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

Why are we going away from Sedin-Sedin-Eriksson?


Sedin Brothers

What line should Eriksson play on?  

38 members have voted

You do not have permission to vote in this poll, or see the poll results. Please sign in or register to vote in this poll.

Recommended Posts

Eriksson was overthinking to support Sedin cycle rather than getting in a shooting position for a shot. 

 

But you are right. It was just few games. WD should have been more patient and stick with them longer.

 

In hindsight, everything started to fall off when he began his line juggling. Burrows and Dorsett injury also forced him to change the lines.

 

First Eriksson swapped with Baertschi. Then, neither lines worked so Baertschi went back to play with Bo, Hansen with the Sedins, and Eriksson with Sutter. Sutter line started being useless after that. After Baertschi got back with Horvat, they didn't play well together either. But the Sedins started to look a bit better... So, is Hansen our best player? Because if so...

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Drakrami said:

Because our coach is stubborn as a brick wall.  Same thing happened with Vrbata, he was buried. Vrbata on pace for 52 points right now for the Coyotes. What happened last year? 

 

WD's philosophy to run 4 scoring lines is the killer. It is not working, dont know why he keeps trying. 

 

Maybe he should try a different angle to coaching - bringing the best out of each of his players. 

Same thing that happened to Vrbata last year is happening to Louie this year. You nailed it. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A selection of Loui Eriksson's career numbers (since 2007 when advanced stats went public):

 

51.6 CF% 

 

55.95 CF60 (Corsi events for per 60 minutes)

 

52.49 CA60 (Corsi events against per 60 minutes)

 

+1.59 CF60RelTM (Corsi events for per 60 minutes relative to teammates)

 

-1.03 CA60RelTM (Corsi events against per 60 minutes relative to teammates--negative numbers are good in this case because they suggest "shot suppression")

 

+1.2 CF%RelTM (Corsi-for percentage relative to teammates)

 

4.66 CSh% (Corsi shooting percentage: percent of Corsi events that score goals)

 

8.68 On-ice (team) Sh%

 

11.62 Sh% (individual)

 

10.78 iCorsi/60 (number of Corsi events generated individually per 60 minutes)

 

6.58 shots/60

 

And those same stats from thusfar in the 2016-17 season:

 

55.2 CF% (best on team)

 

59.84 CF60 (3rd best on team)

 

48.57 CA60 (3rd best on team)

 

+8.13 CF60RelTM (2nd best on team)

 

-10.64 CA60RelTM (2nd best on team)

 

+8.6 CF%RelTM (best on team)

 

1.30 CSh% (3rd worst on team)

 

2.82 On-ice (team) Sh% (3rd worst on team)

 

0.00 Sh% (individual) (obviously tied for the worst on team)

 

11.27 iCorsi/60 (7th on team)

 

5.44 shots/60 (9th on team)

 

(Source: stats.hockeyanalysis.com)

 

From a purely statistical perspective, Eriksson is out performing most of his career numbers (team and individual) for generating possession and has the best overall possession metrics on the team.

 

The only events stat where Eriksson is underperforming (compared to his career numbers) is in shots/60. Which actually makes sense. His iCorsi/60 is above his career rates. But his shots/60 is below his career rates. He's creating more shot attempts but less of his attempted shots are actually hitting the target (as a higher than normal percentage of his shots are getting blocked or missing the net). 

 

This fits with the overall picture of Eriksson having above career average levels in production of shooting events but woefully low rates of translating those shooting events into scoring events.

 

An extremely low percentage of Eriksson's on-ice attempted shots (individual and team) are actually translating into goals.

 

And I'd argue, with a high level of confidence, that Eriksson's percentages at their current levels are unsustainably low. I think his career numbers make that pretty clear.

 

He's been terribly unlucky. 

 

But I can't imagine it continuing much longer. Even the worst plug of a player would eventually start scoring goals if he was driving possession and creating shot attempts (team rates) the way Eriksson has this season.

 

The big question is the degree to which Eriksson's struggles might be, at least in part, symptomatic of a team problem (usage/systems/coaching) or whether the team struggles are simply being exacerbated by Eriksson's terrible puck luck? I think the latter issue is far more significant. But the former may also be a factor here.

 

The good thing is that percentage driven scoring issues tend to resolve over time. Eriksson will eventually start to produce goals. The obvious question, however, is whether or not the coaches are doing the right things to help facilitate this. 

