[Game Takes] Game Takes: Flames 3 Canucks 0

[Bingo]

Flames 3 Canucks 0

- Big Save Dave Solid!
- Top line keeps rolling
- Team sits on third period lead
- PK had to be solid going 6/6

[ricardodw]

according to your analysis Coach Peters is playing with fire.

He gave his stumbling defensemen Hannifin/Hamonic (actually the #1 pairing this game) twice the ice time as the dominate Andersson/Kylington pairing.

ES TOI

Hannifin/Hamonic 19/18 minutes
Gio/Brodie 13/14 minutes
Andersson/Kylington 12/10

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by ricardodw

according to your analysis Coach Peters is playing with fire.

He gave his stumbling defensemen Hannifin/Hamonic (actually the #1 pairing this game) twice the ice time as the dominate Andersson/Kylington pairing.

ES TOI

Hannifin/Hamonic 19/18 minutes
Gio/Brodie 13/14 minutes
Andersson/Kylington 12/10

I expect matchups played a significant role. Checking against Brandon Sutter and Jay Beagle tends to be more than a little less difficult than against Bo Horvat and Elias Petterson.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by ricardodw

according to your analysis Coach Peters is playing with fire.

He gave his stumbling defensemen Hannifin/Hamonic (actually the #1 pairing this game) twice the ice time as the dominate Andersson/Kylington pairing.

ES TOI

Hannifin/Hamonic 19/18 minutes
Gio/Brodie 13/14 minutes
Andersson/Kylington 12/10

Or ... Andersson and Kylington had a good night, but Bill Peters still doesn't trust the third pairing with zone starts and tough matchups.

Right?

[Finger Cookin]

How does the expected GF% stat work?

[Bingo]

It's almost like a more pure +/- based on play and not the outcome.

A player that gets owned but has a goaltender bail them out will still be even, but his XGF% will crater as he gives up shot attempts and scoring chances.

It basically looks at the quantity and quality of shot attempts for and against and applies it to each player as a split.

[Finger Cookin]

So 50% is a wash, higher is better, lower is worse? Thanks for the explanation!

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by Finger Cookin

So 50% is a wash, higher is better, lower is worse? Thanks for the explanation!

You got it.

Giordano was the best regular last year at 56%. James Neal was last at 48%, the only player on the team under water (that played 500 or more minutes)

[Itse]

(Not to get into "another fancy stats fight", but for the record, the actual value of GF% is highly debatable. As is typical for shot-based stats. Personally I think it's mostly a distracting data point with no actual value, but I'm a sceptic and I could be wrong.)

(Just to make it clear, I still appreciate the effort Bingo makes in adding that stuff to the Game Takes. It's not for me, and that's fine )

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by Itse

(Not to get into "another fancy stats fight", but for the record, the actual value of GF% is highly debatable. As is typical for shot-based stats. Personally I think it's mostly a distracting data point with no actual value, but I'm a sceptic and I could be wrong.)

(Just to make it clear, I still appreciate the effort Bingo makes in adding that stuff to the Game Takes. It's not for me, and that's fine )

I like it more than CF% because it assigns a quality to the shot attempts to drive actual expected goal rates.

When you look at last season doesn't the xGF% make sense when compared to the eye test?

Top 5
Giordano
Hamonic
Ryan
Lindholm
Frolik

Bottom 5
Neal
Andersson
Hathaway
Jankowski
Monahan

[American COR]

Originally Posted by Bingo

I like it more than CF% because it assigns a quality to the shot attempts to drive actual expected goal rates.

When you look at last season doesn't the xGF% make sense when compared to the eye test?

Top 5
Giordano
Hamonic
Ryan
Lindholm
Frolik

Bottom 5
Neal
Andersson
Hathaway
Jankowski
Monahan

Doesn't seem to have a strong correlation with the best offensive players on the team but it sure makes Tre's acquisitions look good. I find this stuff fascinating because it seems to highlight players that seem to be on the ice for relatively more quality offensive events than defensive events.

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by American COR

Doesn't seem to have a strong correlation with the best offensive players on the team but it sure makes Tre's acquisitions look good. I find this stuff fascinating because it seems to highlight players that seem to be on the ice for relatively more quality offensive events than defensive events.

Calgary's best offensive players give up too much defensively, certainly part of the problem.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by Finger Cookin

How does the expected GF% stat work?

My expected GF% in high school was .005%

That’s expected girlfriend right?

[loosecannon3]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

My expected GF% in high school was .005%

That’s expected girlfriend right?

lol