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

Playoffs, could it happen?


VanGnome

Recommended Posts

There's a faint glimmer of hope here in Canuckland, and that is the inconceivable notion that we could potentially see... Canucks playoff hockey this season...

First let's look at where we are today:

Record: 20-19-4, 44 points in 43 games played. Currently one point back of Anaheim for the 2nd wild card spot in the West.
Scoring: 128 goals for and 136 against for a differential of -8.
Goaltending: Markstrom is on fire, and doesn't look like he's slowing down any time soon. Tonight's game with 3GA, I couldn't really blame him for much if any of them. He just didn't get much help defensively at all when he needed it.

Over his last 15 games, Markstrom is 10-4-1 with a GAA of 2.33 and a SV% of 0.925. In those 15 games, the Canucks have a goal differential of +18 (53 GF vs 35 GA). Markstrom's last 15 games represents 71% of all Canucks games played in that time period (15/21).

With the trade today of Nilsson, even if Demko is brought up I certainly don't see that share of games dropping, if anything it stays the same and more than likely it increases. So let's say Markstrom plays 80% of the remaining games that the team has. Of the 39 remaining games 80% is representative of 31 games, or basically double the sample size used above. If we use that sample size as a benchmark we end up with Markstrom accumulating an additional record of 21-8-2 for a total individual record of 31-12-3. That would put the team at a record of 41-31-7 for 89 points in 74 games played.

This would leave 8 games in which the team would require 7 points to hit a 96 point benchmark which would realistically give them a shot at securing a wild card spot. In order to achieve those 7 points in 8 games, the worst record they could have would be 3-4-1. I don't think it's unreasonable to think that Demko if sheltered and given relatively weak opponents could achieve that record.

Now, let's examine how to support this hypothesis.

Let's look at the record of the team over the 6 games that Nilsson played, and see how that contrasts to Markstrom over his past 15.

Nilsson's record was 0-5-1 with a GAA of 3.50. The team had a goal differential of -14. If we look at the overall goal differential of the past 21 games, we get +4 which is +12 relative to their current season differential.

Let's take the average of Markstrom and Nilsson's numbers and use that as a benchmark for Demko which gives us a GAA of 2.91. Using the benchmark for Demko of 2.91 GAA, over 8 games we get 23 GA.

The team's average GF for Markstrom was 3.53, for Nilsson's last 6 games it was 1.33. Taking the average of that it is 2.43 GF/G. Let's say that the team performs @ 80% of the goal scoring clip they did in Markstroms past 15 games, that would account for 42 goals and a GF/G of 2.82 GF/G so we would see a modest uptick in run support for Demko. Over 8 games that Demko would play that results in 23 GF which is a differential of 0 (or +4 relative to today's season differential, which is consequently the same as the +4 hybrid over the past 21 total games) based on his benchmark GAA of 2.91 over 8 games.

Having a 0 differential over 8 games spread out through the remainder of the season is certainly plausible enough to support a 3-4-1 record. Let's say even that Demko doesn't play 8 games and only 7 as McKenna will likely play tomorrow in Montreal. It's feasible to assume that could be one of those 5 losses.

Now let's look at variables that could tip the scales in a more favorable direction.

1. Sven Baertschi. Has only played 3 games since coming back from injury. Yet in those 3 games, he is at a PPG pace with 1G and 2A. Prior to his injury he had 6 points in 10 games. It may be a bit early to say, but it looks like he'll be able to maintain the point scoring pace he had before injury.
 

2. Brandon Sutter. Is very close to returning, and will be instrumental in securing our defensive depth on forward. He was not scoring at a huge pace, but enough to pitch in here and there with timely points, but mostly solid 2-way play.

3. Trade bait. Both Granlund and Goldobin I feel are being shopped, and could fetch some defensive help on the blueline. Not having to play Pouliot game in, game out is always a bonus. Hutton and Edler have been good this season, although Hutton is tailing off from his hot start to the year.

