[GDT] Game 3: Flames vs Canucks SN1/Fan960 7pm MT

[Toonage]

Originally Posted by Bingo

Nobody with those splits is stifling or killing momentum.

Dumb penalties ... clearly.

Can't finish ... historically.

But no he isn't stifling anything, he and for whatever reason reasonable players he plays with just don't finish them when he's on the ice.

What about the o-zone penalties? I feel if you enter the zone, maintain possession and lose it on a penalty that far from your own net you're hurting any momentum gains.

[Patek23]

Originally Posted by Bingo

I just don't see win% as .500 when the game played after 60 minutes is 3 on 3 and then a shoot out. It's not really like the game itself.

The Flames have won a game, and earned a third point in a tie.

Ive always taken win percentage to be the most literal sense. How many games you won over how many you didn't. Two different stats which people are mixing into the same thing. Win percentage doesnt care about an OTL or SOL. Points percentage does.

So wins over losses we are .500

Seperately, we have earned 3/4 points. So points percentage wise (the ultimately more important stat) we are .750

[SeanCharles]

You make the playoffs based upon points, not just wins.

3 out of 4 points is not .500.

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by Toonage

What about the o-zone penalties? I feel if you enter the zone, maintain possession and lose it on a penalty that far from your own net you're hurting any momentum gains.

Right ... for those two shifts.

But if you have literally two thirds of all the metrics going your way on a line nobody is killing momentum regularly.

[Patek23]

Originally Posted by SeanCharles

You make the playoffs based upon points, not just wins.

3 out of 4 points is not .500.

Your almost there. You see we've played 2 games and won 1. .500

However, more importantly as well. We have earned 3/4 points as our loss occured in OT. So points percentage wise (which is its own stat aside from win percentage) we are .750.

Why do people have such trouble realizing they're two seperate things. If there was a stat for goals percentage over a season would you incorporate assists into that because they still recieve points?

[CsInMyBlood]

Originally Posted by Bingo

Right ... for those two shifts.

But if you have literally two thirds of all the metrics going your way on a line nobody is killing momentum regularly.

Right but a PP takes momentum away for 2 mins, not just a shift. A goal on that PP really changes the game.

Sam Bennett has always taken ridiculous no reason stick infractions in the O zone. You can call them "cheap" or weak penalties but why put your stick there in the first place. I can see a player having it happen on occasion but Bennett continually does it. It's always been a problem for him. He does not learn from it. What does that say about him?

[The Yen Man]

Originally Posted by Flaming Homer

Ive always taken win percentage to be the most literal sense. How many games you won over how many you didn't. Two different stats which people are mixing into the same thing. Win percentage doesnt care about an OTL or SOL. Points percentage does.

So wins over losses we are .500

Seperately, we have earned 3/4 points. So points percentage wise (the ultimately more important stat) we are .750

I've never looked at a loss in OT as a loss. It's just a tie where we couldn't get the extra point. There's a reason why NHL tracks OT wins in the win column, but OT loss as a separate column (essentially a "tie" column).

Again, if you're going to argue the semantics of the term ".500", why even use the the term in the first place and confuse people? The term has always been meant to be used for mathematical reasons.

[Calgary4LIfe]

The one thing that I have liked about Bennett so far this season that I wish more players on the Flames would also do, is drive to the net hard. Bennett attacks the net.


Yeah, his two penalties weren't great. I thought the first one wasn't much of a penalty, but for sure the 2nd one was. Either way, that's on him.


However, that's ok. Sometimes it is better to have to work with a player in reeling-in his aggression. It is an easier task than to get a player to play more aggressively when that isn't part of his DNA. I thought Ferland in particular was a very underrated aggressive player because he rarely took a bad penalty. However, Bennett plays with snarl in his game - something that this team is not well known for. That sometimes does result in a bad penalty now and then.


I like watching Bennett out there because he is a handful for the other team. He is distracting for them, and he is always eager to drive the net hard and create 'something out of nothing' with that willingness. Add his underlying metrics, and it is difficult not to like him and what he brings to this team, even with the occasional poor penalty (which does suck). Most players that play this aggressive style end up getting these types of infractions, which made Ferland a bit of an anomaly from that standpoint (and a player that I still miss greatly on the Flames, and hope he gets his health on track).


So, with the above in mind, I predict 2 goals from Bennett tonight. First will be a 'lucky' goal that comes from him attacking the net, and the other will be a filthy dangle after walking a defender.

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by CsInMyBlood

Right but a PP takes momentum away for 2 mins, not just a shift. A goal on that PP really changes the game.

Sam Bennett has always taken ridiculous no reason stick infractions in the O zone. You can call them "cheap" or weak penalties but why put your stick there in the first place. I can see a player having it happen on occasion but Bennett continually does it. It's always been a problem for him. He does not learn from it. What does that say about him?

I've called his penalties stupid, silly ... wondered why he can't figure it out.

I'm not wall papering over his warts.

But when he's been on the ice with Backlund and Mangiapane they've been solid.

[sec304]

I was selected to be on the fan wall again for tonight's game. I hope it's a heck of a lot better that Saturday was, Sportsnet sure dropped the ball on that one

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by Flaming Homer

Your almost there. You see we've played 2 games and won 1. .500

However, more importantly as well. We have earned 3/4 points as our loss occured in OT. So points percentage wise (which is its own stat aside from win percentage) we are .750.

