Canuck D Pairings -- Some Surprises

[JamesB]

Quinn Hughes had a great year. At age 22, he set a new franchise record for points scored by a D-man -- more than Salo, Jovanowski, Kearns, Lidster, Lumme, Edler, Ohlund and everyone else in the team's 51 year history. He also turned his defensive play from a significant liability to a significant asset and played well on the PK as well as the PP. He is often mentioned as a potential Norris Trophy candidate. 

 

Hughes is a great young player,  but it is not so obvious that he was better than OEL last year, especially if you look closely at the pairings data. 

 

Pairings Data.

 

I went to Natural Stat Trick and checked out the data for all the Canucks pairings last year. I dropped pairings with less than 60 minutes of play and I focused on the differential between expected goals for (xGF) and expected goals against (xGA) per 60 minutes. The difference is xGD and I think it is the best widely available measure of the performance of a D pair. I looked only at even strength play. There were 16 pairings with enough time on ice to qualify. The table below shows the best 4 pairings and the worst 4 pairings. (I left out the others to save space.)

 

   

Best Pairings		xGD
Luke Schenn	Oliver Ekman-Larsson	1.67
Oliver Ekman-Larsson	Tucker Poolman	1.05
Travis Hamonic	Brad Hunt	0.83
Oliver Ekman-Larsson	Kyle Burroughs	0.67
Worst Pairings
Brad Hunt	Kyle Burroughs	-0.41
Travis Hamonic	Quintin Hughes	-0.46
Luke Schenn	Brad Hunt	-0.57
Kyle Burroughs	Jack Rathbone	-1.13

 

 

Based on this data, the D pair that was by far the best over the season was the OEL-Schenn pairing, and it was not close. Interestingly, the next best pairing was OEL with Poolman. 

 

One important factor not captured by the data is quality of opposition.  There is no easy way to correct for that and it makes a big difference. A given D-pairing might look good against an opposing team's 4th line and look terrible against the top line. It is possible to get a sense of how tough the minutes are by looking at O-zone, D-zone and neutral zone starts and I have checked out the actual opposing players for a few games.

 

Hamonic and Hunt make it into 3rd place in the above list because they faced very weak opposition. However, OEL played by far the toughest minutes on the team last year. If we properly adjusted for :"tough minutes" (D zone starts and quality of opposition) the OEL-Schenn paring would move even further ahead.  

 

The Hughes-Schenn pairing and the OEL-Myers pairing (not shown) were both close to the team average. So was the Hughes-Myers pairing. 

 

PP and PK.

 

Quinn Hughes got a lot more points on the PP than OEL, but of course he played a lot more. I looked at the same number (xGD per 60) for the PP. Only 4 Canuck D-men had enough PP time to be worth considering. Here are the numbers: Hughes -- 6.76, OEL -- 5.73, Hunt 4.07, Myers 3.42. Roughly speaking, Hughes was very good, OEL was good, Hunt was poor, and Myers was very poor. But there is one other consideration. Hughes played pretty much entirely with the top PP unit. OEL had most of his time with 2nd unit, which is not nearly as good. It would not be unreasonable to argue that OEL was actually better than or at least equal to Hughes in PP performance if quality of teammates is considered.

 

I also looked at the PK. The two best guys on the team were Hughes and OEL and they were almost identical. But it is worth considering that OEL has tougher PK minutes than Hughes. 

 

Performance relative to cap hit.

 

Most people think Hughes is a bargain with a cap hit of 7.85 and OEL is overpaid with a cap hit of 7.26. Of course, looking into the future that is true. Both guys are signed for 5 more years. At age 22 Hughes should improve over that time while OEL (currently 30) will probably decline over that time.

 

But,  based on last year's performance both guys gave similar performance and good performance relative to their cap hits. Schenn of course was a huge bargain relative to his cap hit. 

 

That said, OEL has the type of game that often holds up well for D-men into their mid-30s. If so OEL could be a very valuable part of the team going forward. 

 

The guy who is a problem relative to his cap hit is Myers and the pairing data suggests that playing with Myers held OEL back and hurt his performance. (That is what I think the "eye test" also says.). The other problem is that the right side of the D just isn't strong enough in general. 

 

 

 

 

Edited June 2, 2022 by JamesB

[Drakrami]

Overrating our players isn't going to us anywhere other than adrenaline high for some. If all our players are all Norris calibre, Vezina calibre, we would be in the playoffs right now competing in the conference finals. I dont see any of our players (except for Demko) driving the play like McKinnon, McDavid, Draisaitl even if they grow for a few years. The reason we got OEL is because Benning saw shortcomings from Hughes and wanted to have a #1 to take some of the tougher minutes off his shoulders. Since we spent our quota on Hughes and OEL, we are not left with much caproom for RD. There isn't much of a market for RD to begin with, so we are left with scrapping up a Hamonic deal and Poolman deal for 4 years. Getting a #1 RD won't be easy, we'll just have to wait and see. 

