Jump to content
The Official Site of the Vancouver Canucks
Canucks Community

Some interesting numbers underlying this Canucks/Sharks series...


oldnews

Recommended Posts

The reality of the situation is that the Sharks had 1 powerplay goal in the first two games of the series. One goal against on the powerplay did not cause the Canucks to lose the first 2 games of the series. In game 3 they got a few PP goals but the Canucks folded after Schneider let in 2 weak goals and had no fight left in them. The Sharks are the better team, the OP is just showing us how advanced stats are BS and corsi is a poor reflection of the actual games being played in front of our eyes. The Sharks' stars have been stars, the Canucks' haven't. Enough excuses for this team it's time they own that their time is up and changes need to be made

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I get it, but is analysis really required?... Is Corsi really the definition of the teams issues? We've been watching this team degenerate since 2011 for many reasons. And I'm sure someone with your game knowledge doesn't need the problems listed in bullet form to recognize and deem them analysis.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Have a look for yourselves.

Canucks corsi numbers 5 on 5:

http://www.behindthe... 34 45 46 63 67

17 of 19 Canucks have positive 5 on 5 corsi, most of their numbers are actually very impressive.

On the other hand, only 3 Sharks have a positive 5 on 5 corsi...

http://www.behindthe... 34 45 46 63 67

Most of their numbers unimpressive to say the least.

As we all already knew, the Sharks are winning the series on the back of their powerplay...

To spell this out, what we are watching is a case of exceedingly influenced outcomes.

Call it an "excuse" if you'd like to deny the reality and the facts.

8 powerplays to 2 for example, the disparity highly suspect.

Even the calls that don't result in pp goals for the Sharks still have the effect of shortening the five on five game, where the Canucks have a decided edge - reducing the minutes of the Canucks top line, as well as taxing the Canucks penalty killers in the top six (most notably Kesler and Burrows, as well as Hansen and Higgins).

In other words (if you've seen M AK A V E L I 96's video).... it's a series lead on the backs of....Donuts (as opposed to the over-stated inability to score).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I get it, but is analysis really required?... Is Corsi really the definition of the teams issues? We've been watching this team degenerate since 2011 for many reasons. And I'm sure someone with your game knowledge doesn't need the problems listed in bullet form to recognize and deem them analysis.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sorry to disappoint folks.

If the underlying numbers indicated a truly terrible team, a team that is truly being dominated, then they wouldn't interfere with your rants about firing and trading the balance of the organization.

As it stands, there's the problem of actually identifying the problems, and most of the input being offered is pretty knee jerk and hardly scratches the surface.

This isn't exactly a prescription either....

But by all means, carry on.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So you agree we need to score more goals right?

40 out of 51 games in 2013 that the canucks played in, the winning team scored 3 or more goals..i would have to say that no, most teams don't have trouble scoring 3 goals a game. The canucks did it way more than 50% of the time. Most teams do.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Don't forget that we're in an awful contract position right now with money tied up in 2 goalies, Ballard and Booth. Our team has been doing exceptionally well for the skill we put on the ice. Yes, MG isn't perfect but as far as team effort, AV's coaching, and the system, it's working damned well. We just have some money problems which will mostly be resolved in the summer. I think you'll lose your crap when you see how these team does next season.

As for the right now, yeah the scoreboard doesn't look so great, but advanced stats tell us why that is. And the answer isn't "because the Canucks aren't trying or aren't capable".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't know riffraff. My personal preference is that the analysis is preferable to the fire and trade everyone response that I see endlessly here. Perhaps the question becomes is CDC required? Is discussing hockey worthwhile?

If we really want to address what's gone wrong, then the facts clearly point to carrying the play five on five (not necessarily "degeneration"), in which case the question becomes what this team should do about it's 'lack' of discipline, or if there is truly a lack of discipline - not whether AV is an idiot who doesn't know how to assemble lines, etc. Are the losses on the penalty killers?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...