Why do people have such trouble realizing they're two seperate things. If there was a stat for goals percentage over a season would you incorporate assists into that because they still recieve points?

Nobody is having any trouble at all.

Some of us get to overtime and see it as a tie with a bonus point available and not a loss.

[Patek23]

Originally Posted by The Yen Man

I've never looked at a loss in OT as a loss. It's just a tie where we couldn't get the extra point. There's a reason why NHL tracks OT wins in the win column, but OT loss as a separate column (essentially a "tie" column).

Again, if you're going to argue the semantics of the term ".500", why even use the the term in the first place and confuse people? The term has always been meant to be used for mathematical reasons.

Your point would make more sense if it was a shoot out loss as OT has always been a thing. But again they are two seperate stats. Like I touched above. If you were tracking a players goals per game over a season you wouldnt count assists as anything. But they're both points. Win percentage often gets blurred with points percentage as the same thing. They are two completely different stats.

[Brad Marsh]

Originally Posted by ForeverFlameFan

One of the best birthday gifts I’ve received!

Canucks lose 2-6 to the Flames today

So today is also my wife's birthday. We were out to dinner 7 years ago tonight (how can it be 7 years!) and the place we were eating at had this game on, and it was right in my line of sight....needless to say that it was impossible to focus on both, in spite of trying.

So tonight? I'm smoking some salmon at home and leaving the game off entirely!!

My only comment about the game and the team is that I'm hoping to see a bit more compete from the Flames 5 v 5. Need another step there. Otherwise, I really like what they did last game and hope in carries over into this one!

GFG!

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by Calgary4LIfe

However, that's ok. Sometimes it is better to have to work with a player in reeling-in his aggression. It is an easier task than to get a player to play more aggressively when that isn't part of his DNA. I thought Ferland in particular was a very underrated aggressive player because he rarely took a bad penalty. However, Bennett plays with snarl in his game - something that this team is not well known for. That sometimes does result in a bad penalty now and then.

If he could replace the foolish stick in the hands stuff (Michael Frolik used to be a nightmare for those as well) with late hits and roughing penalties I'd be ok.

The late hits and face washes would add to his game ... give you more of that distraction that he causes.

But stick in hands is just asking for it.

Has to be smarter.

But the very same PIM totals assigned to aggressive play and I wouldn't bat an eye.

[Patek23]

Originally Posted by Bingo

Nobody is having any trouble at all.

Some of us get to overtime and see it as a tie with a bonus point available and not a loss.

It seems some are.

Win % = of how many games you played in how many did you win

Points %= of all possible points available per game how many did you get.


A tie, a OT loss, a Shootout loss are not a win.


I think everyone can agree point percentage is a far more important stat in tracking a teams success. But calling a teams point percentage their win percentage is inaccurate.

[The Yen Man]

Originally Posted by Flaming Homer

Your point would make more sense if it was a shoot out loss as OT has always been a thing. But again they are two seperate stats. Like I touched above. If you were tracking a players goals per game over a season you wouldnt count assists as anything. But they're both points. Win percentage often gets blurred with points percentage as the same thing. They are two completely different stats.

Again, you're arguing semantics. Everyone gets what you're saying. I just disagree with what you're saying.

At the end of the day, I don't really care how you define it vs. how I define it. I do find it a bit annoying that the OP of this argument likes to keep pointing it out, but at this point, I think he's just trolling. And guy fricking got me lol.

[SeanCharles]

Originally Posted by Flaming Homer

Your almost there. You see we've played 2 games and won 1. .500

However, more importantly as well. We have earned 3/4 points as our loss occured in OT. So points percentage wise (which is its own stat aside from win percentage) we are .750.

Why do people have such trouble realizing they're two seperate things. If there was a stat for goals percentage over a season would you incorporate assists into that because they still recieve points?

Hahaha I can’t figure out what point you are trying to make here..?

Points percentage is the only stat that matters.

[tvp2003]

If the refs are going to call so many borderline penalties early on, hopefully that is to our advantage as our special teams have been solid.

I also expect the Canucks will have more jump tonight. I'm curious if they go back to Holtby or if they give Demko another shot. Adding Miller should also help -- are you allowed to skate while on the COVID list?

[squiggs96]

Originally Posted by Flaming Homer

It seems some are.

Win % = of how many games you played in how many did you win

Points %= of all possible points available per game how many did you get.


A tie, a OT loss, a Shootout loss are not a win.


I think everyone can agree point percentage is a far more important stat in tracking a teams success. But calling a teams point percentage their win percentage is inaccurate.

1st period Win % = number of games you were winning after the first period divided by number of games you played in.

[Erick Estrada]

Originally Posted by Bingo

Nobody with those splits is stifling or killing momentum.

Dumb penalties ... clearly.

Can't finish ... historically.

But no he isn't stifling anything, he and for whatever reason reasonable players he plays with just don't finish them when he's on the ice.

Let's not let Backlund off the hook here as his penalty to put the team down two men was dumber than either of Bennet's penalties and Backlund may surpass Bennett when it comes to taking bad penalties at the worst times.