The Flames have 5 point-per-game players

[Paper]

Jankowski’s pace over 79 games (the maximum he can play) is 29 points. Had they said “0.366 PPG, which translates to 30 points per 82 games”, then I would check.

Being on pace for a certain number and scoring at a certain rate is a lot different because teams have a lot more guys scoring 0.366 PPG or higher than they do guys on pace to finish this season with at least 30 points.

Who cares if he plays 79 or 82 games when we're talking about depths? He's on the team, he's healthy and he's a "30-point player." You sure are stretching to take a stupid argument and not look stupid, but it's not working. Your idiotic logic means that if Jankowski were to score 30 points in 79 games instead of 29 points in 79 games is the difference between the Flames having great depth and average depth. Have fun with that.

Also, conveniently leaving out defense lol. Flames have 12 players who are pro-rated to score 30+ points. Only Tampa and Nashville have more (not sure how trade deadline affects this)

 

[TomasHertlsRooster]

Who cares if he plays 79 or 82 games when we're talking about depths? He's on the team, he's healthy and he's a "30-point player." You sure are stretching to take a stupid argument and not look stupid, but it's not working.

Also, conveniently leaving out defense lol. Flames have 12 players who are pro-rated to score 30+ points. Only Tampa and Nashville have more.

How is he a “30 point player” if he’s not on pace for 30 points and he never has scored 30 points before?

The post that I responded to was specifically about forwards. I included defensemen in the analysis where I showed that 9 teams have more points from players outside of their top-5 scorers.

 

[Rubi]

The Flames don't even have 3 bottom-6 players on pace for 30+ points. Jankowski is on pace for 29.

Who the hell cares? Is the 30 pt mark some magical kind of number and 20 or 25 isn't?

The way I look at it is if my team is playing the in the SC final and the next goal will win the Cup, which forward line would I want out on the ice?

Gaudreau-Monahan-Lindholm who have scored a total of 242 pts so far this year?
or
Meier-Couture-Pavelski who have scored a total of 183 pts so far this year?

I think the answer is pretty obvious.... unless you're a Sharks fan and a Flames hater.

 

[Paper]

So just so we're clear. If Jankowski puts up a point next game, putting him at 26 points in 68 games and on pace for 30 points in 79 games, then the Flames have amazing depth and if not they have crap depth?

That's a shit ton of pressure on Jankowski, but we'll see. So much rides on that next game.

 

[TomasHertlsRooster]

Who the hell cares? Is the 30 pt mark some magical kind of number and 20 or 25 isn't?

The way I look at it is if my team is playing the in the SC final and the next goal will win the Cup, which forward line would I want out on the ice?

Gaudreau-Monahan-Lindholm who have scored a total of 242 pts so far this year?
or
Meier-Couture-Pavelski who have scored a total of 183 pts so far this year?

I think the answer is pretty obvious.... unless you're a Sharks fan and a Flames hater.

Somebody else in the thread said Calgary’s depth was 2nd to only Tampa and that was pretty obviously incorrect.

This has nothing to do with the top lines of each team this year.

 

[TomasHertlsRooster]

So just so we're clear. If Jankowski puts up a point next game, putting him at 26 points in 68 games and on pace for 30 points in 79 games, then the Flames have amazing depth and if not they have crap depth?

That's a **** ton of pressure on Jankowski, but we'll see. So much rides on that next game.

The “3 bottom-6 forwards on pace for 30 points” was simply incorrect and so I felt the need to point it out. The “6 forwards at 0.5PPG” was correct so I mentioned it and then mentioned that half the league has that and it isn’t impressive. Even if the “3 bottom-6 forwards on pace for 30 points” was accurate, I could just as easily say “their depth is bad, what other teams only have 5 forwards with 30 points right now?”

Either way, it’s a cherry picked number and we can cherry pick numbers all day in either direction to make their depth look good or bad and that because it’s not particularly high end or low end. It’s above average and it’s better than I gave it credit for, but it’s still nowhere near the top of the league or “2nd best behind Tampa” which is what I took issue with.

 

[Rubi]

Somebody else in the thread said Calgary’s depth was 2nd to only Tampa and that was pretty obviously incorrect.

This has nothing to do with the top lines of each team this year.

I haven't read every single post in this tread.

So where did the magical 30 pt bench mark come from? Is that something you made up? Anything above 30 pts means you're a great depth player but if you're below the magical 30 pt mark you're not?

