Arrow 1983 Posted January 7, 2020 Share Posted January 7, 2020 I was recently going through the Canuck players stats, and how they would stack up against a system where all things where truly equal. Here is just some fun findings that I noticed, and I will share what criteria I used to rank the Canuck players. Based purely on pts I started to wonder where each player on the Canucks would rank from, Forwards 1 through 12 and Defenceman 1 through 6. Using 31 teams the math goes simply like this a #1 forward would be ranked 1 though 31, a # 2 forward would rank 32 though 62. The math goes 31*1=31 31*2=62 31*3=93 all the way up to 31*12=372 and for defenceman up to 31*6= 186. First column is name of player 2nd column their current rank in points and 3rd column is there forward or Defence rank As of Game 42 for Canucks Forwards only, Petterson, 14 #1 Miller, Tied for 22 #1 looks to me he might be worth the price Benning payed Boeser, Tied for 27 #1 Horvat, tied for 42 #2 Pearson, tied for 80 #2 Virtanen, tied for 118 #4 Leivo, Tied for 168 #6 Gaudette, Tied for 181 #6 Sutter, Tied for 320 #11 has played 22 of 42 games Roussel, Tied 339 #11 has played 14 of 42 Ferland, Tied 366 # 12 Has played 14 of 42 Schaller, Tied 380 # 13 Has played 40 of 42 Eriksson, Tied 380 #13 Has played 23 of 42 Beagle, Tied 400 # 13 Has played 33 of 42 Defence only, Hughes, Tied for 9th #1 Edler, Tied for 43 #2 Myers, Tied for 70 #3 Tanev, Tied for 85 #3 Stecher, Tied for 131 #5 Benn, Tied for 149 #5 Fantenberg, Tied 203 #7 Has played 15 of 42 Starting with defence I would come to the conclusion that the Canucks have a very balanced D. I would make an argument that with more playing time, Stecher could easily be a #4 even a low 3rd. I would also argue that Benn and Fantenberg are interchangeable. If this is true The Canucks could handle a major injury and have the depth to cover 1 defenceman not Named Hughes. On forward, first what I consider an interesting Fact, Jake Virtanen is currently 11th in time on ice per game played @ 12:19 mins almost 3 mins less then Leivo was before he got injured 15:01. Prior to Leivo Getting injured Jake had Zero powerplay time. Virtanen Powerplay goals 3, powerplay points 5. Leivo Powerplay goals 0, Powerplay points 5. The Last Jake fact 2nd in Even strenght Goals 9, Petterson is 1st with 13, Miller, Pearson, Boeser tied for 3rd with 8 each. Leivo 4th at 7 goals. All in all I would say Jake is proving when given the chance he can handle a bigger role. 2nd the perception, of a top 6 forward I believe is very skewed in hockey fans. if 186 or greater player is a top 6 forward 31*6=186 then currently any player with 18ish pts (It's about the Half way point for most teams) right now is a top 6 forward. 18*2 is 36 pts for a lower end top 6 forward. I believe most people would say 50 pts would qualify a player as a second line Player.At this point of the season a player would require 25ish points. Currently players 108 to 117 have 25 points. Players 94-124 would be a #4 player in the league actual currently 25pts would make you a top half of the #4 players in the league. Makes me wonder who Benning is thinking of acquiring when he says he wants another top 6 forward. Looking through the list of guys with 25 pts I just don't see a team giving one of those guys up. Which begs the question is a 18pt player currently better then what the Canucks have now? The Last point I'd like to make before I pass it to you guys for comment is, the look of our lineup if the League had true parity, Line 1 Horvat, Petterson insert player 62-93 a #3 That's right no Miller no Boeser Line 2 Virtanen Gaudette Insert a #5 124-155 No Leivo Line 3 Insert a #7, #8, and #9 LOL Sutter Roussel and Ferland could be without injuries Line 4 Insert #10 #11 #12 Eriksson if he wasn't scratched so many games. Beagle and Schaller don't make the cut. Disclaimer: I am well aware this type of stat tracking has it's flaws, intangibles are not accounted for Injuries decrease point count (however all teams have injuries and this can show depth of a team). Furthermore, time on ice can also reveal a lot not accounted in this method, as I have pointed out with Virtanen, Leivo and a little with Stecher. Plus the team a player is playing for can have major changes in point totals Miller being a prime example. Now its all your guys, very interested in hearing what you guys think, I'm sure I have left out a ton. 1 1 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post Davathor Posted January 7, 2020 Popular Post Share Posted January 7, 2020 1 7 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arrow 1983 Posted January 7, 2020 Author Share Posted January 7, 2020 11 minutes ago, Davathor said: Think of it as NHL fanticy drafting with you and 30 other people you have to pick 12 forwards and 6 defence each. Forwards first then defence. This is how Canuck players would rank Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wanless Posted January 7, 2020 Share Posted January 7, 2020 Canucks have 3 players in the top 30 for scoring. True parity would suggest a team should only have 1 player in the top 31. I get what you're throwing down here. But of course it doesn't include intangibles which can make a 40 point player much more valuable to a team than a 60 point player I dont think parity will ever be honest in the league. But having a 2 point game system it gives the illusion that teams do better than they perform Either way, what you've shown is that the current roster gives a lot of merit to Benning a ability to assemble a team As much as I've been vocal about Green not being good enough, it's nice to see this win streak and turn around mid season. As well as players seemingly advancing their skills Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wanless Posted January 7, 2020 Share Posted January 7, 2020 Canucks have 3 players in the top 30 for scoring. True parity would suggest a team should only have 1 player in the top 31. I get what you're throwing down here. But of course it doesn't include intangibles which can make a 40 point player much more valuable to a team than a 60 point player I dont think parity will ever be honest in the league. But having a 2 point game system it gives the illusion that teams do better than they perform Either way, what you've shown is that the current roster gives a lot of merit to Benning a ability to assemble a team As much as I've been vocal about Green not being good enough, it's nice to see this win streak and turn around mid season. As well as players seemingly