[News] Flames waive Glenn Gawdin. Upd: clears

[Zoller]

I think Gawdin is what he is at this point. He's not going to develop into a scoring forward in this league but he's got the tools to crack the bottom 6. He can work on some things in the AHL. I think if he improved his skating he could be a bit more physical and aggressive without the fear or being too out of position.

He's a smart player and knows he's not the fastest skater but that self knowledge tends to make him look like a bit of a floater out there.

[gvitaly]

Originally Posted by Flaming Homer

Came to say this. I'm not an analytics guy at all but I chuckled when I seen he was even ahead of Gaudreau in that metric. To me, it shows how analytics don't paint the whole picture.

I thought Gawdin looked fine in his brief stint.

I agree especially when dealing with very small sample sizes. They could often be misleading. That’s why I mentioned they showed Ritchie wasn’t bad in the 2 games and not that he’s better than Johnny at generating chances. It’s all about perspective I guess.

As for Gawdin vs. Ritchie, I would’ve preferred to keep Gawdin in the line-up, but he is more likely to be used as the 13th forward. That’s why top line ice time in the AHL might be better for him. PS: hope he doesn’t get claimed.

[GioforPM]

I don’t know how someone could watch the two games and declare Gawdin was better than Ritchie. They each saw the ice a minimal amount of time and neither was noticeably good (or bad), especially compared to Lewis, though Ritchie laid some decent hits and got off a few good shots to the net. I’d say Gawdin lost the puck more often than Ritchie, but it was all offensive zone so not dangerous.

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by Flaming Homer

Came to say this. I'm not an analytics guy at all but I chuckled when I seen he was even ahead of Gaudreau in that metric. To me, it shows how analytics don't paint the whole picture.

I thought Gawdin looked fine in his brief stint.

It's so early so when you look at a stat production / 60 it can get skewed.

Gaudreau has 3 individual high danger chances, Ritchie has two. But Ritchie only has 20 minutes of ice time to Gaudreau's 30.

Bottom line Ritchie hasn't played too bad in the two games to start the season. Honestly the whole team has played pretty well.

Only five players under water through two games ... Lucic, Tanev, Zadorov, Backlund and then Lewis who is a whisker under 50%.

[dieHARDflameZ]

Safe to say Tanev is under water from trying to plug holes caused by Zadorov. That dude is a turnover machine.

[Macindoc]

Originally Posted by dieHARDflameZ

Safe to say Tanev is under water from trying to plug holes caused by Zadorov. That dude is a turnover machine.

Yes, Zadorov seems to have one play: the blind backhanded clearing attempt off the boards. Teams are just going to key on that and grab the puck in the high slot every time he touches it.

[Lanny_McDonald]

Originally Posted by dieHARDflameZ

Safe to say Tanev is under water from trying to plug holes caused by Zadorov. That dude is a turnover machine.

I dunno, Tanev hasn't been James Norris back there himself. Tanev has made more than his fair share of defensive blunders. No excuse for Zadorov, but Tanev isn't exactly helping either.

[Young Guns]

Originally Posted by Lanny_McDonald

I dunno, Tanev hasn't been James Norris back there himself. Tanev has made more than his fair share of defensive blunders. No excuse for Zadorov, but Tanev isn't exactly helping either.

Tanev will get rid of the dust and get better but Zadorov I'm not so sure of.

[TherapyforGlencross]

Based off practice lines, with Gawdin waived:

Gaudreau-Lindholm-Tkachuk
Mang-Dube-Ritchie
Coleman-Backlund- unknown (Richardson or Pitlick, does anyone know?)
Lucic-Monahan-Lewis

[Savvy27]

Originally Posted by Lanny_McDonald

I dunno, Tanev hasn't been James Norris back there himself. Tanev has made more than his fair share of defensive blunders. No excuse for Zadorov, but Tanev isn't exactly helping either.

I agree with this. I was shocked at how poorly Tanev played against the Ducks. He was really struggling with the puck and they seemed to be getting the better of him while he was defending too. It was really noticeable because I can't really recall that happening to him before.

[Toonage]

Slightly more on topic, with Richardson almost ready to draw in I'm honestly very curious to see how he looks.

