Lack of an NHL level Offensive system means lack of even strength scoring

[IBatch]

1 hour ago, Phat Fingers said:

KIetThis is a young team, really as a group, completely revamped, retooled, rebuilt going into this season.  

 

That you are referencing the top 5 teams in the league and we are in the conversation is itself a revelation from the previous 4 years.  

 

5v5 scoring is tougher and it needs to improve of this group it to be successful.  Okay.  I bet the whole club from the ice clearing crew to Aqua man would say the same thing.  

 

All great points and alot of work went into your research.  All valid.  

 

Looking at the clubs on your list, they have been playing together for years.  They have the ability to know what the other is doing without thinking.  That takes time, practice and repetition.  

 

Signs of great chemistry are all there for this group, but they have to work at it, process it a micro second that the top 5 teams dont need due to their time together.  

 

Adapting to adversity is the current hump.  Green has made adjustments and players are getting healthy, Edler is back and we won.  Not an outlier.  He eats minutes that Hughes didn't have to play, Hughes has a great night.  Less defensive lapses and the big oilers line is held pointless and is -3.  

 

This team can beat the top teams in the west.  If we make the playoffs, it would be as a wc team.  This group has worldbeater darkhorse potential.  

 

One huge positive that is not being talked about in your OP is secondary scoring.  We have scoring threats in our top 3 lines.  We have 7 players on pace to score 20 goals this season. Ep40, Brock, JT, Bo, Pearson, Jake and Gaudette. 

 

Almost 8 had Lievo not been injured (he was picking up his pace just prior to being hurt)  Hughes is on pace for a 60 point rookie campaign.  With Edler back, Quinn should be able to focus on his offence more.  The shot production that Hughes creates is insane. 

 

Markstrom has had a really emotionally rough first half.  His demeanor is far more intense than previous years and he is stopping the right pucks.  No back breakers this year and he is stealing games.  

 

Our 5v5 scoring is in need of improving.  In the last 3 games the club has scored first.  That was a huge issue in the 5 game skid.  Green made adjustments and the team responded.  Green still has the room.  

 

The first half is over and I still see this team as a playoff team.  Although with the JT deal, maybe we just miss this year and for fracking once, we move up in the Lotto.  

 

I was about to reply to this post and saw this - you've covered a lot of what I was going to.

 

 

Id like to add (and yes this is a couple weeks old now and things have changed a bit for the better since) that Vancouver offense is better then it's been in years, we are on our way to score 250  in quite some time.  When was the last time?2010-2011 when we scored 261 and led the league in goals for.  Since  then we've dropped off a cliff including three seasons in the 180's...nowadays 250 goals is good for top 5-8 league wide, and 300 is exceptional (we scored 346 one year in the early 90's - that was simply incredible even for then). 

 

 

Currently we have 121 goals in 38 games...good for top ten league wide and with a few more good for close to top five.   13 goals less then the league leaders ... or one more goal every three or four games that's it.   Which is definitely within reach if we can keep it up.   The second half things will lock up a bit and scoring should go down but 250 is  a possibility as like you've said this team is getting used to each other and the coaches systems - I see them getting better with time too.   Not that worried.   Our goals against could be better if anything.   Doesn't help being involved in several barn burners ... and it's definitely a lot more exciting to watch them play - they are dangerous.   7-9 20 (including Leivo and Ferland) goal scorers rarely happens , even back in 70-80's not many Cup teams or any teams for that matter could boast that.   That's more then half your forwards.   And it does win cups.  Bet some would be surprised to know what teams have ever had 8 20 goal scorers all-time.   It's a pretty small list considering. 

 

Edit:   Want to add that since our first year until now our 50th season,  we've led our division 10 times.   Five times in a row with the peak Sedins,  2 with the WCE teams (including the Sedins), 2 times with the Linden teams and once in the mid 70's.   Not too shabby.  

Edited December 24, 2019 by IBatch

[189lb enforcers?]

EP

The kid draws the penalties this team capitalizes on, masking the fundamental flaws in its offensive strategies. 

Stay healthy, EP. 

Edited December 24, 2019 by 189lb enforcers?

[Baggins]

11 hours ago, stawns said:

They hardly dump and chase every time......at most it's 60/40.  If there's nothing there, a dump and chase is a far better play than trying to force something out of nothing and turning the puck over at the blue line and getting caught on odd man rushes.  If you've got nothing, you advance the puck deep and try and force turnovers.

For many what stands out for them is what they don't like. Therefore it's 'all the time'. 

 

Every team uses dump and chase. If a clean entry is available they take it. If it's unlikely they dump and chase. The only other option is circle back and try again if the clean entry isn't there.

[189lb enforcers?]

17 minutes ago, Baggins said:

For many what stands out for them is what they don't like. Therefore it's 'all the time'. 

