[PGT] Canes 6 Flames 3 - Road Trip Mercifully Over

[dino7c]

Originally Posted by DeluxeMoustache

Bingo, how arrogant something sounds really has a lot to do with the listener

Cognitive dissonance isn’t something you get diagnosed with, it is basically a term used to describe processing seemingly contradictory information. That’s all. And that’s what this is.

People who are familiar with stats generally know that sub .900 save percentages are generally not good, right? That’s engrained. So if a goalie puts up an .8xx, some people say ‘the goalie wasn’t good enough because he put up a .8xx’. But if you do consider, shot by shot, what actually happened, it can happen that a statistically relatively unusual number of shots were effectively unstoppable within that small sample

So it’s a situation where a goalie has bad numbers but I say he was good. That’s it. Two pieces of seemingly contradictory info.

It would help if people would be open to discuss the nature of the actual events behind the statistics, although it is easier for people to just get upset about things they choose not to understand.

I know full well that you can have a different opinion. And if you don’t want to look at the actual underlying details, you will. That’s fine. You yourself write in your Game Takes about how sometimes there are rare occasions where the stats don’t reflect what you are seeing. You do it, it’s a game take. I do it, it’s, I don’t know, arrogant ? Lol

Meanwhile, you about Markstrom with ZERO consideration of the terrible teams he has played on

Originally Posted by DeluxeMoustache

Jakob Markstrom has had an above average save percentage twice in seasons with over 20 appearances

In 2019-20 his .918 compared favourably to the league average of .910
In 2018-19 his .912 was a bit above the .910 average

That is all. He had one pretty good season and Tre bought high, and paid him

He subsequently put up a below average season. Sure he had hot streaks and cold streaks. That doesn’t matter at the end of the day. It’s just the excuses for poor results.

He has lost a lot more than he has won, with a career 132-138-34

So stats only matter when they fit your narrative. If only you chose to realize that Markstrom started for a rebuilding team basically his entire career. Selective cognitive dissonance lol.

Vlad was the 2nd best goalie on the ice, lost the battle at his position...I still think he has done great, wasn't his best night

[DeluxeMoustache]

^ aww. You deleted the part where you call me a ####ing #######
Just kidding, I applaud that. We obviously have different viewpoints but I know you are better than that

I don’t think that old post is relevant here

It does talk about sv% over full seasons, which are statistically significant. Over the course of a season, there are fortunate games that counterbalance the bad ones, and the stats begin to reflect the overall body of work

I’m of the view point that in a single game, there are too few shots to hang an opinion on that stat, without allowing for discussion

As for Markstrom, I thought he was average coming in, questioned the contract, he had a disappointing year last year, and then has been generally quite good this year. I am fully aware that team play affects sv%. I have made that case many times, pointing to Roloson and Fernandez both over .930 in Minny. Plus I have pointed to goalies under Sutter and predicted Markstrom to improve quite a bit. Unsurprisingly he has. I have no issues with him, like him in fact, but don’t think he’s elite.

The stats have shown him to be average. Not all goalies on bad teams have average stats. See Luongo’s career. Elite stats on bad teams. There’s no cognitive dissonance in believing a guy with average stats is not elite.

As for the game, Mathgod’s chart clearly shows how Carolina dominated the game, particularly the end of the first and the entire second, until the PPs.

Vladar had the second best night, sure. He let in 6 goals. Didn’t play poorly. That can happen, and it did, and it’s rare

[dino7c]

Originally Posted by DeluxeMoustache

^ aww. You deleted the part where you call me a ####ing #######
Just kidding, I applaud that. We obviously have different viewpoints but I know you are better than that

I don’t think that old post is relevant here

It does talk about sv% over full seasons, which are statistically significant. Over the course of a season, there are fortunate games that counterbalance the bad ones, and the stats begin to reflect the overall body of work

I’m of the view point that in a single game, there are too few shots to hang an opinion on that stat, without allowing for discussion

As for Markstrom, I thought he was average coming in, questioned the contract, he had a disappointing year last year, and then has been generally quite good this year. I am fully aware that team play affects sv%. I have made that case many times, pointing to Roloson and Fernandez both over .930 in Minny. Plus I have pointed to goalies under Sutter and predicted Markstrom to improve quite a bit. Unsurprisingly he has. I have no issues with him, like him in fact, but don’t think he’s elite.

