. It's not one or the other - our high GA is truly the sum of the parts. Kipper and the team defense have both not been nearly good enough.

I don't understand your first paragraph. I can have it both ways.

The way you can answer your second paragraph is to look goal by goal and see what happened, and ask yourself whether the Flames goalie could have reasonably stopped the goal, assessing the shot quality, etc

Again I'm not doing this for the season but anecdotally you can go through a handful of goals and extrapolate. Seems like a lot of work to prove a point.

Consider last game. Odd man rush overplayed by D, cross crease tap in, deflection off of skate, bang-bang play from behind out front on the Butler turnover. Being as the Flames only allowed 23 shots, in your world Kipper has to save 3 of those 4 or he is brutal. Which ones? This is where we disagree.

Not to mention that less than a minute or so in, he already made a save on a centering attempt from behind. And he also made some dynamite saves when the Flames were on the PK.

Yes, the team is that bad. What did Hartley say about Dallas? That they didn't earn their 4 goals, the Flames gave them 4 goals, and that the team needs to learn how to play defense.

Other teams must salivate at the prospect of playing the Flames. The perfect storm of soft and stupid D and huge holes at C. "No low percentage shots from the perimeter to pad the goalie's stats tonight, boys! We can just go straight to the net and no one will bother us"

[JayP]

Originally Posted by DeluxeMoustache

I don't understand your first paragraph. I can have it both ways.

It makes perfect sense. You can't rip on some article that has actually put in the effort of actually breaking down the numbers because you disagree with their methodology (which on it's own is justified), but then throw out baseless claims about how Patty Roy would have a save% below .900 on this team with absolutely nothing to back it up. You have no methodology to get to that number except confirmation bias and you don't see an issue with that?

The way you can answer your second paragraph is to look goal by goal and see what happened, and ask yourself whether the Flames goalie could have reasonably stopped the goal, assessing the shot quality, etc

Again I'm not doing this for the season but anecdotally you can go through a handful of goals and extrapolate. Seems like a lot of work to prove a point.

Consider last game. Odd man rush overplayed by D, cross crease tap in, deflection off of skate, bang-bang play from behind out front on the Butler turnover. Being as the Flames only allowed 23 shots, in your world Kipper has to save 3 of those 4 or he is brutal. Which ones? This is where we disagree.

Not to mention that less than a minute or so in, he already made a save on a centering attempt from behind. And he also made some dynamite saves when the Flames were on the PK.

You complain about methodology and then begin to extrapolate off of one game. Even you know that's ridiculous. Try extrapolating off the LA game last week and get back to me with your results.

Yes, the team is that bad. What did Hartley say about Dallas? That they didn't earn their 4 goals, the Flames gave them 4 goals, and that the team needs to learn how to play defense.

Other teams must salivate at the prospect of playing the Flames. The perfect storm of soft and stupid D and huge holes at C. "No low percentage shots from the perimeter to pad the goalie's stats tonight, boys! We can just go straight to the net and no one will bother us"

I never denied any of this. The defense is terrible. But the world isn't black and white. It is possible for the defense and Kipper to both be playing terribly.

[DeluxeMoustache]

Originally Posted by JayP

It makes perfect sense. You can't rip on some article that has actually put in the effort of actually breaking down the numbers because you disagree with their methodology (which on it's own is justified), but then throw out baseless claims about how Patty Roy would have a save% below .900 on this team with absolutely nothing to back it up. You have no methodology to get to that number except confirmation bias and you don't see an issue with that?



You complain about methodology and then begin to extrapolate off of one game. Even you know that's ridiculous. Try extrapolating off the LA game last week and get back to me with your results.



I never denied any of this. The defense is terrible. But the world isn't black and white. It is possible for the defense and Kipper to both be playing terribly.

Haha, you are really bent out of shape about the Patrick Roy thing. Methodology? I have a rock solid one but my flux capacitor is in the shop.

I have looked at the goals from a number of games in a similar manner to last game. Even posted a couple. Search my posts if you don't believe me.

I'm done with this. It is actually really obvious once you go through a number if games.

[JayP]

Originally Posted by DeluxeMoustache

Haha, you are really bent out of shape about the Patrick Roy thing. Methodology? I have a rock solid one but my flux capacitor is in the shop

I have looked at the goals from a number of games in a similar manner to last game. Even posted a couple. Search my posts if you don't believe me.

I'm done with this. It is actually really obvious once you go through a number if games.

You really know you're in the wrong when you start going with nerd blasts like "flux capacitor" instead of actually defending your posts.