 

Every team uses dump and chase. If a clean entry is available they take it. If it's unlikely they dump and chase. The only other option is circle back and try again if the clean entry isn't there.

Merry/Happy, Baggins. 

 

Generalities. 

 

Both camps are right in their assessments, but it’s as you’ve wisely stated, they look for or notice what they don’t like. 

 

The Canucks haven’t just been dumping it in to facilitate a line change or get behind Dmen, it’s largely been their entry plan unless there’s room to do the Cliff Ronning - the button hook on the highboards - to develop an offensive zone anything. 

 

One thing we almost never ever see from them is a dump-in, while on the PP, but again, just an observation from the couch. 

 

Scotty Bowman and others must cringe when teams just hand over possession so easily, knowing it’s so hard to acquire. 

 

As an aside here, I like possession. I miss it. 

 

Players like Peter Forsberg wouldn’t just dump it in.

He’d gain the zone, rag it, whatever, until his team could take over possession, then he’d complete his shift change. 

 

I’m sure analytics has something to do with the modern game’s pervasive chip-play where the far side forward tips a slap-pass from a Dman, at centre to facilitate a line change, handing over possession.

 

I wring my hands and shake my head when I see them do it in the WHL or where ever. I’d rather take my chances by maintaining possession than get a full, clean line change in. 

Edited December 24, 2019 by 189lb enforcers?

[Guest]

9 hours ago, Dats hockey said:

It’s not like it’s not a valid point, we went through a massive stretch were we just couldn’t score 5v5.

It's not a point, it's his opinion.  Everything reads fine until those two lines where OP just makes a conclusion in his own head and states it as fact. 
That stretch coincided with all our injuries btw, that was when we didn't have Roussel, Beagle, Motte, Ferland and Sutter among others.  Those aren't scorers, but as we've seen they mean a lot to our team. 

Clamoring about not scoring leads to putting pressure on Elias, Bo and Brock.  Last thing we need is media grilling our young guys as to why they're not scoring.  

[IBatch]

On 12/24/2019 at 4:35 PM, VancouverHabitant said:

It's not a point, it's his opinion.  Everything reads fine until those two lines where OP just makes a conclusion in his own head and states it as fact. 
That stretch coincided with all our injuries btw, that was when we didn't have Roussel, Beagle, Motte, Ferland and Sutter among others.  Those aren't scorers, but as we've seen they mean a lot to our team. 

Clamoring about not scoring leads to putting pressure on Elias, Bo and Brock.  Last thing we need is media grilling our young guys as to why they're not scoring.  

On the last paragraph- hopefully it won't come to that at all for a long long time (until they are old and declining).   This team as a whole is scoring on a 70 goal higher pace then it was a few years ago (remember that? - two years in a row of 180ish goals on the year).   Back then we had little offense from all our lines and our defense.   

 

Jump forward to the next core - and already we are approaching the type of offense we got from the better Sedin years....and this core is barely wetting their feet yet.   Sure the second half could see a dip as games tighten up, and if we lose a key player it would also slow things down. 

 

But overall we seem to get the job done regardless if games go to OT or not (offensively) and regardless of its the PP or regular scoring that's getting the job done.  We have fairly balanced scoring as a whole too - enough contributors up and down the lineup to make it hard to defend against - and we are winning games when the top line is mostly shut down too.

 

Been quite the ride so far.  QH gives us a weapon on the back end we haven't had in a long time.   Our time isn't here yet - but it's on the horizon for sure. 

[Bertuzzi44ever]

What I find most puzzling is why people think when they say,

 

”we got so and so” who can score they assume the other team doesent have so and so who can score or more importantly play a system that shuts down these guys, or study video of them before the game (which they alll do as a team requirement on video day) and play to their strengths to defend/defeat us.

 

 

 

this league isn’t a “if our Canucks get a better roster they automatically do better!” like in a ea simulator would likely do. This happens on the ice. That’s why it’s a game. Or else let’s just start handing cups and Trophies out to who the best players, teams are before the season starts and not even play hockey.

 

This is real life. .best teams don’t always win. In fact they hardly ever do.  (Going by best teams in the regular season I mean, as the best team in the playoffs obviously usually wins) That’s why just like the game of life, the game of hockey is left up to chance, and a number of different circumstances like momentum, puck luck, what positive or negative energies their teams are riding waves of, the atmosphere in the building, the chemistry of lineman’s and those against them, the mood of the players on that particular day, I could go on but people get the idea. 

 

Just because we have guys who can score, and guys who can skate ....doesent mean that other teams don’t too....and it also doesn't mean those players named aren’t immune to being shut down by better defensive systems. Or ones that are playing better.