Its only 2 games in but I'm preparing to eat a bit of crow when it comes to the vets brought in during the off season. While Richardson has had surgery this off season and that might hamper him, I think Sutter's system will be as welcoming as it can be for a player like this. Hope to see him play this weekend and take those first few bites of crow.

[Lanny_McDonald]

Originally Posted by Young Guns

Tanev will get rid of the dust and get better but Zadorov I'm not so sure of.

They'll both round into shape. I'm not concerned about either. It takes time to develop some chemistry and trust in your partner, so this may take a little while. I think they'll be fine.

[zukes]

Originally Posted by TherapyforGlencross

Based off practice lines, with Gawdin waived:

Gaudreau-Lindholm-Tkachuk
Mang-Dube-Ritchie
Coleman-Backlund- unknown (Richardson or Pitlick, does anyone know?)
Lucic-Monahan-Lewis

Whoa, really trying for a balanced attack, I get it, but Ritchie with Dube and Mangiapaine? Yuck!

[Gaskal]

Zadorov needs to crosscheck first and worry about the puck after!

Incoming forechecker? Ignore puck and crosscheck, crosscheck, crosscheck!! Then, he not worried about puck as much since his arm is broken, da?

[Strange Brew]

Wow Monahan banished to the basement based on those lines.

[Patek23]

Originally Posted by Bingo

It's so early so when you look at a stat production / 60 it can get skewed.

Gaudreau has 3 individual high danger chances, Ritchie has two. But Ritchie only has 20 minutes of ice time to Gaudreau's 30.

Bottom line Ritchie hasn't played too bad in the two games to start the season. Honestly the whole team has played pretty well.

Only five players under water through two games ... Lucic, Tanev, Zadorov, Backlund and then Lewis who is a whisker under 50%.

I think advanced stats are too black and white though. When the game is more of a full scale of contrast between black and white. You can take a analytics number to support a larger argument for sure. But when I see guys #### post a bunch of lines of 10 different percentages as if that alone shows who is a good player or not I shake my head.

I would expect a guy like Ritchie to have good analytics he's got a never ending motor. He wins puck battles. Has a big body. But he handles the puck like a grenade. So although he might drive possession he has zero finish. The only stat I know that accurately shows a players finish is goals. And that's why the Flames as a whole have been analytics darlings yet the end result has been lackluster. Alot of effort. Win on the shot clock. Yet no finish. The story 2 games into this season is the same story going back to Gulutzan. I remember outshooting opponents then as well.

[The Cobra]

Advanced stats are much more effective over larger sample sizes.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by The Cobra

Advanced stats are much more effective over larger sample sizes.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Yeah. With only 2 games, one or two bad plays can result in a bad stat. IIRC after the Oiler game Taney had bad stats versus Ryan but probably based on the one goal.

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by Flaming Homer

I think advanced stats are too black and white though. When the game is more of a full scale of contrast between black and white. You can take a analytics number to support a larger argument for sure. But when I see guys #### post a bunch of lines of 10 different percentages as if that alone shows who is a good player or not I shake my head.

I would expect a guy like Ritchie to have good analytics he's got a never ending motor. He wins puck battles. Has a big body. But he handles the puck like a grenade. So although he might drive possession he has zero finish. The only stat I know that accurately shows a players finish is goals. And that's why the Flames as a whole have been analytics darlings yet the end result has been lackluster. Alot of effort. Win on the shot clock. Yet no finish. The story 2 games into this season is the same story going back to Gulutzan. I remember outshooting opponents then as well.

Brett Ritchie isn't usually a play driving guy or an underlying stats darling. Last year he was 19th on the Flames in CF% and 21st in xGF%. So really he fits more with your eyes than with the stats that we've seen in the first two games.

He may just fit better into a fourth line role on a quick play Sutter team than he did last year trying to move up the lineup and provide a physical presence on a line with better players.

But other than that I'm not sure I agree.

You can't just use goals to judge players or you're going to miss or misinterpret too much. Honestly 9 times out of 10 the whole of an analytics look matches the eye test anyway.

[TheIronMaiden]

Originally Posted by Lanny_McDonald

I dunno, Tanev hasn't been James Norris back there himself. Tanev has made more than his fair share of defensive blunders. No excuse for Zadorov, but Tanev isn't exactly helping either.

James? I thought the award was named after Chuck.