Flames Fan Forum

[PeteMoss]

No idea about this site - but according to this - the Flames are at 39.5% on faceoffs when on the shorthanded (which is brutal).

http://faceoffs.net/stats/team-faceoffs?situation=sh

But eyeballing it, I don't see an obvious correlation between SH FO stats and the PK rankings.

EDIT: If its really a giant concern, Derek Grant could be up here helping since it appears he's good on face-offs and would play on the PK.

[Coach]

Originally Posted by Ashasx

That doesn't make any sense.

Even the best face off guys in the league only float around 55%. Players don't get suddenly better or worse on the dot just because they are on special teams.

You mean to tell me that the Flames suck on the PK because they lose the faceoff 55% of the time (at most)?

No, that doesn't make sense.

Our PK sucks because we collapse towards the net in an effort to block shots. We give the opposition so much time and space that they can cycle to puck as low as the top of the circle with no pressure. We only have one guy up top, and he roams around, giving the other team way to much time to make any play they want.

It's not because of faceoffs. It's because of bad coaching.

I'm not saying it's the reason the PK sucks, just that winning the draw on the PK is an important part of killing the penalty. If there are 3 faceoffs during a PK and you lose all of them, you may still kill it off, but it will be harder.

And this is one time where I don't think you can look at the larger sample size and just assume 1/2 the draws on the PK are won. and have to take it draw-by-draw. Sure most people float around 50%, but that could still mean they lose every PK draw just because ( number of reasons; aren't bearing down enough, face better faceoff players during those draws, etc...).

Toews could win 60% of his draws, but still lose all of his d-zone PK draws. Conversely, a player could go 30% on the dot, but end up winning all d-zone pk draws.

This stuff doesn't happen on a spread sheet.

[MoreDrank]

Originally Posted by PeteMoss

No idea about this site - but according to this - the Flames are at 39.5% on faceoffs when on the shorthanded (which is brutal).

http://faceoffs.net/stats/team-faceoffs?situation=sh

But eyeballing it, I don't see an obvious correlation between SH FO stats and the PK rankings.

EDIT: If its really a giant concern, Derek Grant could be up here helping since it appears he's good on face-offs and would play on the PK.

Grant is out indefinitely with a broken jaw. It especially sucks because he was leading the AHL in scoring. He deserved a look.

[PeteMoss]

Originally Posted by MoreDrank

Grant is out indefinitely with a broken jaw. It especially sucks because he was leading the AHL in scoring. He deserved a look.

Fair - although I meant at any point in the year they could have called him up. But I guess you need to have Bollig hanging around playing once every 5th game just in case.

[tvp2003]

Originally Posted by PeteMoss

Fair - although I meant at any point in the year they could have called him up. But I guess you need to have Bollig hanging around playing once every 5th game just in case.

Apparently the Flames felt Mason Raymond was a better option over Grant

[Ashasx]

Originally Posted by MattyC

I'm not saying it's the reason the PK sucks, just that winning the draw on the PK is an important part of killing the penalty. If there are 3 faceoffs during a PK and you lose all of them, you may still kill it off, but it will be harder.

And this is one time where I don't think you can look at the larger sample size and just assume 1/2 the draws on the PK are won. and have to take it draw-by-draw. Sure most people float around 50%, but that could still mean they lose every PK draw just because ( number of reasons; aren't bearing down enough, face better faceoff players during those draws, etc...).

Toews could win 60% of his draws, but still lose all of his d-zone PK draws. Conversely, a player could go 30% on the dot, but end up winning all d-zone pk draws.

This stuff doesn't happen on a spread sheet.

Yes, it's easier to win a faceoff in the offensive zone on a powerplay than in another situation. (It's easier for wingers to cheat and support the centreman on the faceoff when there is one fewer opponent they have to deal with)

So all teams have a lower faceoff % on the PK. But everything is relative. This disadvantage would apply to all teams (and does).

ie., if Toews wins 5% more draws than the average centreman in the NHL is all situations, he will still win 5% more draws than the average centreman on the PK. Whether this is 52% instead of 55% is not the point.

