Goal Differential

[The Cobra]

17 teams had a positive goal differential this year, with Calgary ranking #17.

The top 16 are the 16 playoff teams.

Want to make the playoffs?

Score more goals than you give up.

Sometimes it really is that simple.

[Mathgod]

[blankall]

Yup. The Flames barely missed the playoffs. That is true.

"at the end of the game, the team with the most points on the board is going to win."

-John Madden - genius

[LiquidX]

Originally Posted by The Cobra

17 teams had a positive goal differential this year, with Calgary ranking #17.

The top 16 are the 16 playoff teams.

If this is correct, it's pretty remarkable considering the awful runs of goaltending the Flames had throughout the year.. makes me a little more positive about next year. I think it could be a big bounce back season (guess it couldn't be much worse).

[butterfly]

It is correct, and the Flames had some bad luck and bad goaltending this year. Neither of which are necessarily unrelated.

[dino7c]

Originally Posted by The Cobra

17 teams had a positive goal differential this year, with Calgary ranking #17.

The top 16 are the 16 playoff teams.

Want to make the playoffs?

Score more goals than you give up.

Sometimes it really is that simple.

Flames did have more points than a playoff team

[The Cobra]

Originally Posted by dino7c

Flames did have more points than a playoff team

Yes, the Flames had one more point than Florida.

Of course, the Flames played in a weaker division and therefore had the easier schedule.

[Classic_Sniper]

Markstrom was probably the biggest culprit this season when it comes to the Flames goal differential. It’s the exact same coach, systems and mostly the same team yet he goes from top 5 starter to bottom 5 starter with very little rhyme or reason.

I think it’s fair to say that if he gave the Flames just average, just a career average like performance this season. He would’ve saved the Flames around 26 to 27 goals which based on goal differential, would’ve put the Flames at roughly 100 points and an easy in for the playoffs.

Thanks for crushing our hopes against the Oilers last year and the entire 22-23 season Markstrom. I don’t even know what to expect from him next season if he’s still here, his save% is all over the map as a Flame.

First Year = Average
Second Year = Great
Third Year = Terrible

We could honestly get anything from him which is not good if you’re upper management and trying to model/project next season.

[dino7c]

Originally Posted by The Cobra

Yes, the Flames had one more point than Florida.

Of course, the Flames played in a weaker division and therefore had the easier schedule.

With Seattle being a 100 point team and Vegas and Edmonton topping the conference IDK about that

we thought it would be but when you look at the actual stats not so much

Anaheim and SJ sucked

6 of the 8 teams in the Atlantic were under 100 points

anyway it doesn't matter but if you rank the league by points Calgary is one better

[powderjunkie]

VGK were +18 and VAN +13 last year and both missed. Also might be evidence that the PAC isn't as terrible as it was a few years ago.

NYR +20, DAL +4 both missed in the weird division year.

I skipped the COVID shortened season cuz there were no clear delineation of playoff teams. Year before that MTL +13 and missed.

Year before that was 2017-18: FLA +2, STL +4, DAL +10.

Basically all of those teams (except VAN) had some pretty good success (or at least a cinderella run) in the years following those near-misses.

[The Cobra]

Originally Posted by dino7c

With Seattle being a 100 point team and Vegas and Edmonton topping the conference IDK about that

we thought it would be but when you look at the actual stats not so much

Anaheim and SJ sucked

6 of the 8 teams in the Atlantic were under 100 points

anyway it doesn't matter but if you rank the league by points Calgary is one better

Well the stats tell a different story.

The teams in the West averaged 90 points per team.

In the East, the Metro had 91, and the Atlantic 95.

Calgary simply did not take advantage of its easier schedule, largely due to goaltending. 3 of the worst 4 teams in the NHL were in the West. Another place the Flames failed to take advantage of.

[Paulie Walnuts]

The Pacific is a high scoring division the two years we won the division we led in goals for.

I don't think that will change going forward so yeah we need to figure out how to be better keeping pucks out we need to also need to keep up offensively with them and things might become harder if Bedard joins us.

[butterfly]

Originally Posted by The Cobra

Well the stats tell a different story.

The teams in the West averaged 90 points per team.

In the East, the Metro had 91, and the Atlantic 95.

Calgary simply did not take advantage of its easier schedule, largely due to goaltending. 3 of the worst 4 teams in the NHL were in the West. Another place the Flames failed to take advantage of.

Atlantic is heavily skewed by Boston. Boston was great, Toronto was good, Tampa Bay had what, 5 more points than Calgary? Overrated division.

[powderjunkie]

Originally Posted by butterfly

Atlantic is heavily skewed by Boston. Boston was great, Toronto was good, Tampa Bay had what, 5 more points than Calgary? Overrated division.

ATL had the most points for its 8th, 7th, and 6th, too.

Ideally you'd delve into inter-division records, as 3 pt games can also skew things, especially if they are divisional games.

[The Cobra]

Originally Posted by butterfly

Atlantic is heavily skewed by Boston. Boston was great, Toronto was good, Tampa Bay had what, 5 more points than Calgary? Overrated division.

Doesn’t really matter, it is what it was. The Pacific was skewed by Anaheim and SJ, two of the worse team in the league.

Plus the Pacific led the NHL in Loser points , way more than the Atlantic. The Pacific fattened their point count with loser points.

[Itse]

Originally Posted by The Cobra

17 teams had a positive goal differential this year, with Calgary ranking #17.

The top 16 are the 16 playoff teams.

Want to make the playoffs?

Score more goals than you give up.

Sometimes it really is that simple.

Yeah, this is why it should be called a primary stat, and any shot-based metrics ("possession" etc.) should be considered secondary stats.

The latter are good for adding nuance, but they rarely change the overall picture, which is already visible in points per game and goal differential.

[The Cobra]

Originally Posted by Itse

Yeah, this is why it should be called a primary stat, and any shot-based metrics ("possession" etc.) should be considered secondary stats.

The latter are good for adding nuance, but they rarely change the overall picture, which is already visible in points per game and goal differential.

Goal differential is the end result. If you s ore more than your opposition, wins will happen.

Possession stats try to measure what should be happening, not what has happened.

Looking at goal differential is really not much different than looking at the standings.

[Fighting Banana Slug]

[/B]

Originally Posted by The Cobra

Goal differential is the end result. If you s ore more than your opposition, wins will happen.

Possession stats try to measure what should be happening, not what has happened.

Looking at goal differential is really not much different than looking at the standings.

I don’t think it is controversial to say that goal differential is highly correlated to the standings. I am just not sure what the point of raising it is.

Flames were middle of the road. We know that.

[Enoch Root]

I think goal differential gives the best picture of team quality. It is also more predictive than the standings.

The problem is that you need large sample sizes for it to be of any use, because in a game to game situation, goals very much have a luck element, strength of schedule matters, and whether a team is on a roll (especially the PP). And that is why possession stats are also helpful.