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

Canucks outshot again, win again

Rate this topic


Tree n Me
 Share

Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, IBatch said:

Amen...I'm not 100% sure but I think we made a record for fewest goals during this rebuild one year, and we've already surpassed two of those years in goals for in 58 games....remember when maybe we had two or three  guys scoring in the low 50's and one or two in the thirties?  Now we have Miller, EP, QH, BB, Horvat, and maybe Pearson that will eclipse 50, and possibly three or more guys 60...maybe even one or two 70.   Huge difference.   Things have slowed down a bit as to be expected ... AND we have JV, AG and if he was healthy Leivo providing decent-great secondary scoring.   Finally we have a PMD - good times to be a fan. 

Yeah, we hit rock bottom with our ability to score. It really was bad. To me that was the lowest point for us in recent years. 

 

I look at Boeser's arrival as the turning point of acceleration into our new era. Everything since then has been on an upward trajectory. When in the history of this franchise have we had three straight rookies who were in Calder contention? We all know Boeser could have won that had he stayed healthy. Petey did win. Hughes may win this season. These guys have transformed this team for the future.

 

We also have the emergence of JV and AG, a Hobey Baker winner. It's crazy to think how much talent we have. Podz and Hoglander are still in the wings, Rafferty lighting it up in Utica.

 

As these guys emerge and mature, it gets "somewhat" easier for JB to fill remaining voids and get the missing pieces like Miller. I'm confident JB will address our needs on D in the same manner. 

 

Right now there are concerns that we're being outshot but we've actually prepared for this in giving Marky the #1 spot and how we've brought Demko along. I don't think JB, Green, or anyone has sugarcoated the fact that where we are right now as a team - with our weaknesses - we need our goalies to be consistently great. They need to carry a heavier load until this team comes together. And as long as they do their part, the rest of the team needs to do theirs as well and score. It's all coming together.

 

The one thing I'm grateful for is the fact that both Linden and Benning kept preaching patience during that time. Just look at how that has paid off. 

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Canucks players are defensively aware and quite responsible and accountable in D zone. Canucks getting outshot is primarily due to lack of team speed in the D zone. Vancouver is not a slow team but in the D zone they do have trouble getting to the puck carrier or his intended pass receiver quickly enough. Often times Canucks players recognize where they have to go to intercept the pass or retrieve the puck but they are half a step or a full step slower, thus failing to stop the cycle. 

 

As an example, Ryan Kesler won a Selke partly due to his foot speed. He skated miles in the D zone chasing the puck carrier and getting ahead of the cycle and breaking the cycle. 

 

My humble suggestions are:

 

- insert younger wingers such as Baily and MacEwan who are quicker but less experienced. They are in charge of backchecking in support of backskating D pairs

 

- ask players to play more physical to knock puck carriers as well as receivers off balance and thus retrieving possession physically, in the playoffs delayed hits, grabs and slashes are called less frequently, this may benefit Vancouver D coverage

 

- While Vancouver does a decent job of protecting the centre of the ice thus preventing west-east cross ice plays, when they are off or tired, opposing teams have easier time creating chances on top of crease as well as on top of the slot. Try to block more shots.

Edited by Maddogy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, Maddogy said:

Canucks players are defensively aware and quite responsible and accountable in D zone. Canucks getting outshot is primarily due to lack of team speed in the D zone. Vancouver is not a slow team but in the D zone they do have trouble getting to the puck carrier or his intended pass receiver quickly enough. Often times Canucks players recognize where they have to go to intercept the pass or retrieve the puck but they are half a step or a full step slower, thus failing to stop the cycle. 

 

As an example, Ryan Kesler won a Selke partly due to his foot speed. He skated miles in the D zone chasing the puck carrier and getting ahead of the cycle and breaking the cycle. 

 

My humble suggestions are:

 

- insert younger wingers such as Baily and MacEwan who are quicker but less experienced. They are in charge of backchecking in support of backskating D pairs

 

- ask players to play more physical to knock puck carriers as well as receivers off balance and thus retrieving possession physically, in the playoffs delayed hits, grabs and slashes are called less frequently, this may benefit Vancouver D coverage

 

- While Vancouver does a decent job of protecting the centre of the ice thus preventing west-east cross ice plays, when they are off or tired, opposing teams have easier time creating chances on top of crease as well as on top of the slot. Try to block more shots.

I’ll add that although they’re peppering is with shots, Marky has a chance on most due to our defense clearing out the crease or rebounds. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/13/2020 at 11:41 AM, Bitter Melon said:

Its also not exactly 50 shots every single game, the point still stands, don't be so literal.

 

I never said I expected them to win the cup this year, merely pointing out a trend the team needs to work on as they improve.