The stats have shown him to be average. Not all goalies on bad teams have average stats. See Luongo’s career. Elite stats on bad teams. There’s no cognitive dissonance in believing a guy with average stats is not elite.

As for the game, Mathgod’s chart clearly shows how Carolina dominated the game, particularly the end of the first and the entire second, until the PPs.

Vladar had the second best night, sure. He let in 6 goals. Didn’t play poorly. That can happen, and it did, and it’s rare

you still are but I thought it was better to totally own you by posting a quote of you saying the exact thing you are smugly insulting others intelligence for.

I also don't want a poster like you getting me banned.


This place has post history, its took me less than a minute to find multiple posts of you using save% wins ect. to prove or disprove a point without digging deeper.

[dino7c]

Originally Posted by DeluxeMoustache

Grubauer has a career .919 and last year had a .922 sv%. You think Seattle would have preferred Markstrom’s .910 career and .904 last year?

If only you looked beyond the numbers and considered the team he played behind but that darn cognitive dissonance. Yeah I think Seattle would like a some Markstrom right about now.


okay I'm done, but those in glass houses

[GioforPM]

I don't see how anyone can watch Vladar and Markstrom and prefer Vladar. He's fine, but he's still raw and loosey goosey at times. He doesn't track the puck as well, and he's way less precise with his movements. He relies on his size a lot more. In many ways he's just a less polished version of Markstrom. He may be better than Markstrom one day, but not yet.

[dino7c]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

I don't see how anyone can watch Vladar and Markstrom and prefer Vladar. He's fine, but he's still raw and loosey goosey at times. He doesn't track the puck as well, and he's way less precise with his movements. He relies on his size a lot more. In many ways he's just a less polished version of Markstrom. He may be better than Markstrom one day, but not yet.

I am super impressed with him but sometimes he makes things harder than they need to be...which is fine, he will learn IMO

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by DeluxeMoustache

Hey, I am interested in discussing what is reasonably expected from a goalie.

I see people saying that the goalie let in 6 so he wasn’t good enough. That’s the start of the conversation. I think it is a good idea to take a more detailed look than at goals and sv%

There are shots a goalie should save, shots he could save, and shots he can’t
Those shots come in different proportions each game.

Like I say, there is a difference between a shot that goes in to a goalie’s logo, and one that goes over his shoulder beside his ear. Those shots are measured the same, first as raw shots affecting sv%, and for some more advanced purposes if they have the same criteria (location, shot type etc.).

But that actual shot placement doesn’t figure in to statistics
And sample size of a single game is low and very subject to the events leading up to each shot, and shot placement

These are pretty basic things that are easy to understand. But people prefer not to

You say Anderson made ‘more big saves’. I’m saying I saw a puck whiz over past Vladar’s ear, but don’t recall Anderson throwing a blocker up beside his ear. Not all shots are made equal.

What is wrong with being right? I don’t think it’s something to apologize for

I wouldn't say shot placement doesn't figure into statistics, they do exactly that.

We don't go far enough to truly assign a level of danger for each instance that is unique, but they're certainly counted by where the shots come from and how they came to be.

In the Canes game the Flames had 33 shot attempts from inside the home plate are to 28 for Carolina.

Of those shot attempts, ones that were deemed high danger or coming off a rebound, pass into the homeplate or a tip Calgary had 16 and Carolina had 11.

In the game Andersson was expected to give up 3.75 and gave up 3, Vladar 3.35 and gave up 6.

Vladar gave up 3 goals on 11 high danger chances, Andersson 2 on 16.
Vladar gave up 2 goals on 17 medium danger chances, Andersson 1 on 17.
Vladar gave up 1 goal on 25 low danger chances, Andersson 0 on 24.

Those are the stats, and they pretty much match with what I saw.

Vladar wasn't very good.

You don't have to apologize for anything, but assuming you're right, and being right have a lot of real estate between them.

[DeluxeMoustache]

Bingo, that’s just the same thing over again

I don’t dispute any of the high danger chance count, as I know how they are defined. I saw all of those things too.