4. Quinn Hughes. Hughes presents an interesting quandary. He's playing well individually this season so far with 20 points in 17 games, however his team is not doing well. The University of Michigan is not ranked on any of the top collegiate ranking lists (Top 15/Top 20 Div 1 NCAA teams), so it looks unlikely that they will be contending for the Frozen Four tournament. This could present Hughes with an interesting dilemma. Should the Canucks be in such a position near the trading deadline as to be in contention for the playoffs either via wild card or divisionally, and the Wolverines unlikely to compete in the Frozen Four, Quinn could decide to leave school early and sign his ELC prior to the NHL trade deadline. This would have him eligible for the playoffs should the Canucks squeak in, as well as the remaining 20 games of the regular season. 20 games of Quinn Hughes on the PP1 with Boeser, Horvat, Pettersson and X could really, really make a big difference down the stretch. Moreover, having Edler moved down to PP2 would spread out the PP QBing and stabilize both units.

With the Canucks also having played more road games in the 1st half of the season, only 17 of the remaining 39 games of the season are on the road. In fact the Canucks only have 3 road games all month in January, one of which they won in OTT, and the competition is not exactly strong. Just 3 teams currently in playoff positions out of 9 games, February looks like a bit tougher of a schedule with more than half of the games on the road including 3 back to backs. Fortunately however in those back to backs only one is against a playoff team on the second game. March represents a lot of home games, with a lot of divisional rivals of whom the Canucks could be battling directly for playoff spots with making those games even more important.

I don't think I've made any unreasonable assumptions in any of this, and I have to say I will be watching in anticipation the remainder of this season and even if the team falls just short I will have to say it should put Green squarely in contention for the Jack Adams if nothing else as EVERYONE had the Canucks in the bottom of the league competing yet again for a lottery pick.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Let's start off with saying I don't want Quinn Hughes playing more than 9 regular season games this year because that would burn off the first year of his ELC and he'd have to be protected in the Seattle expansion draft.  Just looking at this for the good of the team, the more players exempt from this draft the better.  I definitely don't think he'd leave college early to sign with the Canucks.

 

Secondly, Markstrom is still a wild card.  Markstrom played quite well during the second half of last year too, so I'm hoping this is the same streak here.  Sure he can't keep up is .943 save percentage for December, but .920 would be respectable at least which is what he was doing in the back half of last year.  Remember before this streak of games he came off a horrendous streak.  As much as I wouldn't want to see this, I still have it in the back of my mind, but I'm cheering for him every day to keep this up.

 

Thirdly, I don't really want to look into general specifics.  I just want to enjoy the ride.  No need to complicate this.  I'm just gonna walk with Elias.

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Rindiculous said:

Let's start off with saying I don't want Quinn Hughes playing more than 9 regular season games this year because that would burn off the first year of his ELC and he'd have to be protected in the Seattle expansion draft.  Just looking at this for the good of the team, the more players exempt from this draft the better.  I definitely don't think he'd leave college early to sign with the Canucks.

 

Secondly, Markstrom is still a wild card.  Markstrom played quite well during the second half of last year too, so I'm hoping this is the same streak here.  Sure he can't keep up is .943 save percentage for December, but .920 would be respectable at least which is what he was doing in the back half of last year.  Remember before this streak of games he came off a horrendous streak.  As much as I wouldn't want to see this, I still have it in the back of my mind, but I'm cheering for him every day to keep this up.

 

Thirdly, I don't really want to look into general specifics.  I just want to enjoy the ride.  No need to complicate this.  I'm just gonna walk with Elias.

I’m pretty sure if he plays 1 game he burns a year off his contract.  

The 9 game thing is for juniors. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, drummerboy said:

I’m pretty sure if he plays 1 game he burns a year off his contract.  

The 9 game thing is for juniors. 

I read somewhere that the 9 game rule came into effect for this as well and I also heard it on one of mirokiondefence's videos (I trust him with knowing nhl contract specifics).  Could be wrong.