 

We really don’t have a top offense, (top ten) we have a good nucleus going forwArd but we definitely lack in secondary scoring and I’m not saying in general, I’m saying compared to the rest of the league. If you think we don’t, you probably haven’t watched the rest of the league for the last few years....we’re getting better though. It’s not going to happen over night just because you have the talent on your team. The talent had to also be ready to succeed and then go out there and actually do it. Again, this isn’t a simulator, this is life. Nothing is guaranteed but the better we get, obviously the chances we get better and I think what’s puzzling people here again, is they assume just because we are better we should be better.

 

the league improves with us. It’s not like everyone stays the same and we change.

Edited December 28, 2019 by Bertuzzi44ever

[Gurn]

7 hours ago, Bertuzzi44ever said:

What I find most puzzling is why people think when they say,

 

”we got so and so” who can score they assume the other team doesent have so and so who can score or

can you please quote any post on this forum that backs up what you are alleging?

[Canucklehead73]

Well there is the fact that the Canucks draw the most penalties and PP chances in the league... so their percentage of goals scored on the PP would be higher than everyone?

 

Maybe your reading to much into it...

[Bertorama]

The one point not really called out here in The stats is the Intangible hockey plays that are happening.  Canucks are drawing a lot of penalties through their 5 on 5 playmaking and skating capability. That means they are creating chances, opponents are out of position and we are getting looks and chances on net that draw penalties. This Means we will continue to get more power play chances because we are outplaying our opponents 5 on 5. Before we dig so deep into these stats sometimes we look past the way the games are being played. Not every team wins in the same fashion 

Edited December 30, 2019 by Bertorama

[Toyotasfan]

From Friedman’s 31 thoughts:

 

 

[Pete M]

This team seems to be directed to "dump and chase"; therefore, they play "dump and chase" with little thought of doing otherwise. I've seen many times where they could have entered the Ozone with possession but chose to "dump" the puck in and "chase" it in order to make the other team play a 200 ft game. This is a coaching strategy that the team follows with small amount of lee way to carry the puck in.

 

The opportunity cost of "dump and chase" is giving away scoring chances generated off a puck possession strategy. This may account for a lot of games where the Canucks get around 20 shots per game. 

 

For a team to be a puck possession team, the strategy starts in all three zones and the plan is to create time and space in order to maintain possession of the puck...sometimes it takes all three zones in order to create the time and space, sometimes it takes two zones and sometimes one zone (turn overs in the ozone). The key to being successful is the team (5 players on the ice) buys into the strategy and position themselves on the ice to execute the strategy. Of course, sometimes the team has to play a "dump and chase" style when the other team takes away the time and space where dumping the puck in is the best choice. 

 

The Canucks do not have a puck possession strategy, but if they did have a puck possession strategy, they would be a lot better team, and would have a better record.

 

A puck possession strategy is simple but the players need to work as a 5 man unit, commit to the strategy, and execute the system in all three zones in order for it to be effective. A puck possession strategy takes a lot less energy than a "dump and chase" strategy.

 

 

[Alflives]

1 minute ago, Toyotasfan said:

From Friedman’s 31 thoughts:

 

 

That’s so funny.  Green an all star game coach.  Did he ever play in one?

[Alflives]

1 minute ago, Pete M said:

This team seems to be directed to "dump and chase"; therefore, they play "dump and chase" with little thought of doing otherwise. I've seen many times where they could have entered the Ozone with possession but chose to "dump" the puck in and "chase" it in order to make the other team play a 200 ft game. This is a coaching strategy that the team follows with small amount of lee way to carry the puck in.

 

The opportunity cost of "dump and chase" is giving away scoring chances generated off a puck possession strategy. This may account for a lot of games where the Canucks get around 20 shots per game. 

 

For a team to be a puck possession team, the strategy starts in all three zones and the plan is to create time and space in order to maintain possession of the puck...sometimes it takes all three zones in order to create the time and space, sometimes it takes two zones and sometimes one zone (turn overs in the ozone). The key to being successful is the team (5 players on the ice) buys into the strategy and position themselves on the ice to execute the strategy. Of course, sometimes the team has to play a "dump and chase" style when the other team takes away the time and space where dumping the puck in is the best choice. 

 

The Canucks do not have a puck possession strategy, but if they did have a puck possession strategy, they would be a lot better team, and would have a better record.

 

A puck possession strategy is simple but the players need to work as a 5 man unit, commit to the strategy, and execute the system in all three zones in order for it to be effective. A puck possession strategy takes a lot less energy than a "dump and chase" strategy.

 

 

Or you have Quinn Hughes, and he just keeps the puck for his shift.  

[Pete M]

1 minute ago, Alflives said:

Or you have Quinn Hughes, and he just keeps the puck for his shift.  

lol....he is a beauty.

[Pete M]

23 minutes ago, Toyotasfan said:

From Friedman’s 31 thoughts:

 

 

that's awesome if TG gets the nod ...GCG!

[ilduce39]

1 hour ago, Toyotasfan said:

From Friedman’s 31 thoughts:

 

 

So good.