What matters, when looking at a goalie’s work in a single game, is where those shots are placed. Nobody measures that. But it makes all the difference

That’s why I noted in post 93 my view on how each goal actually happened

Many of us have studied statistics. There are outlying data points in every data set. That’s what this is.

Just look at Johnny’s shot attempt from down low, over the shoulder. Usually doesn’t work. It usually hits the goalie or misses the net, even though there’s a hole there. Because players can’t shoot perfectly (sample evidence: all star game target shooting).

The day it does go in, Johnny happens to hit a hockey puck size hole over a goalie’s shoulder. Is that goalie worse than all the other goalies?

In my mind, not particularly.

On an average 33 shot night, that shot is worth .030. That one fluke could be the difference between .909 (good) and .879 (bad)

Like I say, none of what you say is wrong in terms of the stats. But like I say, something went by Vladar’s ear and I did not see Anderson have to put a blocker beside his ear to stop a comparable shot. I didn’t see a puck bounce off the crossbar right on to the stick of a wide open Flame, for Anderson to stop. There is no real estate between that statement and what is right. It didn’t happen. Both essentially unstoppable. Anderson faced different shots. I didn’t see any miraculous saves corresponding to equivalent shot placement. He was solid, but wouldn’t have saved those either.

[DeluxeMoustache]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

I don't see how anyone can watch Vladar and Markstrom and prefer Vladar. He's fine, but he's still raw and loosey goosey at times. He doesn't track the puck as well, and he's way less precise with his movements. He relies on his size a lot more. In many ways he's just a less polished version of Markstrom. He may be better than Markstrom one day, but not yet.

That’s fair. I have actually been impressed with his puck tracking and crease movement for the most part, rebound control, and overall play, based on where he is it in his career.

I could see him being a very good goalie

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by DeluxeMoustache

Bingo, that’s just the same thing over again

I don’t dispute any of the high danger chance count, as I know how they are defined. I saw all of those things too.

What matters, when looking at a goalie’s work in a single game, is where those shots are placed. Nobody measures that. But it makes all the difference

That’s why I noted in post 93 my view on how each goal actually happened

Many of us have studied statistics. There are outlying data points in every data set. That’s what this is.

Just look at Johnny’s shot attempt from down low, over the shoulder. Usually doesn’t work. It usually hits the goalie or misses the net, even though there’s a hole there. Because players can’t shoot perfectly (sample evidence: all star game target shooting).

The day it does go in, Johnny happens to hit a hockey puck size hole over a goalie’s shoulder. Is that goalie worse than all the other goalies?

In my mind, not particularly.

On an average 33 shot night, that shot is worth .030. That one fluke could be the difference between .909 (good) and .879 (bad)

Like I say, none of what you say is wrong in terms of the stats. But like I say, something went by Vladar’s ear and I did not see Anderson have to put a blocker beside his ear to stop a comparable shot. I didn’t see a puck bounce off the crossbar right on to the stick of a wide open Flame, for Anderson to stop. There is no real estate between that statement and what is right. It didn’t happen. Both essentially unstoppable. Anderson faced different shots. I didn’t see any miraculous saves corresponding to equivalent shot placement. He was solid, but wouldn’t have saved those either.

For sure, and as I said they currently don't have a danger scale other than where on the ice the shot took place, and how the puck got to the shot ... both are important. Both mean a lot when you look at averages, but they don't handle the individual shot for sure.

But don't you think it's possible you might have a thing for backup goaltenders?

[DeluxeMoustache]

Originally Posted by Bingo

For sure, and as I said they currently don't have a danger scale other than where on the ice the shot took place, and how the puck got to the shot ... both are important. Both mean a lot when you look at averages, but they don't handle the individual shot for sure.

But don't you think it's possible you might have a thing for backup goaltenders?

No, I have admitted to being a goaltender apologist in general before

It happened that Rittich was in the 6 goal Tampa game, and Vladar in Florida, but to be quite honest I’d look at it the same if it was Smith or Markstrom

[DazzlinDino]

Originally Posted by DeluxeMoustache

No, I have admitted to being a goaltender apologist in general before

It happened that Rittich was in the 6 goal Tampa game, and Vladar in Florida, but to be quite honest I’d look at it the same if it was Smith or Markstrom

So what you are really saying for all intents and purposes is the better team won? The Flames were tired and Carolina buried their chances. If it were our vintage Flames they would have knocked Carolina's sharpshooters into the sun and Vladar might have faired a little better? Flames lacked the skill so they have to continue to play a certain way. Pretty tough to do when you're playing 3 very skilled teams in a row. Come on admit it, you have a soft spot for that underdog Vladar.