Agreed 100%, unless Green has some kind of 180 degree turn hidden up his sleeve for the postseason, this team is in big trouble against any team that's able to control the puck around the outside. From what I can see, the team's Dzone system is meant to work, 60ish % of the time in the regular season, and we've seen what happens when a goalie has an off night, or, the opposition is tenacious with speed.

Edited by xereau
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Dr. Crossbar said:

Yeah, we hit rock bottom with our ability to score. It really was bad. To me that was the lowest point for us in recent years. 

 

I look at Boeser's arrival as the turning point of acceleration into our new era. Everything since then has been on an upward trajectory. When in the history of this franchise have we had three straight rookies who were in Calder contention? We all know Boeser could have won that had he stayed healthy. Petey did win. Hughes may win this season. These guys have transformed this team for the future.

 

We also have the emergence of JV and AG, a Hobey Baker winner. It's crazy to think how much talent we have. Podz and Hoglander are still in the wings, Rafferty lighting it up in Utica.

 

As these guys emerge and mature, it gets "somewhat" easier for JB to fill remaining voids and get the missing pieces like Miller. I'm confident JB will address our needs on D in the same manner. 

 

Right now there are concerns that we're being outshot but we've actually prepared for this in giving Marky the #1 spot and how we've brought Demko along. I don't think JB, Green, or anyone has sugarcoated the fact that where we are right now as a team - with our weaknesses - we need our goalies to be consistently great. They need to carry a heavier load until this team comes together. And as long as they do their part, the rest of the team needs to do theirs as well and score. It's all coming together.

 

The one thing I'm grateful for is the fact that both Linden and Benning kept preaching patience during that time. Just look at how that has paid off. 

You bet.  Have to admit I had my doubts JB was the right guy for the job but always new this was going to be a very tough road.  It's turned out better then I expected.    Don't have a problem with the patient part, they are ahead of schedule in my books by at least a year.   Can't wait to see how the rest unfolds nonetheless - just going to enjoy it in the meantime.  From a macro viewpoint the pieces definitely look promising. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It’s not sustainable. But in reality the Canucks are in a way overachieving this season and finding ways to win unlike years past. They really have to shore up the defensive core and play a different style of game if they want to be genuine contenders. Not worried. The window is just opening. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/11/2020 at 12:28 PM, N7Nucks said:

A lot of slot shots. But people here seem to be saying they were all "muffins" that weren't hard to stop. Almost like they weren't even watching the game or are lying to play it off like the fact we give up nearly 40 shots a game (a lot of which are quality) isn't something to be worried about.

The hypothesis, in deploying such a system, is that they are all perimeter muffins.

This assertion doesn't pass the eye test, and as @Duodenum showed with the advanced stat chart, its not even limiting them in regards to other teams!

 

Not surprising, because it takes time for the team to set up, and this window, is when the HQ chances are coming.

Edited by xereau
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
11 hours ago, 73 Percent said:

Yay we won the score on the shot clock. Hood job guys. Go team. Yar!

 

 

Players should be paid for the amount of shots they dish out not the amount of points they generate. Points are misleading and only intellectually dishonest people would focus on points. I'd rather have a player that generates 200 shots a season with a shooting percentage of 1 than a guy that scores every other night but refuses to shoot more. 

Edited by Maddogy
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Maddogy said:

Players should be paid for the amount of shots they dish out not the amount of points they generate. Points are misleading and only intellectually dishonest people would focus on points. I'd rather have a player that generates 200 shots a season with a shooting percentage of 1 than a guy that scores every other night but refuses to shoot more. 

:lol:

 

So this preferred player would generate on average about 2.5 shots a game, and get two goals in the season. You'd rather have that player on your team than someone who scores every other night, 41 goals on the season, but he picks his spots  more before he shoots?  Kind of like you'd prefer LE over Bure?

 

As a player I know which one I'd prefer.  Dam frustrating if you were the former.

 

Seriously though I get what you mean. They have to not play so much on the perimeter on the PP. Standing and static.  I want to see them move around more,  shoot more, and then collapse in front of the net to find rebounds.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, Maddogy said:

Players should be paid for the amount of shots they dish out not the amount of points they generate. Points are misleading and only intellectually dishonest people would focus on points. I'd rather have a player that generates 200 shots a season with a shooting percentage of 1 than a guy that scores every other night but refuses to shoot more. 

What about goalies? They play for free right?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

47 minutes ago, Maddogy said:

Players should be paid for the amount of shots they dish out not the amount of points they generate. Points are misleading and only intellectually dishonest people would focus on points. I'd rather have a player that generates 200 shots a season with a shooting percentage of 1 than a guy that scores every other night but refuses to shoot more. 

