The underlying numbers usually indicate a fundamental problem though. Ya, we are winning right now, if our underlying stats are bad you would think we are bound for regression, which has historically been the case for teams with bad fancy stats and we might be seeing that already.
Watching the two games prior to last night, "regression" would actually mean leaving the first period with multiple-goal leads in each. Based on their play, they were unlucky to be up by 0 and 1 goal, statistically speaking.
Here's the way I look at it last night, too. If you just focus on each team's best chances at 5-on-5, the Flames had:
- The Tkachuk goal
- Reider/Frolik 2-on-1
- Tkachuk between the legs from point blank
- Lucic with a clear path to the net (taken away by a hook)
- Monahan with an open net from a sharp angle
- Brodie one-timer from between the circles
- Monahan with a chance from in tight
The Habs, meanwhile, scored three times at 5-on-5, but only one of those chances was dangerous. Even if you argue that the Armia shot was dangerous, the Mangiapane chance in the third was pretty much the same. So, considering the Habs' best chances 5-on-5, what do you have?
- Chiarot (I think) walking down the slot all alone, then Weber off the rebound
- Gallagher in the slot after a Rittich giveaway
- Suzuki's goal
- Cousins backhander from in tight off the rush
Aside from that, is there anything missing? A lot of chances happened during the 4-on-4, and of course we had a short-handed breakaway too. But in terms of 5-on-5, we did a better job of creating actually dangerous chances.
I'm sure I'm missing some, but this is how the numbers mislead you. A shot from a certain area is considered a dangerous chance, even if it isn't. And vice versa.
This is why I'm optimistic right now. There is a pattern currently of us getting the better chances than our opposition.