[News] Calgary Flames sat down with the league to talk about penalties drawn on the team

[Cleveland Steam Whistle]

Originally Posted by burnitdown

Here are Wideman's stats, this year and last year:

2015-16: 51 games, 30 PIMs
2016-17: 52 games, 30 PIMs

He's been assessed 10 minor penalties this year, of which 3 are for delay of game. You'd think Wideman would be the one most punished by a major conspiracy due to hatred caused by his hit. He hasn't been...

I've said before that I don't think that's actually the case. While I was corrected in stating the Flames formally contested the suspension to Wideman, which was no the case, the NHLPA were the ones that did that and were in the position to do so.........but the Flames did publicly back the player and state they thought the outcome was too harsh.

Even down to the individual level, I'm willing to wager once the dust settles, pretty easy for the refs to forgive Wideman's transgression as an individual, he missed 20 games, he was punished. What would likely have a lingering effect would be the perception that the Flames Organization doesn't value the officials safety by suggesting the suspension was too long. That's something that could result in a group of people wanting to punish and send a message on a much larger scale because they believe it's important moving forward to show what happens if the teams don't get on board with protecting their members as well as their own players.

[Fighting Banana Slug]

Edit: And I am not much of a conspiracy theorist either. The article also concedes that there could be some other reason outside of bias, and is open to suggestion as to the statistical variation. Do you have any other suggestions?

Woops: Apparently deleted my initial point which was: The article indicated that the league saw a drop in penalties called when the Flames numbers went up. What do did you mean about the article mentioning that other teams had the same number of penalties called?

[burnitdown]

Originally Posted by Street Pharmacist

Your ignoring the most obvious answer. Subconscious bias is inherent in all of us. Refs are human. Read what Kerry Fraser wrote about Don Shoenfeld. It happens all the time. You honestly don't think Burrows stopped getting the benefit of the doubt?

Oh, I totally agree there were probably a few borderline calls that didn't go our way due to the whole incident. I just don't think it's a league-wide conspiracy (meaning all the refs are in on it) and it justifies complaining about it in every gameday thread and becoming a national hockey topic on sports shows.

Originally Posted by Fighting Banana Slug

Edit: And I am not much of a conspiracy theorist either. The article also concedes that there could be some other reason outside of bias, and is open to suggestion as to the statistical variation. Do you have any other suggestions?

I think there are many factors at play, in addition to the few extra borderline calls going against us...such as a new coaching system, being in more competitive games, more minutes to tougher guys (Bennett, Tkachuk, Brouwer), and less minutes to softer players (Hudler, Colbourne). As for the immediate spike right after the Wideman incident, there were a couple outlier games shortly thereafter (16 times on the PK in 2 nights) that would have swayed the data whether there was an incident or not. So worst case scenario, if you reviewed the tape and disagreed with all those calls, you could point to those 2 specific group of refs taking it out on the Flames...but it's misleading to group those games in with all the others to bump up the average and claim it was something that lasted the rest of the season.

[QUOTE=Woops: Apparently deleted my initial point which was: The article indicated that the league saw a drop in penalties called when the Flames numbers went up. What do did you mean about the article mentioning that other teams had the same number of penalties called?[/QUOTE]

I'm mentioning how the graphs are pretty much identical curves for penalties drawn pre/post Wideman incident. They don't give the numbers or mention anything about this but it's pretty fair to say there's no significant difference in penalties drawn.

[Jay Random]

[QUOTE=burnitdown;6137894]I get you're trying to be clever with your words but looking at whether more or less penalties were called on Wideman (who is the key guy in the conspiracy theory) is most certainly examining evidence of things that actually happened.

No, it isn't. The thing that happened was that the TEAM took many more penalties for the rest of that season and all of this season – far more than can be explained by chance alone. The graph shows a clear discontinuity. That is the phenomenon that needs to be explained.

The fact that some OTHER phenomenon that you THINK should have happened did NOT happen, does not remove the need to explain what actually did happen.

It is only your own assumption that Wideman ought to have taken more penalties personally. Because that did not happen, you refuse to look at the change that actually did happen. You throw out the data because they do not confirm your preconceived expectations.

[burnitdown]

[QUOTE=Jay Random;6137949]

Originally Posted by burnitdown

I get you're trying to be clever with your words but looking at whether more or less penalties were called on Wideman (who is the key guy in the conspiracy theory) is most certainly examining evidence of things that actually happened.

No, it isn't. The thing that happened was that the TEAM took many more penalties for the rest of that season and all of this season – far more than can be explained by chance alone. The graph shows a clear discontinuity. That is the phenomenon that needs to be explained.

The fact that some OTHER phenomenon that you THINK should have happened did NOT happen, does not remove the need to explain what actually did happen.

It is only your own assumption that Wideman ought to have taken more penalties personally. Because that did not happen, you refuse to look at the change that actually did happen. You throw out the data because they do not confirm your preconceived expectations.

I'm not throwing out the data pointing to more calls against us. I'm just saying you also have to consider the data showing no more calls against Wideman once he returned and no fewer penalties called to the other team. If a conspiracy was true, you'd expect some change in all three to likely occur.

And the data in that article is smoothed, meaning it's an average over a certain number of games. As I mentioned above, I pinpointed two outliers in the data shortly after the incident that definitely would have caused the instant jump. Take out those outliers (and a whopping 16 times shorthanded in 2 games) and I'm willing to guess there's no difference pre/post incident last season. I'll let you review all the penalties in those 2 games and decide if you want to call out the refs from those two games but not much supports the theory that a grudge is being held for the rest of last season at least. As for the higher penalties this year, you'd have to argue the team is composed exactly the same if you want to make any sort of relevant comparisons.

