“Make it to the playoffs an anything could happen"

[Flamesfan05]

Originally Posted by Bingo

Jesus not this again.

The stats you are referring to is the standings, and I'm pretty sure the difference between the before and after Zadorov success rate for the team is something more than Zadorov out, Oesterle in.

Yeah Zadorov trade maybe a win depending on the picks and what Conroy can take advantage of the cap gain

It’s in no way make the Flames better right now cause Zadorov is way better than zero or whoever the Flames have to replace him so far

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by Strange Brew

Not to mention the small sample size. About a week ago, the record was worse without Zadorov in the lineup.

Now it is better.

Perfect example of someone with strong opinion and actively seeks only data that supports it.

And Calgary's goaltender going full Vezina almost since the moment Zadorov left ....

[Scroopy Noopers]

I’m all here for selling off our UFA’s, catching fire, and making it a round or two. What a blast that would be.

[TheIronMaiden]

Originally Posted by Scroopy Noopers

I’m all here for selling off our UFA’s, catching fire, and making it a round or two. What a blast that would be.

Honestly, trading the three UFAs would reduce a lot of tension and distraction.

[Reggie Dunlop]

[topfiverecords]

Just be sure to acquire Nieminen and Simon before the deadline.

[dino7c]

Originally Posted by Flamesfan05

Yeah Zadorov trade maybe a win depending on the picks and what Conroy can take advantage of the cap gain

It’s in no way make the Flames better right now cause Zadorov is way better than zero or whoever the Flames have to replace him so far

Gilbert and Zadorov aren't that far apart IMO
Zadorov may be more risk more reward...big hits that put him out of position

Not signing him to an extension is an auto win and trading him hasn't cost the team a single point

[dino7c]

Originally Posted by Bingo

Jesus not this again.

The stats you are referring to is the standings, and I'm pretty sure the difference between the before and after Zadorov success rate for the team is something more than Zadorov out, Oesterle in.

haha you guys are too easy

way too easy

it is absolutely destroying you that the Flames have a better record since Zadorov left like I said they would

[dino7c]

Originally Posted by Strange Brew

Not to mention the small sample size. About a week ago, the record was worse without Zadorov in the lineup.

Now it is better.

Perfect example of someone with strong opinion and actively seeks only data that supports it.

and 3 days earlier it was better

so its about the same or better the entire time...he obviously isn't a HUGE loss as was suggested initially or the #1 dman like his idiot agent said. He was 6th in ice time for the Canucks recently, GL with that big contract guy. Maybe in Columbus.

Glad Gilbert is back...I think he was really taking steps

This is also rich coming from a guy who found a game before Zadorov was traded that he didn't play to try and prove me wrong. Fact is the Flames haven't missed him much if at all. They went through the toughest part of their schedule without him and did better.

Heck they beat the Sens without him giving them free goals!

[CSharp]

Originally Posted by Flamesfan05

Conclusion: need Sutter back for anything can happen

LOL, he's still got unfinished business! He comes back, team will just miss by a tie breaker process and the team picks somewhere in the mid draft position and we lose all the pending free agent players for nothing! Frickin Murphy's Law should then be changed to Sutter's Law.

[SuperMatt18]

Originally Posted by dino7c

Flames have already traded 2 pending UFAs

one was their leading scorer last year...both trades look like wins. Picks and a younger player that is playing awesome.

I wouldn't be too worried, its a new era

I'm not as sold as you are.

They had indicated that they wanted to move on from Zadorov and Toffoli from before those trades...it's actually why both guys asked for trades...because they were unhappy the Flames weren't going to give them big contracts.

Lindholm, Hanifin, and Tanev are in a different bucket. As I think the Flames have made offers to all of them / there is some inclination they might re-sign.

I do worry that if by the deadline they are in a playoff position, and that they think there is still a chance they would re-sign, that they could talk themselves into keeping them and trying to re-sign them. Hell it terrifies me enough already when Dissentowner said that they are still open to extending Lindholm, anything over $8M would look like a big overpayment at this point.

It would probably be okay for Hanifin, but not the other two.

[dino7c]

I would sign Hanifin

Tanev trade, I actually think his game is fading sorry to say

Lindholm trade

I'm not against youngish players coming back

[Roof-Daddy]

Originally Posted by dino7c

I would sign Hanifin

Tanev trade, I actually think his game is fading sorry to say

Lindholm trade

I'm not against youngish players coming back

I'm leaning towards this as well, and I've never been a huge Hanifin fan but you can build a solid D around Hanifin, Andersson, Weegar for many years still IMO.

I also hope Markstrom continues to have alights out season and then gets moved at the draft for more futures. He could pull in a really solid return IMO if he continues playing well like he has. Much better than just dumping Vladar for a late pick.

[Sec214]

Originally Posted by Scroopy Noopers

I’m all here for selling off our UFA’s, catching fire, and making it a round or two. What a blast that would be.

Sell Sell Sell


Then saddle up and enjoy the ride.

[Pellanor]

I wanted to look into regular season success vs playoff success, to see if deep runs were more likely for teams with regular regular season success. To do that I first counted the number of top 10 regular season finishes since the lockout. Then I counted how many times each team made each round of the playoffs, and assigned a score to each.
1st round loss: 0 points (you made it, but nothing happened)
2nd round loss: 1 point
Conference finals: 2 points
Cup finals: 4 points
This gives an average of 1 point per playoff appearance, so I could simply subtract the number of playoff appearances from the total score to get a playoff success score that gives a rough idea of how deep the team goes when it makes the playoffs.