[Dazzle]

3 hours ago, Drakrami said:

Overrating our players isn't going to us anywhere other than adrenaline high for some. If all our players are all Norris calibre, Vezina calibre, we would be in the playoffs right now competing in the conference finals. I dont see any of our players (except for Demko) driving the play like McKinnon, McDavid, Draisaitl even if they grow for a few years. The reason we got OEL is because Benning saw shortcomings from Hughes and wanted to have a #1 to take some of the tougher minutes off his shoulders. Since we spent our quota on Hughes and OEL, we are not left with much caproom for RD. There isn't much of a market for RD to begin with, so we are left with scrapping up a Hamonic deal and Poolman deal for 4 years. Getting a #1 RD won't be easy, we'll just have to wait and see. 

But it's not overrating players. This analysis was an internal look at our own players, and there wasn't any reference to other teams. OEL is a decent piece to this team, but we need more depth, that's for sure.

[Alflives]

Trade Hughes, right?  

[JM_]

the takeaway here for me is OEL can carry a pairing. Which is great for us, because we're going to need him to be paired with an ELC or a low priced partner to make our cap work. 

 

Edited June 1, 2022 by JM_

[Crabcakes]

The data also says they need help on the right side.  If there is only 1 move on D this summer, this is the one that I see

[JM_]

1 minute ago, Crabcakes said:

The data also says they need help on the right side.  If there is only 1 move on D this summer, this is the one that I see

we'd miss his size, but Myers certainly can be moved. OEL is our best all-around dman and can be put with a lot of different types of players. E.g., OEL-Stecher might even work well for a year or two while a prospect develops in Abby. 

 

 

[canucklehead44]

I didn't follow the Canucks nearly as closely this year as last but from everything I read the first half OEL had very strong defensive metrics and in in his last 40 games had a very respectable 22 points for a .55 points per game, above his .49 points per game career pace. If he can put up 35-40 points next year with strong defensive metrics he is well worth what we are paying for him. 

 

It would have cost us a 1st and 2nd to drop Player Name, Beagle, and Roussel, so essentially we got Garland for taking on the OEL contract. 52 points for 4.9 million on a youngish forward with energy is solid value, so overall this trade might actually work out pretty well all things considered (Player Name/Beagle/Roussel were absolute disasters). 

Edited June 1, 2022 by canucklehead44

[aGENT]

Thanks for doing the work @JamesB.

 

As I've been saying for a while now, OEL is not REMOTELY the problem on our D. In fact he's probably our best overall D man. Maybe folks will stop wishing him away with the data you've posted.

 

Also, like I've been saying for months... If we can manage to move Myers, even with $1m retention, and replace him with a less well rounded but better defensively, younger, faster and cheaper D (like Lyubushkin and/or trading for a guy like Marino), we're likely a more cohesive D core. AKA better.

Edited June 1, 2022 by aGENT

[JM_]

9 minutes ago, aGENT said:

Thanks for doing the work @JamesB.

 

As I've been saying for a while now, OEL is not REMOTELY the problem on our D. In fact he's probably our best overall D man. Maybe folks will stop wishing him away with the data you've posted.

 

Also, like I've been saying for months... If we can manage to move Myers, even with $1m retention, and replace him with a less well rounded but better defensively, younger, faster and cheaper D (like Lyubushkin and/or trading for a guy like Marino), we're like a more cohesive D core. AKA better.

what about OEL-Gudbranson 

[aGENT]

Just now, JM_ said:

what about OEL-Gudbranson 

I don't think we want to go there 

 

#drama

[JM_]

4 minutes ago, aGENT said:

I don't think we want to go there 

 

#drama

it might be OK for most of the regular season, but he looked pretty bad vs EDM. 

 

Lyubushkin or Zadorov tho could be interesting. 

[Bure_Pavel]

OEL plays good when paired with a stay at home physical Dman. Hoping Canucks can deploy him in a more offense role this season. 

[NucknAsia]

2 hours ago, aGENT said:

Thanks for doing the work @JamesB.

 

As I've been saying for a while now, OEL is not REMOTELY the problem on our D. In fact he's probably our best overall D man. Maybe folks will stop wishing him away with the data you've posted.