[BigFlameDog]

I think I would actually need to know how they measure a win and a loss on a faceoff. A clean win back to the D on a power play (or PK for that matter) is a definite advantage, no one can argue that. A scramble win that ends up knocked around and out of the zone may be a win but it did nothing to help the PP.

I am guessing the face off win stat is subjective based on whatever stat guy is tracking that day? I guess where I am going with this is there must be "wins" that don't give much advantage...how many clean clear cut wins are there in a game??

A clear cut win on a PK or PP helps whatever team has it....there probably aren't very many of those through 60 mins.

[united]

Originally Posted by bubbsy

things i'd love to have heard about:
- what is the plan short/long term regarding what position bennet will play?
- do they intend to give any guys in the AHL a look this year up in the big leagues?
- any comment on why the AHL team has struggled to the degree they have this season?

Good questions. I don't believe either of the first two were addressed.
On the third, the Flames' view is the AHL is purely a league to develop their younger players for future NHL success. They will not be a team who loads up on 30-year-olds to try and win the Calder Cup, they are all development. That said, winning - the attitude and habits it ingrains, and lessons it teaches - is important to the Flames. Winning matters. Mentioned you can't tell kids it's okay to lose one year (for draft position for example) then turn around the following year and tell them it's unacceptable. They also mentioned the big thing with the current group is lack of physical development, which is why they see the move to the Pacific as a good thing because it gives them less game time but more gym and practice time.
They also touched on the move. Probably everything you would expect. Being closer is good but it's still not ideal. The Leafs, Kings, Ducks, Sharks can all phone a player and he can drive himself to the rink within an hour or two - that's ideal.

[Envitro]

So just to clarify on the Jankowski comments that were made yesterday, Treliving and Burke were very clear that they were going to do everything to sign him and all indications are that Janko feels the same way. They fully expect to have him under contract next year.

[Bandwagon In Flames]

Really looks like Hartley threw his team under the bus and didn't accept any of the blame.

- Basically admitted last years success was due to getting all the bounces (so the Jack Adam's award goes to luck apparently).

- Blames Face-offs as the biggest reason for the atrocious PK instead of his system. They might be an issue but there are much bigger fish to fry.

- Blames gap control on forwards not having good puck possession. Isn't the system supposed to dictate when forwards hold onto the puck and when the dump it in?

Not sure why there's still such a love fest for this guy.

[united]

Hartley said countless times the start of the season was his fault, the Flames' play this season is his fault, the poor special teams is on him. Also, the bounces stuff was Treliving, not Hartley.

[Bandwagon In Flames]

Originally Posted by united

Hartley said countless times the start of the season was his fault, the Flames' play this season is his fault, the poor special teams is on him. Also, the bounces stuff was Treliving, not Hartley.

Please provide a source

[Coach]

Originally Posted by Ashasx

Yes, it's easier to win a faceoff in the offensive zone on a powerplay than in another situation. (It's easier for wingers to cheat and support the centreman on the faceoff when there is one fewer opponent they have to deal with)

So all teams have a lower faceoff % on the PK. But everything is relative. This disadvantage would apply to all teams (and does).

ie., if Toews wins 5% more draws than the average centreman in the NHL is all situations, he will still win 5% more draws than the average centreman on the PK. Whether this is 52% instead of 55% is not the point.

You're still averaging all this out which is not the way to look at this. If Toews win 5% more draws, that doesn't mean he is winning 5% more draws in all situations, it just averages out that way. Again, he could go 60% on the night, and still go 0% on PK. Or 100%. If he does either of those, it likely (ie, not absolutely) effects what the PK did on that particular night.

If the Flames have a stretch where they are consistently losing d-zone draws on the PK (let's say 20% over 5 games), it's likely that their PK sucked during that stretch. It's not the only factor of course, not even the most important one, but to suggest it has no impact is ridiculous.

[Coach]

Originally Posted by Bandwagon In Flames

Really looks like Hartley threw his team under the bus and didn't accept any of the blame.

- Basically admitted last years success was due to getting all the bounces (so the Jack Adam's award goes to luck apparently).