 

[2023FriendshipTour]

I haven't read every single post in this tread.

So where did the magical 30 pt bench mark come from? Is that something you made up? Anything above 30 pts means you're a great depth player but if you're below the magical 30 pt mark you're not?

That's his benchmark, so he can make anti Flames arguments.

 

[TomasHertlsRooster]

I haven't read every single post in this tread.

So where did the magical 30 pt bench mark come from? Is that something you made up? Anything above 30 pts means you're a great depth player but if you're below the magical 30 pt mark you're not?

That's his benchmark, so he can make anti Flames arguments.

It’s a benchmark that a f***ing Flames fan came up with in the last page:

Really? What 10 teams have all 6 top 6 forwards with .5 PPG or more? What 10 teams also have 3 bottom 6 players on pace for 30+ points?

 

[Wewillrise]

I thought the flames had 5 players better than Drai?

 

[2023FriendshipTour]

I thought the flames had 5 players better than Drai?

Sounds like the same kind of fans telling us the Oilers were on the verge of being a powerhouse :p Both not true.

 

[Paper]

I thought the flames had 5 players better than Drai?

No no, you're thinking of the Oilers having 5 Giordanos.

 

[guzzy]

I thought the flames had 5 players better than Drai?

And I thought the oilers were supposed to be cup contenders the last two years? See.....a troll job followed by a troll job. You are welcome

 

[guzzy]

No no, you're thinking of the Oilers having 5 Giordanos.

They don’t have one.

 

[DirtDiver]

Nope, they're up there with Tampa in goals because of their top guys. Depth is not very good.



Anaheim has 6 forwards at 0.5PPG or more. It's a thoroughly unimpressive feat in this extremely high scoring season. Here's a full list of the 16 teams who have at least 6 forwards scoring at least 0.5PPG:

Anaheim, Arizona, Boston, Calgary, Columbus, Colorado, Detroit, Florida, New Jersey, Pittsburgh, San Jose, Tampa Bay, Toronto, Vegas, Winnipeg, Washington

The Flames don't even have 3 bottom-6 players on pace for 30+ points. Jankowski is on pace for 29.

The initial post which suggested they were top-heavy was based on the top-5 scorers. So, let's look:

Team (Beside top-5)	Goals	Points
SJ	126	428
WPG	120	377
TB	121	375
CBJ	117	355
WSH	114	351
NSH	130	348
TOR	114	341
VGK	123	341
MTL	110	328
CGY	112	313

[TBODY] [/TBODY]

I included full season points from guys that were acquired during the season and excluded all points from players that were traded. I counted points from players who are still with the organization but in the minors, but those are mostly negligible.

So, they rank 10th in points from players outside of their top-5 point scorers. Every other team has fewer points from their non top-5 guys. A few teams might have more goals but I didn't check. Either way, 10th certainly isn't as bad as I expected. I said there were at least 10 teams between them and Tampa and by just the actual numbers, there are 6 teams between them and TB, and only 9 teams between them and 1st. So, perhaps that was exaggerated. But IMO, there are a few other teams with slightly fewer points among their non top-5 players who have more offensive depth than Calgary. (Pittsburgh and Boston come to mind.)

So, maybe their scoring depth is not bad, but it is certainly not high end.

So from your depth chart their it shows that Calgary has way better top end talent then SJ does. Depth is great to have but so is high end talent.

So, maybe your top end talent is not bad, but it is certainly not as high end as ours. Your post proves this fact.

 

[Duffalufagus]

How is he a “30 point player” if he’s not on pace for 30 points and he never has scored 30 points before?

The post that I responded to was specifically about forwards. I included defensemen in the analysis where I showed that 9 teams have more points from players outside of their top-5 scorers.

Flames fan here. Jankowski is a good penalty killer. Below average otherwise.

 

[TomasHertlsRooster]

So from your depth chart their it shows that Calgary has way better top end talent then SJ does. Depth is great to have but so is high end talent.

So, maybe your top end talent is not bad, but it is certainly not as high end as ours. Your post proves this fact.

At forward, yes; Calgary has better high end depth. Gaudreau would be the best Shark forward for sure.

I could get deeper into comparing the two teams but this isn’t the thread for it. I didn’t intend to do that; I only came in to explain that Calgary’s depth isn’t 2nd to only Tampa like was initially claimed.

Flames fan here. Jankowski is a good penalty killer. Below average otherwise.

