Worst Bottom 6 in the NHL (Statistically, It's Not Even Close)

[Mr.Coffee]

Nah you're right everyone, I'm sure that because the OP didn't provide a university level thesis with indexed research and hours of analysis, graphs, charts and scientific testing his point is completely invalid.

[CsInMyBlood]

Originally Posted by Kovaz

That implies a comparison with other teams, which you obviously didn't do. I guarantee no team has 32 goals ("quadrupling" our 8 goals) from their bottom 6. And there are a number of teams right where we are. Removing the top 6 scoring forwards, here's how many goals some other teams have from their remaining forwards:

Boston: 8
Pittsburgh: 8
Los Angeles: 9
St.Louis: 9
Montreal: 10
Philadelphia: 10
Tampa Bay: 11

So I guess Pittsburgh, Los Angeles, St. Louis, and Tampa Bay also shouldn't be contenders or expected to go deep in the playoffs. I'm sure if you explain away half of their goals as well, they'll look even worse.

Sure, our bottom-6 hasn't produced a ton of goals, but I think the 3rd line in particular is being excessively criticized. Pop quiz: which Flames line is scoring the most relative to their ice time?

• A) Gaudreau-Monahan-Ferland
• B) Tkachuk-Backlund-Frolik
• C) Bennett-Jankowski-Jagr

The correct answer is C) Bennett-Jankowski-Jagr, with 2.98 GF/60.
In second is Gaudreau-Monahan-Ferland with 2.86 GF/60, and Tkachuk-Backlund-Frolik trail far behind with 1.57 GF/60

Our bottom 6 is a problem, no doubt. But the hyperbole around them is a bit excessive. The 4th line sucks, but the 3rd line is showing positive signs despite being snakebitten.

Now are you including PK time in your GF/60? Because Backlund and Frolik have almost played 60 mins of PK time each, where Jagr has zero and Jankowski has 5 mins.

[EVERLAST]

It's a long damn season. The regular season is where this team improves , makes changes and earns it's place in the playoffs.

I don't care where we lineup in the playoffs just make it and then it's time to produce or defend or just win instead of losing....whatever it takes .

I always look back at 2004. No one gave a damn when we made the playoffs, no one could have anticipated with all the injuries we would lose the scf because of a bad bad bad call.....that's all that did us in as everyone stepped it up and contributed.

I'm going to be curious who is still here At game 82, how they are playing and if they are contributing in any way.

Treliving can help or let them sort it out on thier own. Seems to me waiving lack and scouting games himself seems like he's going to help.

Jagrs experience for the remainder of the season will help. Call ups from Stockton will help......it's just not as dire as we think.

We could be oiler fans. Delusional beyond belief ....I think we'll be fine.

D Sutter said it best....don't get too high, don't get too lowe.

[belsarius]

Originally Posted by EVERLAST

It's a long damn season. The regular season is where this team improves , makes changes and earns it's place in the playoffs.

I don't care where we lineup in the playoffs just make it and then it's time to produce or defend or just win instead of losing....whatever it takes .

I always look back at 2004. No one gave a damn when we made the playoffs, no one could have anticipated with all the injuries we would lose the scf because of a bad bad bad call.....that's all that did us in as everyone stepped it up and contributed.

I'm going to be curious who is still here At game 82, how they are playing and if they are contributing in any way.

Treliving can help or let them sort it out on thier own. Seems to me waiving lack and scouting games himself seems like he's going to help.

Jagrs experience for the remainder of the season will help. Call ups from Stockton will help......it's just not as dire as we think.

We could be oiler fans. Delusional beyond belief ....I think we'll be fine.

D Sutter said it best....don't get too high, don't get too lowe.

Typo? Intentional? Or Freudian slip? Either way, hilarious!

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by Mr.Coffee

Nah you're right everyone, I'm sure that because the OP didn't provide a university level thesis with indexed research and hours of analysis, graphs, charts and scientific testing his point is completely invalid.

Show me ONE POSTER in this thread who has disagreed with the OP’s opinion that the Flames bottom-six offence needs to improve.