[opendoor]

I find it tough to believe that it's primarily the team driving Kiprusoff's sv% given that his overall numbers are worse than most goalies' PK numbers.

[Erick Estrada]

Hartley is clearly not up to the task of coaching in the NHL. His team is less organized than Keenan's and that's saying something considering how far expired Keenan was when he joined the Flames. I can't remember the team defensemen being so confused as the team gives up so many point blank chances night after night. Throw in some ill-timed time outs, puzzling shoot out choices, and bizarre roster management at times and I feel he's been the worst Flames coach since Greg Gilbert.

He's going to get likely one more year but if he can't implement even a half decent defensive system next year he may as well get Switzerland on speed dial as his NHL coaching career is over.

[Flash Walken]

Originally Posted by opendoor

I find it tough to believe that it's primarily the team driving Kiprusoff's sv% given that his overall numbers are worse than most goalies' PK numbers.

He's having a rough season compounded by an awful approach to team defense in front of it.

He's not playing well, though. A few stinkers, but mostly goals that a season or two ago he would've stopped.

[Flash Walken]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

Hartley is clearly not up to the task of coaching in the NHL. His team is less organized than Keenan's and that's saying something considering how far expired Keenan was when he joined the Flames. I can't remember the team defensemen being so confused as the team gives up so many point blank chances night after night. Throw in some ill-timed time outs, puzzling shoot out choices, and bizarre roster management at times and I feel he's been the worst Flames coach since Greg Gilbert.

He's going to get likely one more year but if he can't implement even a half decent defensive system next year he may as well get Switzerland on speed dial as his NHL coaching career is over.

In my opinion, there is a reason neither him nor Feaster have seen an NHL role in years.

That reason? Not good enough for the NHL.

[return to the red]

At the start of the year I told myself I don't care if they lose as long as it was exciting but I've never seen a Flames team like this, they aren't even exciting. I even turned the game off tied 2-2 because you could tell that the way they were playing it was wasn't going in the right direction.

I thought I wouldn't miss the offense stifling ways of Sutters defensive systems but after watching this team on the road I'm not so sure anymore.

[SuperMatt18]

I don't think Scotty Bowman gets this roster to play as a team, or strong defensively.

No centers, no forwards committed to defense, and no physical shutdown d-man.

No surprise that the best forwards this year (Backlund, Stajan, Stempniak) are the only forwards that have some resemblance of a two way game.

This is a team built to win with offensive talent, sadly there just isn't that much offensive talent there to play that style.

[dino7c]

Matt Stajan is our #1 center and has been our only center in the lineup for much of the season...yet some blame the coach

[Psytic]

Originally Posted by return to the red

At the start of the year I told myself I don't care if they lose as long as it was exciting but I've never seen a Flames team like this, they aren't even exciting. I even turned the game off tied 2-2 because you could tell that the way they were playing it was wasn't going in the right direction.

I thought I wouldn't miss the offense stifling ways of Sutters defensive systems but after watching this team on the road I'm not so sure anymore.

I think my definition of exciting to watch is different than most but I thought with Wiesbrod coming in from Boston this team would get nastier and bigger. I expected high hockey IQ ,fierce board play mixed with strong 2 way players. Instead it looks like they are trying to reaquire all our one dimensional players from past Flames teams only now they are older.

They may draft for IQ but there is still a lot of morons on the active roster that need to go. It seems kind of weird how their draft philosophy is different than their trade philosphy.

[Brannigans Law]

Is it fair to start blaming Feaster? Usually takes 2-3 seasons for a GM to have a fair chance at shaping the team. If what others have said in a previous threat about ownership refusing to let Feaster rebuild things are worse than we thought.

[Flames Draft Watcher]

Originally Posted by Psytic

I think my definition of exciting to watch is different than most but I thought with Wiesbrod coming in from Boston this team would get nastier and bigger. I expected high hockey IQ ,fierce board play mixed with strong 2 way players. Instead it looks like they are trying to reaquire all our one dimensional players from past Flames teams only now they are older.

They may draft for IQ but there is still a lot of morons on the active roster that need to go. It seems kind of weird how their draft philosophy is different than their trade philosphy.

Hard to completely remake the team in a year. I think they'd love some more strong, 2-way, high hockey IQ players but those guys are hard to come by. So I don't think their trade philosophy does differ from their draft philosophy.

Wideman addressed one weakness, powerplay QB. Hudler added another small, skilled forward which we already had several of. Pretty obvious that we still need a big, strong defenseman. Pretty obvious that we still need to add some size and strength up front as well. I don't think teams are giving away powerforwards though, they are a rare commodity in this league.

