Monday, April 16, 2007
"... it looked like Iginla and Huselius were starting to come around a bit later on. They will create more scoring chances in future games"
Aw shucks, this isn't even fun anymore. If I'm going to poke something with a stick, I at least want it to open its eyes and show a little life.
Jarmoe Game #2
TOI: 25:38
Shifts: 30
G: 0
A: 0
Pts: 0
+/-: -1
SOG: 2
Hits: 1
PIM: 0
I guess Flames fans should take some heart in the fact that he took a whopping 13% of the team's shots -- up from 0% in the first game. Of course, this is probably offset by the fact that he doubled Tanguay and Huselius combined.
The fact that Schneider alone took 10 shots last night has absolutely no relevance.
Jarmoe Game #2
TOI: 25:38
Shifts: 30
G: 0
A: 0
Pts: 0
+/-: -1
SOG: 2
Hits: 1
PIM: 0
I guess Flames fans should take some heart in the fact that he took a whopping 13% of the team's shots -- up from 0% in the first game. Of course, this is probably offset by the fact that he doubled Tanguay and Huselius combined.
The fact that Schneider alone took 10 shots last night has absolutely no relevance.
# posted by sacamano @ 3:42 am 
Comments:
This couldn't possibly get worse.
I wonder if a coach has been replaced mid-series before?
There's no way they will replace Playfair, having said that, there is no way the Flames will win this series, but we already knew that, right?
Best quote so far:
"During the first TV timeout, the ice cleaners didn't even bother to clean Detroit's end of the ice"
That is pretty telling. Is it wrong that I was laughing hysterically during the first ten minutes of the game? ;)
Man I hate to see the Flames go so lifelessly... especially against the Wings. Did I read it right that he Wings actually out hit the Flames in their last game? If this is the case, the Flames are lost for this series because they've lost their identity.
Sig said...
If this is the case, the Flames are lost for this series because they've lost their identity.
Sweet. I want to see ten more commenters say this so that Matt finally snaps.
BTW, they out hit them for a grand total of 3 hits in two games in their home barn. If they played these games the exact same way in Calgary, it probably would have finished +10 in the Flames' favour. It's a worthless measure.
Too bad the Flames can't hook and hold like they did in '04, they might actually win a game.
Why blame Playbad? Sutter built this team full of has-beens and third stringers. Without Kipper the score is easily 7-1.
It's a worthless measure.
Not to come to Calgary's defence here, but can we take much from the Shots on Goal stats, either? I believe it was Vic who said that Babcock really stresses taking shots from everywhere. I remember last year, the numbers against the Oilers were pretty lop-sided as well. But the Oilers weren't exactly getting outplayed (The Game Six Miracle excluded). And like RiversQ mentioned, the home town discount on stats must be worth at least 3-5 extra shots a game for Detroit. So how much of a story do those numbers really tell?
Do we really need to quantify the Flames' performance in order to determine how badly they played? Can't we just watch the game?
Do we really need to quantify the Flames' performance in order to determine how badly they played?
Yes.
Not to come to Calgary's defence here, but can we take much from the Shots on Goal stats, either?
Nah, you're right. I'm sure that if Iggy keeps putting up an average of 1 shot per game he will continue to dominate.
Good point Grabia. G1 of the DAL/VAN series was a good example of this as well - both teams fired well over a dozen useless shots each. Shot quality has a lot to do with things, but I still think shot totals are a decent indicator of the balance of play. You might not be giving up too many quality scoring chances while getting soundly outshot, but it's hard to say you have any control over the game.
Yes, Detroit's a team that likes to shoot early and often, but they're way above their norm for shots and Calgary's way below. The gap is too big to be explained purely by style of play. JMO.
Shot quality has a lot to do with things, but I still think shot totals are a decent indicator of the balance of play. You might not be giving up too many quality scoring chances while getting soundly outshot, but it's hard to say you have any control over the game.
Eaxctly what I wanted to say, but way smarter. I wish it was possible to have a possession stat for hockey, covering all three zones. It would help flesh stuff like that out.
Needless to say, I agree with Mclea: let's just sit back and enjoy how badly Calgary is playing.
We have the Wings right where we want them. They must be absolutely exhausted from taking all those shots. The Flames, conversely, have to be fresh as a daisy after those two games. Why, I bet that post game showers were entirely unnecessary as no one but Kipper even broke a sweat in Detroit.
Yup, it's all looking good from this point on ...
Go Flames
peter said...