[Jay Random]

Originally Posted by burnitdown

I'm not throwing out the data pointing to more calls against us. I'm just saying you also have to consider the data showing no more calls against Wideman once he returned and no fewer penalties called to the other team. If a conspiracy was true, you'd expect some change in all three to likely occur.

Again, that is only your own assumption. And you are refusing to entertain any explanation for the increase in calls against the team, except to point at factors that did not come into play until the following season.

As for the higher penalties this year, you'd have to argue the team is composed exactly the same if you want to make any sort of relevant comparisons.

You can easily isolate the penalties called against players who were not on the team last year, and other posters have in fact done this. It is not sufficient to account for the change; it is not even close to sufficient.

[burnitdown]

Originally Posted by Jay Random

Again, that is only your own assumption. And you are refusing to entertain any explanation for the increase in calls against the team, except to point at factors that did not come into play until the following season.

You can easily isolate the penalties called against players who were not on the team last year, and other posters have in fact done this. It is not sufficient to account for the change; it is not even close to sufficient.

Not sure what more you could ask from me. I've attributed the blip right after the Wideman incident to the two outlier games shortly after the incident, which account for a staggering 16 PKs!! Take those out and the rest of last season's penalties will be relatively unchanged pre/post and this would be a total non-story.

As for this season, I've already listed many reasons which could individually play a role in causing more penalties this year. My reasons go well beyond just subtracting and adding PIMs of new/old players. Take Bennett for example...he had 37 PIMs last year and 62 PIMs this year. Do you actually believe that's because of a conspiracy? If you watch the games, Bennett's been way more undisciplined this year and that increase is on him. Other reasons like playing in more competitive games and having a new coaching style are harder to quantify. Glad you're willing to totally discount those possibilities and instead scream conspiracy. I'm not.

Ironically enough, I hate the fact that people keep making a story out of this yet I'm doing just that by replying...so I'll drop it and hope others stop complaining a Wideman conspiracy too.

[RyZ]

Michael Lopez ‏@StatsbyLopez

A loyal & intelligent reader asked me to compare Calgary's change in penalty rate (pre and post Wideman hit) to other teams. Here's a plot

[CaptainCrunch]

Time for a senate investigation.

Say it ain't so Gary Say it ain't so.

[GoJetsGo]

Originally Posted by Cali Panthers Fan

I'm not saying there haven't been legitimate complaints in the past, but last night's game is a bad example of anti-Flames bias.

It was another showcase of their ineptitude. Just because they got some calls right doesn't excuse the grossly negligent ones they did not.

[PugnaciousIntern]

Originally Posted by RyZ

Michael Lopez ‏@StatsbyLopez

A loyal & intelligent reader asked me to compare Calgary's change in penalty rate (pre and post Wideman hit) to other teams. Here's a plot

I was convinced it was all conspiracy, but that's quite damnning

[thymebalm]

Originally Posted by PugnaciousIntern

I was convinced it was all conspiracy, but that's quite damnning

I've seen a lot of charts that look exactly like that. It's not conspiracy, its just plain reality. And these charts can't account for the non-calls (false-negatives).

I'm just happy that it finally seems to be wearing off.

[Ashasx]

Originally Posted by RyZ

Michael Lopez ‏@StatsbyLopez

A loyal & intelligent reader asked me to compare Calgary's change in penalty rate (pre and post Wideman hit) to other teams. Here's a plot

This is unreal.

[sa226]

The most frustrating thing is that despite irrefutable data, there is nothing that can be done about it.

[AhiChicken]

Originally Posted by RyZ

Michael Lopez ‏@StatsbyLopez

A loyal & intelligent reader asked me to compare Calgary's change in penalty rate (pre and post Wideman hit) to other teams. Here's a plot

Nice. Did not know they had a package for this. Time for some fun with stats.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by RyZ

Michael Lopez ‏@StatsbyLopez

A loyal & intelligent reader asked me to compare Calgary's change in penalty rate (pre and post Wideman hit) to other teams. Here's a plot

Black (and white) swan

[PugnaciousIntern]

Originally Posted by thymebalm

I've seen a lot of charts that look exactly like that. It's not conspiracy, its just plain reality. And these charts can't account for the non-calls (false-negatives).

I'm just happy that it finally seems to be wearing off.

Yeah, and perhaps I pay attention to them more, but non calls stand out to me as even more of an issue. More frustrating in my mind

[Coach]

That graph makes me want to re-watch every game since the incident and compare missed calls on the Flames vs missed calls on the other team. And then compare missed calls on Gaudreau alone vs the other team.

If only I had the time.

[burnitdown]

Originally Posted by RyZ

Michael Lopez ‏@StatsbyLopez

A loyal & intelligent reader asked me to compare Calgary's change in penalty rate (pre and post Wideman hit) to other teams. Here's a plot

Despite the initial shock value of the visual, I just don't see how everyone thinks this is such damning evidence. Take away the 2 games in back-to-back nights shortly after the incident where we were on the penalty kill an incredible 16 times and that lowers the penalty rate 0.47 (16 penalties/34 games)...bringing our penalty rate UNDER 0.0 for the remaining 32 games (meaning LESS penalties were called after the incident the rest of last season).

You can definitely argue the refs were out to screw us in those two games...provided the calls are actually unwarranted. But it's very misleading to lump those 2 outliers in with the other 32 games to artificially inflate the average and make it seem like way more penalties were called in every game to end last season.

[Jay Random]

Originally Posted by burnitdown

Take away the 2 games in back-to-back nights shortly after the incident where we were on the penalty kill an incredible 16 times

You keep saying that, but offer no reason why those games should be taken away. If the referees were indeed out to get the Flames, shortly after the incident would be when their tempers were hottest and their desire to inflict punishment most intense.

It appears that you are absolutely committed to explaining the facts away instead of explaining the facts.