Here's the table with the data.

Team                  RS Top 10   RS Top 5   Made Playoffs  PO Score   PO Success
Pittsburgh Penguins          13          6              15        21            6
Boston Bruins                11          7              14        18            4
Washington Capitals          11          7              13         9           -4
San Jose Sharks              10          5              13        15            2
Tampa Bay Lightning           9          4              13        22            9
Anaheim Ducks                 9          6              11        12            1
Chicago Blackhawks            8          3              10        16            6
New York Rangers              8          2              13        14            1
Detroit Red Wings             7          4              11        13            2
Vancouver Canucks             7          3               8         8            0
New Jersey Devils             7          2               8         7           -1
St Louis Blues                7          5              11         9           -2
Nashville Predators           7          3              13         8           -5
Dallas Stars                  6          3               9        10            1
Colorado Avalanche            6          4              10         9           -1
Carolina Hurricanes           5          4               7        12            5
Los Angeles Kings             5          0               9        10            1
Montreal Canadiens            5          3              11        10           -1
Philadelphia Flyers           5          1              10         9           -1
Minnesota Wild                5          2              11         2           -9
Vegas Golden Knights          4          3               5        12            7
Toronto Maple Leafs           4          3               6         1           -5
Calgary Flames                4          1               9         2           -7
Edmonton Oilers               3          0               5         8            3
Florida Panthers              3          2               5         5            0
New York Islanders            3          1               8         6           -2
Buffalo Sabres                2          2               4         4            0
Ottawa Senators               2          1               8         8            0
Arizona Coyotes               2          1               4         2           -2
Winnipeg Jets                 1          1               7         4           -3
Columbus Blue Jacket          1          1               6         1           -5
Seattle Kraken                0          0               1         1            0

And here's a chart with the same data. In the upper right we see the teams that have succeeded in both the regular season and playoffs. The upper left are the teams that under perform in the playoffs. The lower right are the teams that have playoffs success with little regular season success. And the teams in the lower right are the bubble teams that make the playoffs, but don't go on runs.

[Enoch Root]

Everyone keeps looking for simple patterns, and simple recipes for success.

Here is what the above chart shows: the Flames (and the Leafs and BJs and Wild) haven't had playoff success. That's it. Full stop.

No matter how you slice it and dice it, no matter how many ways you analyze it, the same truth remains: the Flames haven't had any playoff success. And we all know this.

[gvitaly]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

Everyone keeps looking for simple patterns, and simple recipes for success.

Here is what the above chart shows: the Flames (and the Leafs and BJs and Wild) haven't had playoff success. That's it. Full stop.

No matter how you slice it and dice it, no matter how many ways you analyze it, the same truth remains: the Flames haven't had any playoff success. And we all know this.

I don't think anyone is pretending it's simple, but there's definitely a correlation between certain things. It's difficult to simply say do X, Y, and Z and win the Stanley Cup in 5–10 years. Obviously, we're dealing with players, injuries, bounces, and referees, so there will always be random events that influence a playoff series, or help a team win the cup.

Dismissing something, or poking holes in something, is a lot easier than doing the work in an attempt to understand if there's a pattern in the data. Moreover, I don't think anyone here is attempting to draw a conclusion for you. It's an attempt to get a better picture than a cliché like: "make the playoffs, and anything can happen", which isn't wrong, but oversimplifies things.

[nik-]

Originally Posted by Scroopy Noopers

I’m all here for selling off our UFA’s, catching fire, and making it a round or two. What a blast that would be.

That would be hilarious. The assets and the ride.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by gvitaly

I don't think anyone is pretending it's simple, but there's definitely a correlation between certain things. It's difficult to simply say do X, Y, and Z and win the Stanley Cup in 5–10 years. Obviously, we're dealing with players, injuries, bounces, and referees, so there will always be random events that influence a playoff series, or help a team win the cup.

Dismissing something, or poking holes in something, is a lot easier than doing the work in an attempt to understand if there's a pattern in the data. Moreover, I don't think anyone here is attempting to draw a conclusion for you. It's an attempt to get a better picture than a cliché like: "make the playoffs, and anything can happen", which isn't wrong, but oversimplifies things.

Let me be clear: I love stats, and I appreciate people doing the work.

What I am saying is that we actually haven't seen a lot of correlation so far. Look at the scatter plot above - not much correlation there. People are doing the work because they want to find the patterns and the correlations, and I am just saying, there aren't as many as we would have thought, going in.

There is no simple way to build a team: every team is limited by the cap, and by the 50-man roster. And every team can acquire assets via the draft, trades (a net zero sum game), and free agency. And the draft is self-correcting: if you do poorly, you get better draft picks.

As a result of all these things, most of the fish in this eco system, are roughly the same size, give or take.

[troutman]

Originally Posted by Mathgod

Wrong answer. There are no 3/18 odds and the Flames have never had 3/18 odds in the last 33 years (with '04 being the one exception). So the odds for this team have been more like 1/33 or something in that ballpark.

The 2 Kings teams had Sutter, who utilizes a system that is specifically meant for playoff success, and the correct type of roster construction that is suited for that system.

The Blues had the hottest goalie in the world for 6 months and one of the best records in the league in the 2nd half of that season.

So these are special circumstances that have never applied to the Flames, outside of '04.

The LA teams were far better than their seeding would suggest. They had three hall of famers that they drafted and a top coach.

The Blues were allowed to mug their way to a Cup. Berube dared the refs to call penalties, and they did not.