No. That is not the issue. The issue with the OP was the assertion that the Flames bottom-six is the worst in the entire League by a wide margin, and he even claimed that statistics proved as much.

The problem is not the validity of the opinion. It is the attempt to exaggerate and then pass off this opinion as an incontrovertible fact. Yes, the Flames’ bottom-six is possibly a concern, but we still have no idea how it compares to other teams in the NHL.

[Oling_Roachinen]

Originally Posted by Kovaz

That implies a comparison with other teams, which you obviously didn't do. I guarantee no team has 32 goals ("quadrupling" our 8 goals) from their bottom 6. And there are a number of teams right where we are. Removing the top 6 scoring forwards, here's how many goals some other teams have from their remaining forwards:

That type of analysis is just far too simplified that it's actually going to remove good bottom six players completely missing the point. While most teams don't always have such a clear distinction between the top 6 and bottom 6 like the Flames do, a lot of teams do get scoring from their "third liners" that can and often do sneak into the top 6 in scoring.

Take for example New Jersey. Miles Wood has 6 goals, just one less than Versteeg, Jankowski, Bennett, Jagr, Brouwer, Lazar and friends combined. He has played with Noesen, Coleman, Boyle. Hayes, Stafford and Zacha in a predominately bottom 6 role in terms of ice-time. Yet in your analysis, you removed him as he is currently top 6 for the Devils in scoring.

Chris Stewart and Marcus Foligno formed a pretty clear duo on the third line for a good majority of the season playing behind Koivu and Staal's lines. They have 10 goals between them but again, you've removed Stewart and his 6 goals from your analysis. (Staal, Zucker, Granlund, Koivu, Niederreiter and Ennis are the players who likely form the 'real' top 6 for the Wild except today Winnik is somehow on the top line).

It's far from black and white. Especially when you factor in injuries, PP opportunity, double shifting, and all that jazz but I think you've over simplified the idea completely missing the point. It's probably pretty fair for most NHL teams, but for some it's just not usable when talking about the bottom 6.

[Oling_Roachinen]

And don't even get me started on Montreal.

Their third line, behind the Drouin line and Danault line, has been the Plekanec-Gallagher combination. Not infrequently has Byron been on that line.

The Byron-Plekanec-Gallagher line has a combined 17 goals between them. Plekanec is 6th in ice time for forwards, Byron is 7th and Gallagher is 9th so it's not like it's entirely unfair to label them the bottom 6 either.

To argue that Montreal has received 10 goals from their bottom six is entirely inaccurate. Gallagher has scored 9 goals himself. Gallagher has played primarily with the third line center, is 9th in ice-time for forwards, 7th in ice-time on the PP. It's hard to argue that he hasn't been a third liner for Montreal this season in terms of actual assignment. In reality, Montreal has benefited from a very good bottom six. Their issue is the top six.

[ckendall]

Originally Posted by Classic_Sniper

I said it was a loose stat and maybe it's wrong, maybe it's not.

I told my boss I was on time to work every day the last two years and no sick days. HR had a different opinion, backed up by real data like my time card showing late arrival multiple times and time stamped photos of me arriving late. But I was able to brush it off by saying my claim was only a loose stat and that I might be wrong, or I might not. We both agreed I was a damn fine worker, but for some reason I didn’t get a raise ... can’t figure out why.

[edslunch]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

Show me ONE POSTER in this thread who has disagreed with the OP’s opinion that the Flames bottom-six offence needs to improve.

No. That is not the issue. The issue with the OP was the assertion that the Flames bottom-six is the worst in the entire League by a wide margin, and he even claimed that statistics proved as much.

The problem is not the validity of the opinion. It is the attempt to exaggerate and then pass off this opinion as an incontrovertible fact. Yes, the Flames’ bottom-six is possibly a concern, but we still have no idea how it compares to other teams in the NHL.

Relax. He tried to make a reasonable point and didn't back it up very well. It doesn't need to be an issue.

[SebC]

This is the classic CalgaryPuck that I remember and love. A post that is unsound getting torn apart, not with personal attacks or one-line drivebys with dozens of "thanks", but with logic. Hopefully this will dissuade similarly unsound posts and raise the quality of the discussions that do get started.

