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

[TSN] Here's Why Canuck Fans Should be Concerned


LaBamba

Recommended Posts

Just now, LaBamba said:

 

What I am trying to say is that the source of this information is irrelevant. It doesn't change the information. 

The 'information' is the usual overblown, cherry-picked singular indicator with no context, nor it's own counterpoint - MSS for / MSS against.

The source is relevent - it's horrible 'analytics' - with a motive - to rescue itself from the foot-in-mouth of all the laughable content they posted regarding trades over the summer.

 

Weber is absolutely punking TSN and I'm loving it.

 

And this drivel does precisely what you hate - spoon-feeding the Leafs fanbase a premature fairy tale.

 

The Leafs are getting destroyed when it matters - blowing leads - getting shelled - their goaltender is looking like an ECHLer behind that fire drill - and here they are with the but, but 'we have some upside' kumbaya.

One of the best coaches in the NHL, and they are a fire drill nevertheless.

 

But hey - it's a work in progress right.  So 'optimism' for the Leafs, but grave concern for the Canucks.....cause the BS BS is so indicative.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, LaBamba said:

 

So you are suggesting that he made all of this up and our cycle game is actually really awesome? 

#1- The reason the Canucks are not generating MSS is because their focus is on leaving the o-zone early to ensure they are covered on the back end. Too often last year they had two forwards chasing the play instead of being in front of the puck carrier. The consequence of this new structure in the neutral zone is less sustained o-zone pressure. Pretty simple.

#2- Yost's article is an example of how he is often over-reliant on statistics and not thinking about why the statistics are the way they are.

#3- Yost in general is a guy who got in on the ground floor of the analytics boom. The problem is that he is really quite incompetent when it comes to interpretation and understanding basic elements of statistics (e.g., he routinely misinterprets what a z-sore represents, which is something dealt with in intro stats classes in undergrad).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, SID.IS.SID.ME.IS.ME said:

Ah the fun of small samples.

 

For a while there, we were among the league leaders in CF%. And even through four games, we had the lowest CA60 in the NHL. And now after a rough couple games (and a compressed schedule that we knew would be difficult), we're the worst possession team in the league.

 

Sure, the trend the last couple games has been bad. Anyone watching the games can tell you that. But if we get back to playing the systems well, our possession differentials should recover.

 

There's no question that any chart of our performance this season will trend downwards. We were winning and then we started losing (both in the win/loss column and the underlying indicators). That makes the charts slope downwards.

 

But a few games worth of trends does not provide great predictive value for a season.

 

Of course, if the short term trends become long term trends, then there will be plenty of reason for Canucks fans to worry. 

Yeah.

We have a rookie on the top pairing - a sophomore on the 2nd - and a newcomer (fairly small pmd) on the third pairing.

There will be some growing pains - but there are lots of positives to take from the early performances.   The Sens game was a let down - but every team will deal with those.

They also lost their fourth line wingers in the midst of a gruelling 7 in 11 stretch (and a premier shutdown defenseman).

 

But hey, context doesn't matter - the sky is a falling - the chicken littles got hungry after the comeback wins.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, Matt_T83 said:

 

I'm a PhD in informatics and I can basically tell you math is for real. If you think that, go dump your cell phone and computer and live without technology. Otherwise bow down to your masters son.

 

You should have spent some time socializing out of school to work on your sarcasm detection skills. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, SID.IS.SID.ME.IS.ME said:

Ah the fun of small samples.

 

For a while there, we were among the league leaders in CF%. And even through four games, we had the lowest CA60 in the NHL. And now after a rough couple games (and a compressed schedule that we knew would be difficult), we're the worst possession team in the league.

 

Sure, the trend the last couple games has been bad. Anyone watching the games can tell you that. But if we get back to playing the systems well, our possession differentials should recover.

 

There's no question that any chart of our performance this season will trend downwards. We were winning and then we started losing (both in the win/loss column and the underlying indicators). That makes the charts slope downwards.

 

But a few games worth of trends does not provide great predictive value for a season.

 

Of course, if the short term trends become long term trends, then there will be plenty of reason for Canucks fans to worry. 

 

It was the same thing last year. The reason why this information made open my eyes a bit is because it describes what I was most worried about, an effective cycle. We basically have no threat on the blue line, no shot and no threat of a Dman taking the puck to the net on his own. This was apparent last season and I'm curious to see if it continues this season. Our bread and butter has always been possession, it's deteriorating, badly. I don't know how this is even debatable. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Shift-4 said:

Sounds like lots of manual intervention involved.

Yeah, its soooo biased. 

 

Basically the first thing you do when developing a new measure is evaluate inter-rater reliability. For example, do two independent raters score a game equally in terms of time of possession, multi-shot shifts, etc. In the case of the NHL Analytics community, everything is a new measure, and so before testing anything, inter-rater reliability should be established. However, none of them do this.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, oldnews said:

The 'information' is the usual overblown, cherry-picked singular indicator with no context, nor it's own counterpoint - MSS for / MSS against.

The source is relevent - it's horrible 'analytics' - with a motive - to rescue itself from the foot-in-mouth of all the laughable content they posted regarding trades over the summer.

 

Weber is absolutely punking TSN and I'm loving it.

 

And this drivel does precisely what you hate - spoon-feeding the Leafs fanbase a premature fairy tale.

 

The Leafs are getting destroyed when it matters - blowing leads - getting shelled - their goaltender is looking like an ECHLer behind that fire drill - and here they are with the but, but 'we have some upside' kumbaya.