advancing their skills Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coastal.view Posted January 7, 2020 Share Posted January 7, 2020 i think there is an echo in here Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gurn Posted January 7, 2020 Share Posted January 7, 2020 (edited) 6 minutes ago, coastal.view said: i think there is an echo in here looks like you're right. Edited January 7, 2020 by gurn 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EdgarM Posted January 7, 2020 Share Posted January 7, 2020 Your stats support what I have said before in that Jake should be playing in the top 6 and thankfully he's finally playing on the 2nd PP Unit. The odd time on the #1 PP would not hurt either. As his point production suggests, if he had more ice time, he should be able to produce more. I understand balancing the lines but I think the team benefits overall if he is on the ice as opposed to sitting on the bench with the plugs. His style of play will help tremendously in the playoffs and I wish he was playing alongside Bo instead of LE. Bo usually plays against the oppositions top lines and Jake does a much better job along the boards and using his size to get possession and maintain possession of the puck. An attribute which would help Bo tremendously. Not to mention being much more of a scoring threat then Mr. Ericksson. 2 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IBatch Posted January 7, 2020 Share Posted January 7, 2020 5 hours ago, EdgarM said: Your stats support what I have said before in that Jake should be playing in the top 6 and thankfully he's finally playing on the 2nd PP Unit. The odd time on the #1 PP would not hurt either. As his point production suggests, if he had more ice time, he should be able to produce more. I understand balancing the lines but I think the team benefits overall if he is on the ice as opposed to sitting on the bench with the plugs. His style of play will help tremendously in the playoffs and I wish he was playing alongside Bo instead of LE. Bo usually plays against the oppositions top lines and Jake does a much better job along the boards and using his size to get possession and maintain possession of the puck. An attribute which would help Bo tremendously. Not to mention being much more of a scoring threat then Mr. Ericksson. Can't really complain with the results having LE on the second line lately - wouldn't say JV is a better defensive option really but definitely agree he's a better scoring threat. He's one of our best 5 x 5 producers per 60 - the fact that he's on pace for 20 goals playing 12-13 minutes on average says a lot. His ice time is going up now that he's getting 2nd unit time and isn't on the 4th line ... At some point that's going to be his spot permanently-might as well rip the bandaid off and do it (second line).... then again I'm not the coach and why rock the boat right now... 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arrow 1983 Posted January 7, 2020 Author Share Posted January 7, 2020 I didn't know this topic would be so boring that barely anyone would want to post LOL Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rick_theRyper Posted January 7, 2020 Share Posted January 7, 2020 18 hours ago, EdgarM said: Your stats support what I have said before in that Jake should be playing in the top 6 and thankfully he's finally playing on the 2nd PP Unit. The odd time on the #1 PP would not hurt either. As his point production suggests, if he had more ice time, he should be able to produce more. I understand balancing the lines but I think the team benefits overall if he is on the ice as opposed to sitting on the bench with the plugs. His style of play will help tremendously in the playoffs and I wish he was playing alongside Bo instead of LE. Bo usually plays against the oppositions top lines and Jake does a much better job along the boards and using his size to get possession and maintain possession of the puck. An attribute which would help Bo tremendously. Not to mention being much more of a scoring threat then Mr. Ericksson. I think Jake would have been put back there too by now if he and Gaudette weren’t playing so well before and after Rous came back. We’d have a way better 2nd line but a lot worse of a third, maybe? Loui might still do alright back down to the third, overall I’d love to see Jake with Bo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
5Fivehole0 Posted January 8, 2020 Share Posted January 8, 2020 First of all, that's not how ties work. T1st T1st 3rd 4th T5th T5th T5th 8th As for the rest... Wat? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
5Fivehole0 Posted January 8, 2020 Share Posted January 8, 2020 What even is this? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
We Are All Cucks Posted January 8, 2020 Share Posted January 8, 2020 (edited) Interesting idea. Yeah, a bit convoluted, but the concept is interesting. Obviously this is only relevant from an offensive standpoint, but I do wonder how other teams would stack up. Can't really take this data without putting it into context. I have a feeling that all of this would just match up to goals for per team.... If I follow, #1-3 forwards would all be considered top lines, so the fact that we have 5 players ranked #1-3 means that we basically have league equivalent of two top lines. Powerplay numbers are going to skew this significantly of course, since many of the points for these players came on the powerplay, and that doesn't show top-line status either way. Looking solely at this information, we might want to say that the Canucks are a really good offensive team, and that our troubles lie elsewhere. Letting in 9 goals last game also points to that idea. Subtly, only. But having two top lines who can score doesn't even mean you have two top lines. Racking up goals is unimportant if you don't consider the timing of those goals, the line's forecheck, possession, etc. So yeah, your post suggests we have a lot of top scorers, but I'd be curious to see what similar data for other teams look like and see how that relates to standings. Edited January 8, 2020 by We Are All Cucks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Toyotasfan Posted January 8, 2020 Share Posted January 8, 2020 https://www.espn.com/nhl/story/_/id/28428054/midseason-grades-all-31-nhl-teams Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Provost Posted January 8, 2020 Share Posted January 8, 2020 ... full of sound and fury, signalling nothing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now