[Stay Golden]

Gulutzen has done the right thing sitting Stajan several games has made a notable improvement on the 4th line. If only he would decide the same fate for Brouwer that would be perfect. 5 on 5 the rush dies on his stick, and when he doesn't have the puck he is often off on his timing resulting in offside. Brouwer is also the weakest link on the PK. Terrible won't consistantly stay commited to disrupting the passing lanes and chases the play way too much by being out of position.

[Love]

> "statistically, it's not close"
> no statistics in op

[savemedrzaius]

Originally Posted by Oling_Roachinen

That type of analysis is just far too simplified that it's actually going to remove good bottom six players completely missing the point. While most teams don't always have such a clear distinction between the top 6 and bottom 6 like the Flames do, a lot of teams do get scoring from their "third liners" that can and often do sneak into the top 6 in scoring.

Take for example New Jersey. Miles Wood has 6 goals, just one less than Versteeg, Jankowski, Bennett, Jagr, Brouwer, Lazar and friends combined. He has played with Noesen, Coleman, Boyle. Hayes, Stafford and Zacha in a predominately bottom 6 role in terms of ice-time. Yet in your analysis, you removed him as he is currently top 6 for the Devils in scoring.

Chris Stewart and Marcus Foligno formed a pretty clear duo on the third line for a good majority of the season playing behind Koivu and Staal's lines. They have 10 goals between them but again, you've removed Stewart and his 6 goals from your analysis. (Staal, Zucker, Granlund, Koivu, Niederreiter and Ennis are the players who likely form the 'real' top 6 for the Wild except today Winnik is somehow on the top line).

It's far from black and white. Especially when you factor in injuries, PP opportunity, double shifting, and all that jazz but I think you've over simplified the idea completely missing the point. It's probably pretty fair for most NHL teams, but for some it's just not usable when talking about the bottom 6.

This is the Leafs projected lineup tonight. Hard to say which is the first line, which is the second, which is the third or fourth?

Hyman - Matthews - Marner
4. 12. 2
van Riemsdyk - Bozak - Nylander
11. 4. 4
Komarov - Kadri - Soshnikov
2. 11. 0
Leivo - Marleau - Brown
0. 8. 8

[GranteedEV]

What is bizarre is that the Flames trailed only Minnesota last year in terms of 10+ goal scorers.


I'm gonna chalk it all down to random chance.

[Geeoff]

Jankowski and Jagr have played well. Maybe keep Bennett and Lazar because of potential. The rest of the rotating scrubs in the bottom 6 need to go.

[Finger Cookin]

Originally Posted by Mr.Coffee

Nah you're right everyone, I'm sure that because the OP didn't provide a university level thesis with indexed research and hours of analysis, graphs, charts and scientific testing his point is completely invalid.

I'd settle for elementary school science fair level at this point. We have a hypothesis here. There are recorded results. Could those be analyzed? No, who has time for that when the hottest fresh takes need to be served up continually?

[Classic_Sniper]

Originally Posted by Love

> "statistically, it's not close"
> no statistics in op

Alright so, maybe some people didn't appreciate the idea that we are 'by far the worst,' but based on the small amount of stats that I had garnered up in the time frame I had, it appeared to me that we had the worst bottom 6 production and you know what, I still don't necessarily believe that I'm wrong.

I might not have all the stats to make my point definitive without doubt, but I did pull up 'STATS' that revealed that the 3rd and 4th line by themselves, have only produced goals in 2 out of the 21 games this season. I think anyone who has watched this team closely has probably realized that when a goal is scored, it's almost always generated by someone in our top 6. Now obviously I haven't and by the way, will not be looking up every team and every box score in the league to see how much production each bottom 6 has produced each game. But I doubt any team has received less game by game production than we have. If someone wants to do the research to prove that I am wrong, have at it, but I am steadfast that 2 games out of 21 has to be up there with the league's worst.

[JerryUnderscore]

I had some time on my hands so I decided to take a look at the top six compared to everyone else. In this comparison, I'm looking at each players career averages versus what they've done this year.

