[News] NHL 31 in 31: Calgary Flames 2018-19 season preview

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by ricardodw

I agree that the defense might be better than last year. But it is 1 of 6 risks.

If Brodie is a -16 d-man for real then what?

Absolutely ...

if Brodie doesn't bounce back they've hurt their first pairing and if Hanifin and Hamonic aren't steadier than last year's second pairing that could be a mess.

But imagine if Hamilton was traded for Phil Kessel straight up and how the defense core would look right now?

[Strange Brew]

The team's results over the first 60% of the season was certainly the symptom of the team's bigger problem. Players like Smith, Gaudreau, Monahan, Ferland and Tkachuk were blowing the doors off and yet the team's results were OK but not great.

Yeah maybe Backlund, Frolik and Brodie weren't playing great but on balance, you take those trade-offs every time.

It speaks to problems with the overall structure of the team which is definitely what Treliving tried to address this off season. Treliving even says it in the Haynes article, that they needed to not rely on certain players so much because that wasn't getting it done.

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by ricardodw

The Flames were not more than a few pts above the make the playoff line last year when Smith was far exceeding expectations...

Please explain how you arrived at the assertion that “Smith was far exceeding expectations.”

He was 0.003 points off of his career-level SP, and his GAA was 0.05 pts above average. Those look like reasonable expectations which were easily met, and in no way exceeded.

This is yet another example of your tendency to make gross exaggerations as a means to support a flimsy narrative.

[Oil Stain]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

Please explain how you arrived at the assertion that “Smith was far exceeding expectations.”

He was 0.003 points off of his career-level SP, and his GAA was 0.05 pts above average. Those look like reasonable expectations which were easily met, and in no way exceeded.

This is yet another example of your tendency to make gross exaggerations as a means to support a flimsy narrative.

He was exceeding expectations for most of the season.

At the All Star break Smith was at .926% save percentage which was substantially above his career average.

Ricardodw is not grossly exaggerating anything.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by Oil Stain

He was exceeding expectations for most of the season.

At the All Star break Smith was at .926% save percentage which was substantially above his career average.

Ricardodw is not grossly exaggerating anything.

On Feb 11th (Ricardodw's arbitrary date), Smith was at .921 which was 15th in the league (minimum 10 games), and was only .005 above where he finished the season, and within .007 of 5 his totals from the last 7 years. Keeping in mind that all of those seasons were played on a doormat of a team.

Also on that arbitrary date, while it is true that they were 3 points out of 11th, he neglected to mention that they were also 2 points out of 2nd in the division and 10th in the NHL.

It may not have been 'gross exaggeration', but it was most definitely a case of cherry-picking stats and then presenting them in a very slanted way.

[Oil Stain]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

On Feb 11th (Ricardodw's arbitrary date), Smith was at .921 which was 15th in the league (minimum 10 games), and was only .005 above where he finished the season, and within .007 of 5 his totals from the last 7 years. Keeping in mind that all of those seasons were played on a doormat of a team.

Also on that arbitrary date, while it is true that they were 3 points out of 11th, he neglected to mention that they were also 2 points out of 2nd in the division and 10th in the NHL.

It may not have been 'gross exaggeration', but it was most definitely a case of cherry-picking stats and then presenting them in a very slanted way.

Except Ricardodw didn't choose that date. Bingo did.

It's like reading comprehension goes out the window when Ricardodw makes a post and some people go out of their way to attack the poster.

[AC]

February 11th wasn't arbitrary. It was the day Mike Smith was injured, which seems completely justified considering the season changed immediately as of that date.

The rest of Enoch Root's points regarding Ricardodw are spot on though.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by Oil Stain

Except Ricardodw didn't choose that date. Bingo did.

It's like reading comprehension goes out the window when Ricardodw makes a post and some people go out of their way to attack the poster.

Well excuse me for not going far enough backwards in the thread, and just assuming he made the date up. If you are as aware of ricardodw's posting style as you say, you would be well aware that arbitrary dates are in fact a big part of his shtick.

[killer_carlson]

Originally Posted by djsFlames

Skeptics really think a healthy Smith won't manage a .915% with what he showed us until he wasn't healthy last season (probably close to .924 tending)?
And has Giordano's pairing been a liability in any season since he's become elite? - I'll answer that one, no. He'll elevate whoever he's with and that's why it's the best place for Brodie.
That also means no more of that second pairing that didn't work. Is it possible Hanifin compliments Hamonic better?
Last point is the Flames added more scoring up and down the lineup. So does that not alleviate some pressure on the defense to play shut down as much as they needed to with 27th placed scoring last season?
It's fine to look at how they've underperformed in years past as an indication of missing again but this team underwent quite an overhaul and in the process players that remained have also shifted to more favorable positions. Also an entirely new coaching staff with new strategies and some addition by subtraction with Stajan and Brouwer gone in favor of young talent.
It's the sheer difference in the makeup of the roster that leads me to believe that there's a better chance of similar results not repeating. Too many look to the past to predict the future and that would only be fair if we were going in with largely the same group and same depth but things have changed rather drastically.

The Flames added scoring in the lineup but they also removed the #1 goal scoring dman in the NHL from last season.

This shouldn't be overlooked

[ricardodw]

Originally Posted by killer_carlson

The Flames added scoring in the lineup but they also removed the #1 goal scoring dman in the NHL from last season.