[DeluxeMoustache]

Sure thing, I actually really liked the pickup by Tre. Boston was goalie rich, and I think he got a good one.

Vladar set a franchise record with points in his first 6 games, beating the old record of 3

He hasn’t been sheltered at all, either. 3 of his first 5 were against Washington, Boston and Toronto, then he got the back to backs against TB and Carolina

I haven’t been this pleased with a Flames backup goalie since … uh… hmm… uhhhh

Well there was that time that Noodles laid the lumber on Franzen I suppose

Anyhow, this is Vladar’s first adversity, 3 Ls in a row but I thought he was good in TB and fine in Carolina. Hopefully he bounces back strong.

[DazzlinDino]

Originally Posted by DeluxeMoustache

Sure thing, I actually really liked the pickup by Tre. Boston was goalie rich, and I think he got a good one.

Vladar set a franchise record with points in his first 6 games, beating the old record of 3

He hasn’t been sheltered at all, either. 3 of his first 5 were against Washington, Boston and Toronto, then he got the back to backs against TB and Carolina

I haven’t been this pleased with a Flames backup goalie since … uh… hmm… uhhhh

Well there was that time that Noodles laid the lumber on Franzen I suppose

Anyhow, this is Vladar’s first adversity, 3 Ls in a row but I thought he was good in TB and fine in Carolina. Hopefully he bounces back strong.

He has been impressive but not quite there in terms of stealing these types of games. Better that it happens now before the playoffs so they can go over how to make those saves and beat these teams. These losses might be a blessing in disguise because there is only one road to the Stanley Cup and we know Darryl intends to go all the way.

[DeluxeMoustache]

Yeah, I think the team needs to clean some things up. They have stopped checking effectively and had lost coverage in the d zone

I agree it’s timely. Sutter knows the team can be better than they are, he is using this set of results strategically

Also using it to chastise the media. It’s delightful

[Mathgod]

Originally Posted by DeluxeMoustache

By the way, I just took a closer look.

That chart doesn’t say the Flames were better for two periods. It doesn’t actually support that statement at all. Quite the opposite.

- The net slope downward in the first 15 minutes shows the Flames largely controlling
- after 15 minutes, the xGF differential was almost 1.6 in favour of Calgary
- the light red background shows the Canes PP. Flames didn’t let the Canes generate much
- the grey background shows the Flames PPs. Significant movement in xGF due to their PP chances. That first PP contributed nearly 1 goal of the 1.6
- even strength they keep pushing for a couple of minutes then Carolina takes over (upslope on the non shaded background)
- second period the Flames generated a bit then the long upslope is Carolina dominating thoroughly until the two Canes penalties
- the third was even until the Flames pushed a bit, generated a penalty.
- Flames xGF increased on their PP, and Carolina’s increased the last few minutes, including on their PPs


The moves where the Flames xGF made its moves were Flames PPs. Real big move on the first period PP, a net change of +1 xGF in the Flames direction

The stuff on the unshaded background is even strength. The Flames got outplayed. Badly


(And none of that factors in shot placement, which is relevant to the goaltending conversation)

You're clearly far more invested into analyzing the results of one hockey game than I am, so I'll keep this brief. The Flames had the better xGF for the first 15 minutes of the first, and the first 15 minutes of the 3rd. That's the basis for me saying they arguably were the better team for 2 of the 3 periods. Yes, the word arguably implies that I'm well aware that my conclusion was disputable.

You took a deeper dive and dissected the game on a shot-by-shot, chance-by-chance, shift-by-shift, goal-by-goal basis, and came to a different conclusion. I respect your assessment, and your passion for this hockey team.

[Tsawwassen]

Post game links
http://sportsstats.cbc.ca/hockey/nhl...cap140186.html
https://scores.nbcsports.com/nhl/rec...=03&final=true
https://www.sportsnet.ca/hockey/nhl/games/2367233
https://www.espn.com/nhl/game/_/gameId/401349746