- Blames Face-offs as the biggest reason for the atrocious PK instead of his system. They might be an issue but there are much bigger fish to fry.

- Blames gap control on forwards not having good puck possession. Isn't the system supposed to dictate when forwards hold onto the puck and when the dump it in?

Not sure why there's still such a love fest for this guy.

Lol no, it's not. Hartley can scream at them until he's blue in the face to get the puck deep when running out of space, and not turn it over at the opposing blueline. Whether they do it or not is completely up to the players.

[Cleveland Steam Whistle]

Originally Posted by Ashasx

But it doesn't work like that either. If you assume that the best faceoff team will win 3 more faceoffs per game than the Flames, they won't all occur on the PK.

I don't know about the PK, but just from watching the team, I'd say one of our biggest issues on the PP is our inability to win a face off. We seem to lose the draws almost every time, as Hartley said, it kills about 30 secs (or 25% of our PP right off the bat) and then our team struggles to gain the zone again.

I would love to see the stats and have no idea how to pull them, but I think your presumption that a teams overall face off % holds on special teams might be wrong. Reason being, if the Flames centers are weak at face offs (which I believe they are), on special teams they are likely up against the other teams top draw men every time, versus getting any face offs against their weaker draw men in the rest of the game that allows the face off % to go up to 45% or whatever it is.

Anyway, could be wrong, but that would be my thought. I never really thought about it on the PK before, but I know just from watching one of the things I think is the biggest issue with our PP is our inability to win face offs.

[Bandwagon In Flames]

Originally Posted by MattyC

Lol no, it's not. Hartley can scream at them until he's blue in the face to get the puck deep when running out of space, and not turn it over at the opposing blueline. Whether they do it or not is completely up to the players.

So you're saying that Hartley has lost the room and players no longer listen to him? Guess that means it's time to move on.

I think I'll take a break from CP until the Hartley apologists are gone. I can't believe how right HF boards was when they always say CP is just one big circle jerk of homers.

[Cleveland Steam Whistle]

Originally Posted by Bandwagon In Flames

Really looks like Hartley threw his team under the bus and didn't accept any of the blame.

- Basically admitted last years success was due to getting all the bounces (so the Jack Adam's award goes to luck apparently).

- Blames Face-offs as the biggest reason for the atrocious PK instead of his system. They might be an issue but there are much bigger fish to fry.

- Blames gap control on forwards not having good puck possession. Isn't the system supposed to dictate when forwards hold onto the puck and when the dump it in?

Not sure why there's still such a love fest for this guy.

Hartley analyzing the problems on the ice is throwing the team under the bus? That's a very strange way to look at things. Isn't that what coaches do, and isn't anything you can analyze always go back to the players?

When have you ever heard a coach say, we aren't winning cause me and my assitants have been slacking it in the video room, or the issue is we aren't very good coaches. What were you expecting him to say?

The issue may very well be the coaching (although to be honest I doubt it), but not really sure how you made the leap to he threw his team under the bus.

[united]

Originally Posted by Bandwagon In Flames

Please provide a source

Me sitting 50 feet away from him.

[heep223]

Originally Posted by Ashasx

Our PK sucks because we collapse towards the net in an effort to block shots. We give the opposition so much time and space that they can cycle to puck as low as the top of the circle with no pressure. We only have one guy up top, and he roams around, giving the other team way to much time to make any play they want.

It's not because of faceoffs. It's because of bad coaching.

Originally Posted by MrMastodonFarm

It's also because of face-offs. It's like their can't be more than one reason why something fails.

Crazy tunnel vision.

And terrible goaltending!

[Coach]

Originally Posted by Bandwagon In Flames

So you're saying that Hartley has lost the room and players no longer listen to him? Guess that means it's time to move on.

I think I'll take a break from CP until the Hartley apologists are gone. I can't believe how right HF boards was when they always say CP is just one big circle jerk of homers.

I'm not saying that Hartley's been doing a great job. I haven't been a fan of the way he's handled the defence and the special teams personally. But to suggest players losing the puck in bad spots is somehow his fault is pretty ridiculous. He can't play the game for them.