STRENGTHCGY
Won on the merits
The Flames controlled 76% of expected goals (4.25–1.38) and won 3-1 — result matched process.
The verdict · earned
The Flames earned it — the game and the expected-goals battle both.
VAN 1 · CGY 3
Preseason · exhibition
Split squads and prospects, not the club that will take the ice in October. The shots and grades below describe this game only: nothing here counts toward season records, form, rankings or player numbers.
◆ By the ModelSep 22, 11:41 PMxG: xgboost-0.758Edited for clarityDrafted from NHL play-by-play by Backcheck's model, worded for clarity by an AI editor that may not change a number. Nobody at Backcheck was at the rink. How this works
Calgary's 3-1 win over Vancouver held up to scrutiny. The Flames controlled 76% of expected goals (4.25–1.38), ran 78% of shot attempts (31–9), and beat the Canucks in high-danger chances three to two. The scoreboard and the underlying play aligned perfectly — this was a dominant performance.
Vancouver's K. Lankinen was the reason it wasn't worse. His 0.900 save percentage on 30 shots was 1.25 goals better than expected, keeping what could have been a blowout at 3-1. The Flames had the play; their goaltender just ran into a hot one.
Calgary's dominance started early and never wavered. The Flames opened the second period by scoring three times in under four minutes. J. Farabee banked in the first on the power play at 15:00. M. Coronato followed at 17:30, and S. Honzek made it 3–0 at 18:58. That was the game. Vancouver's A. Bains scored in the third, but by then Calgary controlled everything.
The Flames' transition game was the engine. They took 30 rush shots (2.50 xG) and converted two of them — a conversion rate that speaks to both volume and quality. Z. Parekh (2 assists) and M. Gridin (2 assists) were the architects. J. Farabee finished with a goal and an assist, doing the most damage. The Flames created five rebound opportunities and crashed the net hard enough to cash one, the way a team plays when it's in control.
Vancouver couldn't establish any sustained pressure. The Canucks managed 14 rush shots (1.34 xG) and generated only two high-danger chances. On special teams, Calgary went 1-for-4 on the power play (25%; league ≈21%), while Vancouver went 0-for-3 (0%; league ≈21%). The power-play gap was real.
The underlying story is the one everyone watching saw: Calgary ran Vancouver off the ice. The Flames' 76% expected-goals share, their rush dominance, their power-play execution — it all pointed to the same verdict. Lankinen played well enough to make it 3-1 instead of potentially 4-0, but he couldn't change the outcome.