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Rindiculous said:

Let's start off with saying I don't want Quinn Hughes playing more than 9 regular season games this year because that would burn off the first year of his ELC and he'd have to be protected in the Seattle expansion draft.  Just looking at this for the good of the team, the more players exempt from this draft the better.  I definitely don't think he'd leave college early to sign with the Canucks.

 

Secondly, Markstrom is still a wild card.  Markstrom played quite well during the second half of last year too, so I'm hoping this is the same streak here.  Sure he can't keep up is .943 save percentage for December, but .920 would be respectable at least which is what he was doing in the back half of last year.  Remember before this streak of games he came off a horrendous streak.  As much as I wouldn't want to see this, I still have it in the back of my mind, but I'm cheering for him every day to keep this up.

 

Thirdly, I don't really want to look into general specifics.  I just want to enjoy the ride.  No need to complicate this.  I'm just gonna walk with Elias.

The only players I'm even remotely concerned with protecting for the expansion is Horvat, Boeser, Pettersson, Hughes, Virtanen, Gaudette, Demko, Juolevi. Everyone else are replaceable pieces.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Rindiculous said:

I read somewhere that the 9 game rule came into effect for this as well and I also heard it on one of mirokiondefence's videos (I trust him with knowing nhl contract specifics).  Could be wrong.

Gaudette played 5 last year and It took a year off his.  

Boeser played 9 and same thing.  

 

Dont see why Hughes would be any different 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, VanGnome said:

The only players I'm even remotely concerned with protecting for the expansion is Horvat, Boeser, Pettersson, Hughes, Virtanen, Gaudette, Demko, Juolevi. Everyone else are replaceable pieces.

So you don't want to protect Dahlen, Baertschi, Goldobin, Hutton, Gadjovich, or any big splash free agents we could sign over the next two years?  Cause I know I would want to keep all the guys I could rather than set a team back which just made it out of a rebuild.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, drummerboy said:

Gaudette played 5 last year and It took a year off his.  

Boeser played 9 and same thing.  

 

Dont see why Hughes would be any different 

Hughes is in his first year.  The slide rule applies to D+1 players.  Gaudette was D+3, Boeser D+2.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The expansion rules have minimum thresholds for 

2 minutes ago, Rindiculous said:

So you don't want to protect Dahlen, Baertschi, Goldobin, Hutton, Gadjovich, or any big splash free agents we could sign over the next two years?  Cause I know I would want to keep all the guys I could rather than set a team back which just made it out of a rebuild.

Teams had to submit their list of protected players by June 17, 2017, and they had to expose at least two forwards and one defenseman that had played at least 40 games in the 2016–17 season or more than 70 games in the 2015–16 and 2016–17 seasons combined and had to still be contracted for the 2017–18 season.

 

The Seattle expansion will be using the same rules as the Vegas expansion. 2020-2021 is a ways away and a lot can happen in terms of roster flux. Goldobin, Baertschi, and Hutton could very well not be on the team. Juolevi, Dahlen and Gadjovich could not be eligible for expansion at all depending on how they're used.

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, VanGnome said:

The expansion rules have minimum thresholds for 

Teams had to submit their list of protected players by June 17, 2017, and they had to expose at least two forwards and one defenseman that had played at least 40 games in the 2016–17 season or more than 70 games in the 2015–16 and 2016–17 seasons combined and had to still be contracted for the 2017–18 season.

 

The Seattle expansion will be using the same rules as the Vegas expansion. 2020-2021 is a ways away and a lot can happen in terms of roster flux. Goldobin, Baertschi, and Hutton could very well not be on the team. Juolevi, Dahlen and Gadjovich could not be eligible for expansion at all depending on how they're used.

Yes, Juolevi, Dahlen, Gaudette, Macewen, and Gadjovich will all be elgible since they are playing in the AHL this year.  All 3rd year professionals are eligible and this includes the AHL.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Rindiculous said:

Yes, Juolevi, Dahlen, Gaudette, Macewen, and Gadjovich will all be elgible since they are playing in the AHL this year.  All 3rd year professionals are eligible and this includes the AHL.