Yeah, this is where I stand as well. At even strength, he doesn’t move the needle much in either direction but as a whole he’s probably a little below average as a 3rd line center.

 

[DirtDiver]

At forward, yes; Calgary has better high end depth. Gaudreau would be the best Shark forward for sure.

I could get deeper into comparing the two teams but this isn’t the thread for it. I didn’t intend to do that; I only came in to explain that Calgary’s depth isn’t 2nd to only Tampa like was initially claimed.

I agree that our depth is not 2nd tampa and not a depth team like SJ is. But our depth was there when we needed them when our High end top talent was in a slump for a monthish. That is what depth is for.

 

[TheWayToRefJose]

I agree that our depth is not 2nd tampa and not a depth team like SJ is. But our depth was there when we needed them when our High end top talent was in a slump for a monthish. That is what depth is for.

Off of this year, it looks like you guys have the better top line by a decent margin, but the bottom 9 for SJ are a lot better. That can go either way in a best of 7. SJ mainly has to neutralize one line while CGY has three to worry about. Then again stopping that one line is easier said than done, but so is stopping three lines.

Pretty confident we meet in the second round and whoever has to play Vegas in the first loses in the second.

 

[Khrox]

Off of this year, it looks like you guys have the better top line by a decent margin, but the bottom 9 for SJ are a lot better. That can go either way in a best of 7. SJ mainly has to neutralize one line while CGY has three to worry about. Then again stopping that one line is easier said than done, but so is stopping three lines.

Pretty confident we meet in the second round and whoever has to play Vegas in the first loses in the second.

That is pretty close to how I see it. I feel top line is definitely Calgary, and second line is about even (slight offensive edge to SJ on 2nd line, but Flames 2nd line gets the defensive edge). But bottom 6 (pretty much minus Ryan for Calgary) definitely goes in favour of San Jose. The Defence is the big one. Offensively, SJ has the better D, Defensively, I feel Calgary has the edge. The goaltending is an absolute wash though, it's easily the weakest part of both teams (with both teams outscoring their goalie problems for the most part).

I definitely agree with the playoffs though, I think the western champions are the winner of the second round SJ/Calgary matchup

 

[DirtDiver]

That is pretty close to how I see it. I feel top line is definitely Calgary, and second line is about even (slight offensive edge to SJ on 2nd line, but Flames 2nd line gets the defensive edge). But bottom 6 (pretty much minus Ryan for Calgary) definitely goes in favour of San Jose. The Defence is the big one. Offensively, SJ has the better D, Defensively, I feel Calgary has the edge. The goaltending is an absolute wash though, it's easily the weakest part of both teams (with both teams outscoring their goalie problems for the most part).

I definitely agree with the playoffs though, I think the western champions are the winner of the second round SJ/Calgary matchup

This is an honest non biased comparison of both teams. In the west I would think that this would be the series to watch.

 

[JeremyTB]

Who cares if he plays 79 or 82 games when we're talking about depths? He's on the team, he's healthy and he's a "30-point player." You sure are stretching to take a stupid argument and not look stupid, but it's not working. Your idiotic logic means that if Jankowski were to score 30 points in 79 games instead of 29 points in 79 games is the difference between the Flames having great depth and average depth. Have fun with that.

Also, conveniently leaving out defense lol. Flames have 12 players who are pro-rated to score 30+ points. Only Tampa and Nashville have more (not sure how trade deadline affects this)

Why is 30 points the measuring stick? It seems you are using 30 points because not as many are on pace for 40 points on the flames. Why not say 15 or 20 points while you are at it. 30 points is not an impressive feat. Unless 20 of them are goals. You say Flames may have 12 players on pace for 30+ points. The Sharks right now have 10 players with 40+ points. and another guy with 30+ points and another guy 3 points shy of 30 and who has 16 goals. And sorry but you can't ignore trades because those players are now part of that team going forward.

 

[Paper]

Why is 30 points the measuring stick? Blah blah blah, clearly didn't read anything, blah blah blah

I responded to that guy's post who used 30. I didn't come up with it.

 

[blankall]

Tkachuk with 3 points so far tonight. Back up to PPG.

 

[Wayne Primeau]

i will never understand pedants about player definitions

mark jankowski has scored at a 30-point pace twice. call him a 25-point player, call him a 30-point player, i'm just gonna call him mark jankowski and a decent bottom-six centre