This shouldn't be overlooked

Forwards Neal, Lindholm, Ryan replacing Ferland, Stajan and Brouwer
Defense Hanifin replacing Hamilton

Net gain of 18 goals.


Without PP goals net gain: 15.

[Strange Brew]

Originally Posted by ricardodw

Forwards Neal, Lindholm, Ryan replacing Ferland, Stajan and Brouwer
Defense Hanifin replacing Hamilton

Net gain of 18 goals.


Without PP goals net gain: 15.

Losing Jagr’s goal though is going to hurt.

[SebC]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

On Feb 11th (Ricardodw's arbitrary date), Smith was at .921 which was 15th in the league (minimum 10 games), and was only .005 above where he finished the season, and within .007 of 5 his totals from the last 7 years.

A 0.916 goaltender allows 6.3% more goals than a 0.921 goalie, and a 0.914 goalie allows 10.9% more more than 0.921. Over, say, 2000 shots, that's a substantial 12-22 goal difference.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by killer_carlson

The Flames added scoring in the lineup but they also removed the #1 goal scoring dman in the NHL from last season.

This shouldn't be overlooked

Three way tie for the goal lead iirc. And well back in overall points. Hamilton had nice finish but he also got some pretty sweet feeds coming in from the point to the circle.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by SebC

A 0.916 goaltender allows 6.3% more goals than a 0.921 goalie, and a 0.914 goalie allows 10.9% more more than 0.921. Over, say, 2000 shots, that's a substantial 12-22 goal difference.

Goals against are much more a function of the quality of shots against than the quantity (high danger vs not high danger, for instance).

Simply calculating the number of goals against, based on shots and not the quality of those shots, is all but meaningless. The number of assumptions that would be required, in order to simply add those 12-22 goals, make the leap academic.

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by Oil Stain

Except Ricardodw didn't choose that date. Bingo did.

It's like reading comprehension goes out the window when Ricardodw makes a post and some people go out of their way to attack the poster.

For you?

He suggested the Flames were riding Smith at the deadline which is February 28th, and I pointed out February 11th was actually his last start before injury.

Pick either and Smith's stats are the same as he didn't play in between

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by killer_carlson

The Flames added scoring in the lineup but they also removed the #1 goal scoring dman in the NHL from last season.

This shouldn't be overlooked

No it shouldn't. But it shouldn't be looked at in isolation either.

Last year, Giordano, Brodie and Hamonic combined for 18 goals. In the prior 3 years, those 3 averaged 27. So, while Hamilton's goal scoring was up, the rest of the top 4 was down.

What matters is what the group does in the aggregate, not what any one player does individually. Last year, the Flames' defense produced: 40G, 106A, 146P which was the lowest production from the last 4 years.

I predict - and am prepared to bet - that they exceed those numbers this year.

[Duffalufagus]

Originally Posted by djsFlames

Skeptics really think a healthy Smith won't manage a .915% with what he showed us until he wasn't healthy last season (probably close to .924 tending)?
And has Giordano's pairing been a liability in any season since he's become elite? - I'll answer that one, no. He'll elevate whoever he's with and that's why it's the best place for Brodie.
That also means no more of that second pairing that didn't work. Is it possible Hanifin compliments Hamonic better?
Last point is the Flames added more scoring up and down the lineup. So does that not alleviate some pressure on the defense to play shut down as much as they needed to with 27th placed scoring last season?
It's fine to look at how they've underperformed in years past as an indication of missing again but this team underwent quite an overhaul and in the process players that remained have also shifted to more favorable positions. Also an entirely new coaching staff with new strategies and some addition by subtraction with Stajan and Brouwer gone in favor of young talent.
It's the sheer difference in the makeup of the roster that leads me to believe that there's a better chance of similar results not repeating. Too many look to the past to predict the future and that would only be fair if we were going in with largely the same group and same depth but things have changed rather drastically.

I’m not saying you’re wrong, I’m just saying that at some point the “underperforming” narrative needs to be replaced by the “performing” narrative. As in, the results are the results.

I would guess not many fans of other teams are envious of our d. Just sayin.

And Smith is 36. We need one of the young guys to truly emerge and win games on the road and at home or no playoffs. He isn’t playing 60 games.

[Duffalufagus]

Originally Posted by ricardodw

I agree that the defense might be better than last year. But it is 1 of 6 risks.

If Brodie is a -16 d-man for real then what?

If Brodie is -16 playing with Gio we are cooked. Won’t happen.

[Aarongavey]

Originally Posted by Bingo

Absolutely ...

if Brodie doesn't bounce back they've hurt their first pairing and if Hanifin and Hamonic aren't steadier than last year's second pairing that could be a mess.

But imagine if Hamilton was traded for Phil Kessel straight up and how the defense core would look right now?

This post is exactly correct, imagine Stone in the top 4. Haha, Stone is barely a top 6 guy. Bingo is right, Flames needed dmen coming back because Stone in particular and Kulak less so are so weak.

[Strange Brew]

Originally Posted by Aarongavey

This post is exactly correct, imagine Stone in the top 4. Haha, Stone is barely a top 6 guy. Bingo is right, Flames needed dmen coming back because Stone in particular and Kulak less so are so weak.

Well of course you would still have Ferland and Fox per Bingo’s scenario. And perhaps no need to sign Neal. So you have $’s and/or trade chips so Treliving would have done something.