I still think that worrying about one player who could improve our odds at making the playoffs which could unbelievably improve the team when it comes to expansion is a bit too conservative. If as you say all 3rd year AHL players are eligible as well then we will have more players eligible for expansion than we'll be able to protect anyway. I'd rather take overall team improvement over not having that improvement by being too cautious and conservative in fear of the unknown 2 years from now.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Canucks need a 0.667 Winning % the rest of the season to get to 96 points, or a combination of OTL / W will also do. Theoretically, the worst record the canucks could have in wins / losses is : 18-1-20

 

Basically the canucks have to 2 W / 1 L for the rest of the season to guarantee playoffs, if at any point, the team does say 6 W in a row, they could afford 2L in a row. What would really help vancouver is a 9 game winning streak which if started now, would be at 28-19-4 or 60 points. AT that point, with 31 Games left, all they'd need is a 18-13-0 record or 0.58%, still hard. This team needs to realistically get to a point where they play only .500 to get in, which would require them to go on a 14 game winning streak. If that is the case, they'd be at 33-19-4, or 70 points. Then all they need to do is 13-13-0.

Link to post
Share on other sites
57 minutes ago, VanGnome said:

The expansion rules have minimum thresholds for 

Teams had to submit their list of protected players by June 17, 2017, and they had to expose at least two forwards and one defenseman that had played at least 40 games in the 2016–17 season or more than 70 games in the 2015–16 and 2016–17 seasons combined and had to still be contracted for the 2017–18 season.

 

The Seattle expansion will be using the same rules as the Vegas expansion. 2020-2021 is a ways away and a lot can happen in terms of roster flux. Goldobin, Baertschi, and Hutton could very well not be on the team. Juolevi, Dahlen and Gadjovich could not be eligible for expansion at all depending on how they're used.

All our AHL guys now will be eligible to be taken because AHL counts as pro years.

Link to post
Share on other sites

A lot of variables but we have all home games nicely spaced out after the Toronto game in January. This means recovery and practice time. Also the games in hand everyone has (Minnie has 5 gih!) will pretty much even out by the end of the month. Realistically we are 5-6 points away from the final wildcard spot which is not massive over the course of 39 games. If we can improve at home we will make the playoffs (which hopefully means we play the Flames round one)

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Rindiculous said:

Let's start off with saying I don't want Quinn Hughes playing more than 9 regular season games this year because that would burn off the first year of his ELC and he'd have to be protected in the Seattle expansion draft.  Just looking at this for the good of the team, the more players exempt from this draft the better.  I definitely don't think he'd leave college early to sign with the Canucks.

 

Secondly, Markstrom is still a wild card.  Markstrom played quite well during the second half of last year too, so I'm hoping this is the same streak here.  Sure he can't keep up is .943 save percentage for December, but .920 would be respectable at least which is what he was doing in the back half of last year.  Remember before this streak of games he came off a horrendous streak.  As much as I wouldn't want to see this, I still have it in the back of my mind, but I'm cheering for him every day to keep this up.

 

Thirdly, I don't really want to look into general specifics.  I just want to enjoy the ride.  No need to complicate this.  I'm just gonna walk with Elias.

 

Hughes needs just 1 game to burn a year of his ELC.  He's going to turn 20 this year - he will no longer be a teenager so the 9 games doesn't apply anymore.  He'll be a 3rd year pro by the expansion draft and will need to be protected.

Link to post
Share on other sites

We have played more games than other teams around us, so we are a bit higher than where we really are IMO. We will be competitive down to the wire this year instead of collapsing like years before (barring injuries), but just miss out on the playoffs this year. This is going along well with how I've been projecting this rebuild so far. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

The toughest part of the schedule is still to come. In years past the Canucks have fallen off hard in January/February. The win 2 lose 1 philosophy is extremely difficult to maintain with half the schedule still to come. However, if they can keep scoring at a decent pace and get solid goaltending down the stretch anything is possible. Unlikely, but possible. 

Link to post
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...