I initially only looked at goals, shots and shooting percentage, but then I was also curious if playing style or usage might affect how often someone is shooting, so I decided to take a look at shots/60 as well.

Note: For players who have been in the league a while, Natural Stat Trick didn't have all their data but only the past 9-10 seasons. Especially for a player like Jagr that's probably a good thing since he's nowhere near the player he was 20 years ago.

All this data was taken from NaturalStatTrick and is for 5v5 goals.



A couple things stick out to me.

1. The top line are all exceeding expectations in terms of both shooting percentage and shots/60. You could argue that Monahan is shooting at roughly his career average but he's taking more shots which is great. Gaudreau and Ferland are both shooting more frequently and better than their career averages. I would assume Ferland will come back down to earth as far as his shooting percentage?

2. Frolik isn't shooting nearly as well as he has historically and he's also averaging 2 fewer shots/60 than normal. I don't know if this is Gulutzan asking him to play more defensively? That would explain the shots/60, but his shooting percentage is just garbage right now.

3. Tkachuk only has 1 season that I was able to use for his "career" average. As such, I don't know if there's much point in comparing this season to his average.

4. Jankowski is obviously a small sample size, but I like his 10.53% shooting percentage. I have no idea if that is indicative of what he will be as a shooter or if that will decrease. Only time will tell.

5. Bennett is shooting well below his career average in terms of shooting percentage. I'm not sure if that's because he is actively getting worse as a player of if he's just having terrible luck. While he might not be the 13% shooter he was his first year, I highly doubt he's going to be a career 4.35% shooter forever. He's bound to get some more goals eventually.

6. Aside from Brouwer and Jagr, just about everyone in the bottom six has been shooting at their career average (in terms of shots/60) but nothing is going in. Based on the number of shots the bottom six has taken, you would expect 11.425 goals from them. Instead they have 6. If they bottom six was sitting at 11 goals this season instead of 6, there's no way we would have having this conversation.


That's all I've got. Feel free to analyze this data as well and let me know if you see anything else interesting!

[JerryUnderscore]

Originally Posted by Classic_Sniper

Alright so, maybe some people didn't appreciate the idea that we are 'by far the worst,' but based on the small amount of stats that I had garnered up in the time frame I had, it appeared to me that we had the worst bottom 6 production and you know what, I still don't necessarily believe that I'm wrong.

I might not have all the stats to make my point definitive without doubt, but I did pull up 'STATS' that revealed that the 3rd and 4th line by themselves, have only produced goals in 2 out of the 21 games this season. I think anyone who has watched this team closely has probably realized that when a goal is scored, it's almost always generated by someone in our top 6. Now obviously I haven't and by the way, will not be looking up every team and every box score in the league to see how much production each bottom 6 has produced each game. But I doubt any team has received less game by game production than we have. If someone wants to do the research to prove that I am wrong, have at it, but I am steadfast that 2 games out of 21 has to be up there with the league's worst.

I don't mean to pile on, but I think there are two reasons for that:

1. The best players play on the top lines. It stands to reason that if you put your best players (those with the best shooting percentage and ability to create offence) on your first and second line, those will be the lines that score most often.

2. Your first and second lines are typically getting significantly more ice time than your third and fourth lines. For example, Gaudreau is averaging almost 14 minutes of ice time per night 5v5 while Versteeg and Brouwer are getting less than 10 each. That's 40% more ice time for the first line than the fourth. In which case, you might expect somewhere around 40% more production from your first line (assuming all players were generating offence at the same rate, but see point #1).

If we were to look at each team based on average ice time and compare their top six forwards against the rest of the team, we would probably find a a large percentage of goals came from the top six. This would be a massive project that I won't be tackling anytime soon.

[stone hands]

I think people would be less inclined to keep ribbing this thread if you would accept you made an unsubstantiated claim, used fake news to prove it, then continued to try and use said unsubstantiated fake news even in the face of real evidence

You could just say my bad I over exaggerated and move on, but you insist on continuing to use your disproved ‘facts’ as an argument. Just stop