Flames vs. Wild Scoring Chances (and Post Game Complaints) December 11, 2009
Scoring Chances for NHL Game Number 20464
Team
Period
Time
Note
CGY
Opponent
MIN
1
18:34
8
16
20
23
34
44
14
21
32
34
48
55
5v5
MIN
1
18:33
8
16
20
23
34
44
14
21
32
34
48
55
5v5
MIN
1
18:32
8
16
20
23
34
44
14
21
32
34
48
55
5v5
MIN
1
11:56
4
20
23
28
34
5
9
14
15
20
32
4v5
CGY
1
6:05
3
4
12
15
21
34
5
11
21
32
55
5v4
CGY
1
6:00
3
4
12
15
21
34
5
11
21
32
55
5v4
CGY
1
5:45
3
4
12
15
21
34
5
11
21
32
55
5v4
MIN
1
4:10
3
5
16
20
23
34
9
15
20
26
32
34
5v5
MIN
1
2:35
4
17
22
28
34
3
9
14
15
20
32
4v5
MIN
1
1:52
4
17
22
28
34
3
9
14
15
20
32
4v5
MIN
1
0:50
4
17
23
28
34
3
6
12
21
22
32
4v5
MIN
1
0:28
4
11
17
23
28
34
3
6
12
21
22
32
5v5
CGY
2
19:35
4
5
12
15
21
34
3
6
11
12
25
32
5v5
CGY
2
19:33
4
5
12
15
21
34
3
6
11
12
25
32
5v5
CGY
2
16:17
3
4
17
20
22
34
6
9
32
51
55
5v4
CGY
2
15:11
4
5
12
21
34
5
14
21
32
55
4v4
MIN
2
11:33
8
16
20
23
34
44
14
21
32
34
48
55
5v5
MIN
2
10:30
3
12
15
21
28
34
3
6
9
15
20
32
5v5
MIN
2
8:52
4
23
28
34
3
9
14
15
20
32
3v5
MIN
2
8:31
4
22
28
34
3
9
14
15
20
32
3v5
MIN
2
8:02
4
21
22
28
34
3
9
14
15
20
32
4v5
CGY
2
0:48
3
16
20
23
34
44
3
22
32
34
48
51
5v5
CGY
2
0:19
3
12
15
21
28
34
3
6
14
21
32
48
5v5
MIN
3
18:40
8
16
20
23
34
44
5
14
21
32
34
48
5v5
CGY
3
16:56
3
12
15
21
28
34
6
12
20
25
32
34
5v5
CGY
3
14:54
5
16
20
23
34
44
21
22
32
34
48
55
5v5
CGY
3
14:50
44 Goal
5
16
20
23
34
44
21
22
32
34
48
55
5v5
MIN
3
14:21
4
10
11
33
34
44
3
5
12
24
32
51
5v5
MIN
3
11:21
3
12
15
21
28
34
3
6
9
15
20
32
5v5
MIN
3
10:30
Minn. Goal
4
5
17
22
25
34
14
24
32
34
51
55
5v5
MIN
3
3:46
3
16
20
23
28
34
5
12
22
32
34
51
5v5
MIN
3
3:39
3
16
20
23
28
34
5
6
12
14
32
51
5v5
MIN
3
2:38
4
5
17
22
23
34
5
9
15
20
32
55
5v5
MIN
3
1:10
4
5
20
22
23
34
5
12
20
25
32
55
5v5
MIN
4
1:45
Minn. Goal
3
12
21
28
34
3
14
21
32
55
4v4
#
Player
EV
PP
SH
3
D. PHANEUF
22:51
3
6
3:12
4
0
2:13
0
0
4
J. BOUWMEESTER
22:12
3
5
3:33
4
0
3:50
0
5
5
M. GIORDANO
22:18
5
4
1:27
0
0
1:04
0
0
8
S. KRONWALL
6:38
0
5
0:00
0
0
0:00
0
0
10
B. MCGRATTAN
3:45
0
1
0:00
0
0
0:00
0
0
11
F. SJOSTROM
4:29
0
2
0:00
0
0
0:23
0
0
12
J. IGINLA
19:34
5
3
3:39
3
0
0:00
0
0
15
N. DAWES
14:56
4
2
2:47
3
0
0:00
0
0
16
D. BOYD
13:07
3
8
0:34
0
0
1:10
0
0
17
R. BOURQUE
14:46
0
3
1:09
1
0
2:35
0
3
20
C. GLENCROSS
14:09
3
9
0:27
1
0
2:12
0
1
21
O. JOKINEN
18:25
5
3
2:47
3
0
0:25
0
1
22
D. LANGKOW
13:49
0
3
1:52
1
0
3:07
0
3
23
E. NYSTROM
14:19
3
11
0:00
0
0
2:14
0
2
25
D. MOSS
11:40
0
1
0:42
0
0
0:00
0
0
28
R. REGEHR
18:46
2
6
1:06
0
0
4:07
0
5
33
B. PRUST
4:03
0
1
0:00
0
0
0:00
0
0
34
M. KIPRUSOFF
51:15
8
16
4:39
4
0
6:03
0
5
44
A. JOHNSON
9:52
3
6
0:00
0
0
0:52
0
0
Period
Totals
EV
PP
5v3 PP
SH
5v3 SH
1
3
9
0
5
3
0
0
0
0
4
0
0
2
6
5
5
2
1
0
0
0
0
1
0
2
3
3
8
3
8
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
4
0
1
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Totals
12
23
8
16
4
0
0
0
0
5
0
2
I think the totals speak for themselves, do they not?
15 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
The totals seem right, although I’m surprised Jokinen and Iginla did so well. They looked rather bland live this evening.