Guess defenseman regardless of quality of shots should be the highest paid guys in the league - that is with the exception of shoot the puck and maybe beat Gretzky on pure volume - Ovi.   Shooting the puck is a great idea - "you miss 100% of the shots you don't take " right?  That said if nobody is there for the rebound most of the time your just giving the puck back.

 

That I understand where your coming from - our PP can make the Sedins proud with the number of passing plays ... sometimes 5-8 passes and the weak shot...looking for the perfect play.  When Myers first took over the second unit I was relieved - they at least shoot the darn thing.    Anyways - off to the next one  ... TO is missing key guys on defense so maybe this is our chance to show the world how good we can be (given we are in the center of the Universe tomorrow ha ha).  We can be outstanding.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, kilgore said:

:lol:

 

So this preferred player would generate on average about 2.5 shots a game, and get two goals in the season. You'd rather have that player on your team than someone who scores every other night, 41 goals on the season, but he picks his spots  more before he shoots?  Kind of like you'd prefer LE over Bure?

 

As a player I know which one I'd prefer.  Dam frustrating if you were the former.

 

Seriously though I get what you mean. They have to not play so much on the perimeter on the PP. Standing and static.  I want to see them move around more,  shoot more, and then collapse in front of the net to find rebounds.

No you don't know what I meant. I was being sarcastic. 

 

OTOH if we look at the Canucks' shots against and for per game, opponents on average put in 2 more shots against Canucks per game. It is not bad at all. Shots is akin to +/- they are helpful if they are put into context. Otherwise they are not all that indicative. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Maddogy said:

Players should be paid for the amount of shots they dish out not the amount of points they generate. Points are misleading and only intellectually dishonest people would focus on points. I'd rather have a player that generates 200 shots a season with a shooting percentage of 1 than a guy that scores every other night but refuses to shoot more. 

 

46 minutes ago, Maddogy said:

No you don't know what I meant. I was being sarcastic. 

 

OTOH if we look at the Canucks' shots against and for per game, opponents on average put in 2 more shots against Canucks per game. It is not bad at all. Shots is akin to +/- they are helpful if they are put into context. Otherwise they are not all that indicative

 

So...players should be paid for a their SPG stat (sarcastically), but OTOH, shots are not all that indicative of success? 

Hey, don't want to pile on, but you're contradicting yourself here.

 

Personally, I think the greater concern is ALLOWING so many shots against.  I don't watch a lot of other teams play other than when they play against us, but it sure seems like the Canucks are one of the very worst at turnovers, and re-turnovers even in their own D zone.  The worst goal is the one after a Canuck has the puck under control in their own end, and proceeds to hand the puck back to the opposition who buries it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, kilgore said:

 

Personally, I think the greater concern is ALLOWING so many shots against.  I don't watch a lot of other teams play other than when they play against us, but it sure seems like the Canucks are one of the very worst at turnovers, and re-turnovers even in their own D zone.  The worst goal is the one after a Canuck has the puck under control in their own end, and proceeds to hand the puck back to the opposition who buries it.

 

The amount of shots matters but more important is the quality of those shots. You could get 40 shots per game but if they all came from the perimeter where the goalie was allowed to get into position and the passing lanes were blocked, you just end up hitting the goalie in the crest half the time. Some teams are really good at only allowing these kind of weak shot attempts. LA used to this against the Canucks with perfection. Weak shot and clear the zone. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, RonMexico said:

 

The amount of shots matters but more important is the quality of those shots. You could get 40 shots per game but if they all came from the perimeter where the goalie was allowed to get into position and the passing lanes were blocked, you just end up hitting the goalie in the crest half the time. Some teams are really good at only allowing these kind of weak shot attempts. LA used to this against the Canucks with perfection. Weak shot and clear the zone. 

You are right about the quality being more important than how many shots.  But that only goes so far.  If a puck is constantly flying towards the net, even from the blue line, there is more opportunity, the chance at a tip in, or deflection, even off of our own player. Yes the odds are better, per shot, for those shooting right in front, but even with the lesser odds, the sheer amount of shots period, logically means more chance of a goal. 

 

Also, I don't think we are particularly great at not allowing close in shots. I seem to remember quite a few Marky spectacular saves were  from close in. Although I can see that is Baumers plan, they concentrate on maintaining position in a tight little box on the PK at least. They give up shots and try and bliock them instead. But a static PK also means that only the other team is moving their feet, so when you finally recover the puck, the team has to suddenly in a half second, transform into moving their butts. Many times, because the other team is the one in a fluid dance on their skates, they swoop in and get the puck back before it can be cleared.  That's the danger of such a static PK.  Of course the advantages are that a player doesn't risk going out of position to check a player and getting caught in no mans land.  But when I watch other teams with more of an aggressive PK, keep on attacking the puck carrier, IMO it leads to puck clearing quicker. I'm going off on a bit of a tangent.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...