One of the best coaches in the NHL, and they are a fire drill nevertheless.

 

But hey - it's a work in progress right.  So 'optimism' for the Leafs, but grave concern for the Canucks.....cause the BS BS is so indicative.

 

Why does everything turn into the leafs? I think the stat has some merit. Forget about the other end of the rink for a moment. If we still had an effective cycle that number would be much higher. Bottom line. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, TimberWolf said:

 

You should have spent some time socializing out of school to work on your sarcasm detection skills. 

Difficult to detect sarcasm through threads. Most communication is non-verbal, so people who use sarcasm on internet forums are just retarded trolls.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The eye test tells you these numbers are accurate.  Hansen and Henrik both flat out said there is too much 1 and done.  Speed is a requirement in today's NHL.  The Canucks have precious little of that and no depth with that element at any level right now.  This is why this compete now, win and retool idea is terrible.  It's a great idea in 2-3years but not now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Matt_T83 said:

Difficult to detect sarcasm through threads. Most communication is non-verbal, so people who use sarcasm on internet forums are just retarded trolls.

 

Right, I have kept this account active for 12 years to troll this thread, was a long wait, but my time has come. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, J.R. said:

 

 

 

I'd say this is an interesting stat. But that's it. 

This moron has no clue and hasn't watched our games... when the sedins are cycling the zone for a minute 30 seconds and don't shoot and end up taking 1 shot and scoring obviously this stat won't look good. 

 

TSN Hates us cuz they aint us. 

Toronto is garbage. Down with TSN / Sportsnet. 

VAN AGAINST THE WORLD 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, LaBamba said:

http://www.tsn.ca/1.593647.1477586733

Here's why Canucks fans should be concerned #TSN

Despite a respectable start to the season in the win/loss column, there are plenty of reasons to be concerned if you are Vancouver Canucks head coach Willie Desjardins.

The Canucks have opened the season with a 4-2-1 record, primarily driven by some fantastic goaltending from Ryan Miller and Jakob Markstrom. That counts for something – teams with above-average shot-stopping ability can mask deficiencies, sometimes for extended periods of time.

But, as the story always seems to go, the modern era of hockey is cruel to this type of team. When hot goaltending cools, the team will be left to reconcile its brutal shot differentials. The Canucks, as it stands through Wednesday, are the league’s worst team at possessing the puck at 5-on-5, controlling just 43.6 per cent of play. That’s the type of performance that puts a team into the draft lottery far more often than not.

It’s an interesting evolution for a Canucks team that just a few years ago was the cream of the crop at owning the run of play, attacking with incredible fluidity and creativity.

The offence is really where the team has taken a turn for the worse. The Sedins still have their occasional flash of brilliance, but nothing like what we saw during their peak years. Behind the Sedins the team offers little to nothing in terms of dangerous attack, and their cycle game – which used to be a staple – has turned to dust.

Their cycle game (or controlled attack game) degradation is quite real, and probably one of the biggest reasons why the Vancouver attack has disintegrated over time. Watch a Canucks game this season and notice just how frequently the team is limited to one-and-done opportunities.

There’s an easy way to measure this: Multi-shot shifts (MSS), or instances in which a team generates a second shot-attempt immediately after generating an initial shot-attempt. We can calculate these numbers by using the NHL play-by-play sheets and getting creative with the logic, using intervening events (like faceoffs, for just one example) as exclusionary criteria. We’ll also set a timeframe for what we consider a multi-shot shift in order to ensure that the puck was unlikely to have exited and re-entered the offensive zone. In this exercise we’ll say the second shot had to have happened 10 seconds or less after the first shot.

Where does Vancouver rank? Dead last, and more than two standard deviations away from the league average in 2016-17.

Embedded Image

The numbers you are looking at are per game, so how it reads is pretty straightforward: about 2.8 times per-game at 5-on-5, Vancouver will sustain their attack in the offensive zone by sending multiple shots at the direction of the goaltender. The league average here is about 6.5 per-game, and you can see a number of teams – including Toronto, Boston, and Los Angeles – are sustaining their attack about 8.0 times per-game.

As an aside, I’m really intrigued by both Arizona and Colorado’s position here. The teams at the top of the list generally align with the teams who are better at controlling possession to start the year – all of the Leafs, Islanders, and Kings are above the break-even line in Corsi%, and they’re probably doing so by (a) beating opposition into their defensive zone; and (b) keeping them there.

The Coyotes and Avalanche, though, are basically neck-and-neck with the Canucks on the opposite end of the Corsi% spectrum. It seems to me that this could be the case of teams that either counterattack extremely well, or recover pucks in the offensive zone (in the off-chance they’re actually there) extremely well.

Let’s get back to the Canucks’ situation. The next question you’d be inclined to ask with such a lowly number concerns who is (and who is not) on the ice for Vancouver in the event they actually do sustain an attack. You won’t be surprised that the Sedins have been on the ice for about half of the team’s total multi-shot shifts. (The Hutton-Gudbranson pairing has also been on the ice for a good chunk of these events.)

I think this is a starting point for troubleshooting what’s currently chipping away at this team’s effectiveness. When teams can’t sustain attacks, they’re left to defend far too frequently. The more you defend, the more mistakes your team can make and the more your goaltender is forced to bail you out. It’s a trickle-down effect, one that the Canucks would be wise to work on in the coming months.  

 

I don't make threads but this has to be discussed. All summer I worried about this exact thing. Poor possession. Poor possession Leads to more injuries and more injuries leads to even poorer possession. 

I love nerd trolls.  They always smell like dung from Toronto.

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...