Thanks for doing this in my absence.
I was as surprised as you, frankly. They were the only line in the black re: Corsi as well. Still, Joker and Iggy created 5 chances in about 19 minutes of EV play, which really is bugger-all in the big scheme of things. An entire team operating at that rate would average about 12-13 EV chances a game, given the normal amount of EV play, which is somewhere between low and OK for a team rate, but for top-end guys I don’t think it would be a good number.
by Robert Cleave on Dec 11, 2009 10:12 PM PST up reply actions
That’s true and I think my disappointment stems from the fact that they probably had one of the easier assignments last night. I haven’t looked at H2H yet (and I missed the first 15 minutes of the game thanks to traffic), but it seems to me that Langkow faced Koivu most of the time and Boyd faced Havlat (who played pretty damn well, frankly).
The player numbers, so that shows who was on ice for either team when a chance occurred.
by Robert Cleave on Dec 11, 2009 10:01 PM PST up reply actions
Missed the gamethread, just watched the game…glad I drank a bottle of wine first! Seriously, that was pretty sad, especially watching the Minnesota feed (they were pretty gleeful, although it was fun listening to them after the Johnson goal). They seemed surprised that Kipper played well, so the word may not be completely out yet.
Noone looked good, but I did think Joker might have been their best player, hard as that is to write…
Also, Robert, it’s interesting to see your count landed in the 35-30 total, which is where I typically am. Meaning we seem to be on the same wavelength.
I suppose I should lay about a bit of my approach. Please excuse my limited MS Paint skills.
This has been batted around before, but if the puck goes in, for better or worse, it’s a chance. That stipulated, the area inside the black lines is the area of the rink that I emphasize. This stuff is certainly subjective, but that area seems like the sort of range that one might assume a shooter has decent odds against an unscreened goalie. A chance can be a miss, or blocked, but again, I’ll be the first to admit subjectivity is always present, and it would be for the team as well. Darryl Sutter said he thought the chances in the first at EV were 2-2. Maybe they look at three consecutive shots from the top of the crease as one “chance”, because Latendresse had that exact scenario occur 90 seconds into last night’s game.
That’s pretty much my approach as well, although my area doesn’t quite extend as far beyond the top of the face-off circle as yours. Otherwise, pretty much spot on.
Great representation BTW.
by Kent Wilson on Dec 12, 2009 12:56 PM PST up reply actions
although my area doesn’t quite extend as far beyond the top of the face-off circle as yours.
You did read the part about “limited MS paint skills”, right? Anyhoo, it’s my rough guide, and people are welcome to have their own interpretations.
by Robert Cleave on Dec 12, 2009 1:17 PM PST up reply actions

by 
