 

No easy answers here. But hopefully, for everyone's sake, the problem will fix itself soon enough.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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

A selection of Loui Eriksson's career numbers (since 2007 when advanced stats went public):

 

51.6 CF% 

 

55.95 CF60 (Corsi events for per 60 minutes)

 

52.49 CA60 (Corsi events against per 60 minutes)

 

+1.59 CF60RelTM (Corsi events for per 60 minutes relative to teammates)

 

-1.03 CA60RelTM (Corsi events against per 60 minutes relative to teammates--negative numbers are good in this case because they suggest "shot suppression")

 

+1.2 CF%RelTM (Corsi-for percentage relative to teammates)

 

4.66 CSh% (Corsi shooting percentage: percent of Corsi events that score goals)

 

8.68 On-ice (team) Sh%

 

11.62 Sh% (individual)

 

10.78 iCorsi/60 (number of Corsi events generated individually per 60 minutes)

 

6.58 shots/60

 

And those same stats from thusfar in the 2016-17 season:

 

55.2 CF% (best on team)

 

59.84 CF60 (3rd best on team)

 

48.57 CA60 (3rd best on team)

 

+8.13 CF60RelTM (2nd best on team)

 

-10.64 CA60RelTM (2nd best on team)

 

+8.6 CF%RelTM (best on team)

 

1.30 CSh% (3rd worst on team)

 

2.82 On-ice (team) Sh% (3rd worst on team)

 

0.00 Sh% (individual) (obviously tied for the worst on team)

 

11.27 iCorsi/60 (7th on team)

 

5.44 shots/60 (9th on team)

 

(Source: stats.hockeyanalysis.com)

 

From a purely statistical perspective, Eriksson is out performing most of his career numbers (team and individual) for generating possession and has the best overall possession metrics on the team.

 

The only events stat where Eriksson is underperforming (compared to his career numbers) is in shots/60. Which actually makes sense. His iCorsi/60 is above his career rates. But his shots/60 is below his career rates. He's creating more shot attempts but less of his attempted shots are actually hitting the target (as a higher than normal percentage of his shots are getting blocked or missing the net). 

 

This fits with the overall picture of Eriksson having above career average levels in production of shooting events but woefully low rates of translating those shooting events into scoring events.

 

An extremely low percentage of Eriksson's on-ice attempted shots (individual and team) are actually translating into goals.

 

And I'd argue, with a high level of confidence, that Eriksson's percentages at their current levels are unsustainably low. I think his career numbers make that pretty clear.

 

He's been terribly unlucky. 

 

But I can't imagine it continuing much longer. Even the worst plug of a player would eventually start scoring goals if he was driving possession and creating shot attempts (team rates) the way Eriksson has this season.

 

The big question is the degree to which Eriksson's struggles might be, at least in part, symptomatic of a team problem (usage/systems/coaching) or whether the team struggles are simply being exacerbated by Eriksson's terrible puck luck? I think the latter issue is far more significant. But the former may also be a factor here.

 

The good thing is that percentage driven scoring issues tend to resolve over time. Eriksson will eventually start to produce goals. The obvious question, however, is whether or not the coaches are doing the right things to help facilitate this. 

 

No easy answers here. But hopefully, for everyone's sake, the problem will fix itself soon enough.

 

usual excellent SID-summary. The next coach will put him with the twins and let it gel. 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Friedman's take in his 30 thoughts of this week on Eriksson with the Sedins.

 

9. One of the reasons the Canucks haven’t used Eriksson with the Sedins too often? With Daniel and Henrik down low, you’re playing with fire by having a third forward in that area, since the responsibility is to stay higher and protect against odd-man rushes. But Eriksson likes to play in front of the net, so he’s not able to go where he’s comfortable. At some point, Vancouver is going to have to commit to a long run of trying to make it work, but it’s hard to do that when you need wins.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd like to see Eriksson with Sutter or Bo, both of whom are into carrying the puck and shooting.

 

His style is primarily based on following on the way to the net and finishing off rebounds from his line-mates' drives to the net.  Meanwhile, I think Hansen should go back to the Twins because he's got what they don't: speed, tenacity and a shoot-first mentality that could work well with the passing Twins.  In terms of fit, Loui does work with 33 and 22, but they're all finesse-based, whereas their magic could be spread among other teammates.  

Twins - Hansen
Sven - Bo - Eriksson
Granlund - Sutter - Rodin/ Jake
Burr - Gaunce - Dorsett

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Drakrami said:

Because our coach is stubborn as a brick wall.  Same thing happened with Vrbata, he was buried. Vrbata on pace for 52 points right now for the Coyotes. What happened last year? 

 

WD's philosophy to run 4 scoring lines is the killer. It is not working, dont know why he keeps trying. 

 

Maybe he should try a different angle to coaching - bringing the best out of each of his players. 

 

He wasn't expecting to play with youngsters and decided to take the year off.

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...