If am going to assume Hudler and Wideman stay. Baertschi is in the long term plans as well and is another skilled, small forward. So if we're looking to upgrade size and strength then Cammalleri and Tanguay are guys we might want to move. That said Tanguay is signed long term.

On defense we can move almost anybody except Wideman and Brodie. Bouw, Gio, Butler, Smith, Sarich, Babchuk, I would listen to offers for any of them.

It's going to be an interesting trade deadline.

[Joborule]

Originally Posted by Brannigans Law

Is it fair to start blaming Feaster? Usually takes 2-3 seasons for a GM to have a fair chance at shaping the team. If what others have said in a previous threat about ownership refusing to let Feaster rebuild things are worse than we thought.

This is all on Feaster. Yes, he inherited a mess via Sutter, but he has taken that, and arguably put it in worse shape based on standings results. It would be one thing if this team was already in rebuild mode; but they're attempting to be in win now position, and the lack of centres and defense on the team is appalling for the goal they're trying to achieve. In any scenario, those two mentioned issues should not be the case.

[Psytic]

Originally Posted by Flames Draft Watcher

Hard to completely remake the team in a year. I think they'd love some more strong, 2-way, high hockey IQ players but those guys are hard to come by. So I don't think their trade philosophy does differ from their draft philosophy.

Wideman addressed one weakness, powerplay QB. Hudler added another small, skilled forward which we already had several of. Pretty obvious that we still need a big, strong defenseman. Pretty obvious that we still need to add some size and strength up front as well. I don't think teams are giving away powerforwards though, they are a rare commodity in this league.

If am going to assume Hudler and Wideman stay. Baertschi is in the long term plans as well and is another skilled, small forward. So if we're looking to upgrade size and strength then Cammalleri and Tanguay are guys we might want to move. That said Tanguay is signed long term.

On defense we can move almost anybody except Wideman and Brodie. Bouw, Gio, Butler, Smith, Sarich, Babchuk, I would listen to offers for any of them.

It's going to be an interesting trade deadline.

I agree. Cammy and Tanguay would be the ones id be shopping right now.

[FAN]

Originally Posted by Brannigans Law

Is it fair to start blaming Feaster? Usually takes 2-3 seasons for a GM to have a fair chance at shaping the team. If what others have said in a previous threat about ownership refusing to let Feaster rebuild things are worse than we thought.

You really think Feaster wants to rebuild? It's likely that Feaster got the job because he sold the ownership on the idea that the team is capable of making the playoffs with a few adjustments.

Originally Posted by Flames Draft Watcher

Hard to completely remake the team in a year.

It's harder if you don't try. It would have been easier to remake the team if Feaster actually traded a core player outside of Regehr. But no he re-signed Tanguay, Glencross etc. brought back Cammalleri. He even wanted to keep Jokinen at one point.

[ricardodw]

Originally Posted by JayP

You're always the one criticizing these studies (which is fair), but you love to throw out baseless claims about what other goalie's save% would be under the Flames system (ie; Patrick Roy in his prime would be below .900) without anything to back it up. You can't have it both ways.

Kipper clearly has been brutal this year. Our defense is terrible, but it would have to be historically bad to be the only reason our goalies combined save% is so low. It's not one or the other - our high GA is truly the sum of the parts. Kipper and the team defense have both not been nearly good enough.

Historically bad?

BB (before Bouwmeester) 2008-09 when Giordano was the softest d-man behind Regehr, Phanuef, Aucion, Sarich, Vandermeer and Pardy the flames D had 9.15 hits per game...... This year's version 5.39 hits per game.


Most goals are dirty goals (not highlight reel goals) that have the goalie screened and/or jostled. If you don't want to or have the personnel to stop the other teams forwards from doing this you have to expect that they will score a lot more and with a higher percentage.

The highlight reel saves are made with the goalie given room and protection to do his job..... letting opposing forwards into the scoring zone without bumping them is a recipe for defeat.

So yes the Flames Defense this year as a group are historically bad.

[Ark2]

Originally Posted by Psytic

I think my definition of exciting to watch is different than most but I thought with Wiesbrod coming in from Boston this team would get nastier and bigger. I expected high hockey IQ ,fierce board play mixed with strong 2 way players. Instead it looks like they are trying to reaquire all our one dimensional players from past Flames teams only now they are older.

They may draft for IQ but there is still a lot of morons on the active roster that need to go. It seems kind of weird how their draft philosophy is different than their trade philosphy.

I really wish that I understood the pedestal that this board put Wiesbrod on...