Why, I bet that post game showers were entirely unnecessary as no one but Kipper even broke a sweat in Detroit.
Oh I'm sure the showers were unnecessary but enjoyed.
Now that's losing identity.
"I wish it was possible to have a possession stat for hockey, covering all three zones."
I believe that is tracked, as I have seen it before. However, I don't know where to find it or if it's a routine stat.
Post a Comment
<< Home
This couldn't possibly get worse.
I wonder if a coach has been replaced mid-series before?
There's no way they will replace Playfair, having said that, there is no way the Flames will win this series, but we already knew that, right?
Best quote so far:
"During the first TV timeout, the ice cleaners didn't even bother to clean Detroit's end of the ice"
That is pretty telling. Is it wrong that I was laughing hysterically during the first ten minutes of the game? ;)
# posted by 
: April 16, 2007 11:08 am
: April 16, 2007 11:08 am Man I hate to see the Flames go so lifelessly... especially against the Wings. Did I read it right that he Wings actually out hit the Flames in their last game? If this is the case, the Flames are lost for this series because they've lost their identity.
Sig said...
If this is the case, the Flames are lost for this series because they've lost their identity.
Sweet. I want to see ten more commenters say this so that Matt finally snaps.
BTW, they out hit them for a grand total of 3 hits in two games in their home barn. If they played these games the exact same way in Calgary, it probably would have finished +10 in the Flames' favour. It's a worthless measure.
Too bad the Flames can't hook and hold like they did in '04, they might actually win a game.
Why blame Playbad? Sutter built this team full of has-beens and third stringers. Without Kipper the score is easily 7-1.
# posted by : April 16, 2007 11:53 am
: April 16, 2007 11:53 am It's a worthless measure.
Not to come to Calgary's defence here, but can we take much from the Shots on Goal stats, either? I believe it was Vic who said that Babcock really stresses taking shots from everywhere. I remember last year, the numbers against the Oilers were pretty lop-sided as well. But the Oilers weren't exactly getting outplayed (The Game Six Miracle excluded). And like RiversQ mentioned, the home town discount on stats must be worth at least 3-5 extra shots a game for Detroit. So how much of a story do those numbers really tell?
Do we really need to quantify the Flames' performance in order to determine how badly they played? Can't we just watch the game?
Do we really need to quantify the Flames' performance in order to determine how badly they played?
Yes.
# posted by : April 16, 2007 12:43 pm
: April 16, 2007 12:43 pm Not to come to Calgary's defence here, but can we take much from the Shots on Goal stats, either?
Nah, you're right. I'm sure that if Iggy keeps putting up an average of 1 shot per game he will continue to dominate.
# posted by : April 16, 2007 12:46 pm
: April 16, 2007 12:46 pm Good point Grabia. G1 of the DAL/VAN series was a good example of this as well - both teams fired well over a dozen useless shots each. Shot quality has a lot to do with things, but I still think shot totals are a decent indicator of the balance of play. You might not be giving up too many quality scoring chances while getting soundly outshot, but it's hard to say you have any control over the game.
Yes, Detroit's a team that likes to shoot early and often, but they're way above their norm for shots and Calgary's way below. The gap is too big to be explained purely by style of play. JMO.
Shot quality has a lot to do with things, but I still think shot totals are a decent indicator of the balance of play. You might not be giving up too many quality scoring chances while getting soundly outshot, but it's hard to say you have any control over the game.
Eaxctly what I wanted to say, but way smarter. I wish it was possible to have a possession stat for hockey, covering all three zones. It would help flesh stuff like that out.
Needless to say, I agree with Mclea: let's just sit back and enjoy how badly Calgary is playing.
We have the Wings right where we want them. They must be absolutely exhausted from taking all those shots. The Flames, conversely, have to be fresh as a daisy after those two games. Why, I bet that post game showers were entirely unnecessary as no one but Kipper even broke a sweat in Detroit.
Yup, it's all looking good from this point on ...
Go Flames
# posted by : April 16, 2007 2:36 pm
: April 16, 2007 2:36 pm peter said...
Why, I bet that post game showers were entirely unnecessary as no one but Kipper even broke a sweat in Detroit.
Oh I'm sure the showers were unnecessary but enjoyed.
Now that's losing identity.
"I wish it was possible to have a possession stat for hockey, covering all three zones."
I believe that is tracked, as I have seen it before. However, I don't know where to find it or if it's a routine stat.
# posted by : April 16, 2007 3:49 pm
: April 16, 2007 3:49 pm Post a Comment
<< Home