 

Also, like I've been saying for months... If we can manage to move Myers, even with $1m retention, and replace him with a less well rounded but better defensively, younger, faster and cheaper D (like Lyubushkin and/or trading for a guy like Marino), we're likely a more cohesive D core. AKA better.

Exactly right. People look at OEL's points and say he should have had 50! He's a waste! But the Issue is, Hughes was playing 1:30 of the 2 mins on the PP...OEL had very little PP time and was in shut down role. I also think he subtly made Myers look better (cleaning up for him), which also lessens his offensive output. He is a younger version of Edler with more skill (and some sandpaper) and an important piece. We just need a cheaper big RD on his line to stay at home and allow him to be a bit more aggressive offensively. I'd also like to see him get more PP time. Leave QH out for 2 mins and place him on the 1/2 wall on the 2nd PP....

Edited June 1, 2022 by NucknAsia

[kloubek]

I think we should move Myers and Poolman. The latter will likely take a relatively minor asset on our end.
Sign Manson 4 years, 4 million.

Place Rathbone in the 3LD position, and if he isn't ready, sign Butcher.

Find a bottom pairing defensive player (hopefully with size) to pair with either Rathbone or Butcher.

Hughes - Manson
OEL - Schenn
Rathbone/Butcher - Hagg/Johnson/Maatta/Sustr/Petrovic
Extras: Hunt, Burroughs. If re-signed.

[JamesB]

4 hours ago, JM_ said:

we'd miss his size, but Myers certainly can be moved. OEL is our best all-around dman and can be put with a lot of different types of players. E.g., OEL-Stecher might even work well for a year or two while a prospect develops in Abby. 

 

 

I was thinking the same thing. Trade Myers, sign Stecher to a low cap hit and play him with OEL. Stecher and OEL would be a good pairing, probably as good as or better than OEL and Myers and much cheaper. 

[NucknAsia]

1 hour ago, kloubek said:

I think we should move Myers and Poolman. The latter will likely take a relatively minor asset on our end.
Sign Manson 4 years, 4 million.

Place Rathbone in the 3LD position, and if he isn't ready, sign Butcher.

Find a bottom pairing defensive player (hopefully with size) to pair with either Rathbone or Butcher.

Hughes - Manson
OEL - Schenn
Rathbone/Butcher - Hagg/Johnson/Maatta/Sustr/Petrovic
Extras: Hunt, Burroughs. If re-signed.

I don't think Manson is coming that cheap and for that short term. He will be in high demand and if he's going to take a discount it will be to go back to Anaheim. Like the idea but do think it will cost quite a bit more from us.

[JM_]

1 hour ago, JamesB said:

I was thinking the same thing. Trade Myers, sign Stecher to a low cap hit and play him with OEL. Stecher and OEL would be a good pairing, probably as good as or better than OEL and Myers and much cheaper. 

downside is we get a lot smaller, but Stech gives it all he has. Would like to see him back, and lets face it, he'd be cheap. 

[aGENT]

3 hours ago, kloubek said:

I think we should move Myers and Poolman. The latter will likely take a relatively minor asset on our end.
Sign Manson 4 years, 4 million.

Place Rathbone in the 3LD position, and if he isn't ready, sign Butcher.

Find a bottom pairing defensive player (hopefully with size) to pair with either Rathbone or Butcher.

Hughes - Manson
OEL - Schenn
Rathbone/Butcher - Hagg/Johnson/Maatta/Sustr/Petrovic
Extras: Hunt, Burroughs. If re-signed.

Don't even need to get rid of Poolman (though I'm not opposed).

 

Trade one of Miller/Boeser/Garland for a Marino or similar.

 

Sign one of Lyubushkin/Zadorov/Manson.

 

Hughes, Marino

OEL, Lyubushkin

 

Make up the bottom 4 out of some mix of Rathbone, Poolman, Dermott, Schenn and Burroughs.

 

1 hour ago, NucknAsia said:

I don't think Manson is coming that cheap and for that short term. He will be in high demand and if he's going to take a discount it will be to go back to Anaheim. Like the idea but do think it will cost quite a bit more from us.

 

Yeah, I like Manson a lot but he's likely looking at $5m+ (or at least high $4's)...

[aGENT]

1 minute ago, JM_ said:

downside is we get a lot smaller, but Stech gives it all he has. Would like to see him back, and lets face it, he'd be cheap. 

My only thing against Stecher (besides the size) is that we don't really need more bottom 4 guys. We have Rathbone, Dermott, Schenn, Poolman and Burroughs already. That cap space is needed elsewhere IMO.