Canucks News N Notes 23-24 Playoff Edition

[Topper]

These are the teams Vancouver lost more than one game to. Do you see the similarities in the line ups?

2 Phi
2 Seat
3 Av
2 Veg
2 Min
2 Dal
2 StLou
3 LA

Good post; something to think about.

On the one hand, there were loses to Minny, Colorado, Seattle, and LA during that mid-to-late February window where the Canucks were simply turning in bad performances and beating themselves so its hard to really tell if the opposition was the main contributor to those losses. With the caveat that some of this is due to that period the Canucks weren't playing like the Canucks (and that some teams are not on this list because the Canucks were playing out of their head or caught the opposition in a bad spot), I'd say that by and large, compared to the average NHL team, these teams largely have play a bit more lunch bucket, with a bit more structure/patience, size on defense, and are a bit more spread out offensively, either due to impressive depth or the lack of a high end player to key in on. Most of these teams also kill penalties well.

There are certainly exceptions to this -- e.g., Minnesota makes no sense. And these descriptions wouldn't be the first used for a team like the Avs, but they are elite at their game when healthy, have outstanding defensive depth, and have a great work ethic. Dallas, too, is much closer to playing this way, but like the Avs, I am comfortable saying straight up they are better on paper and have a high work ethic and so its just not a surprise to give away points to better teams.

But the record against LA, St. L, Phi (who was playing well when the Canucks played them), and Seattle might be most instructive. These teams aren't scary. These teams most represent the qualities I listed. These teams approach the game with the mindset of neutralizing what the opposition does best -- make what you do well less effective -- exploiting mistakes rather than exploiting weaknesses. The Canucks definitely had challenges getting points against these teams, even though setting aside crappy late February games, the Canucks played decently in these contests.

Donny and I have been saying similar through the season. Big structured teams have been difficult matchups for the Canucks throughout the season.

My feeling is it has a fair bit to do with Vancouver's small forward corps being unable to fight through their checks.

[Cornuck]

We're going to REALLY need these million dollar contracts for the next few years to help balance the payroll. I'm sure Podz will fill a roster spot just fine (somewhere in the lineup).

[Carl Yagro]

Also to add... Pods and Hogs both have similar trajectories so far, their career stats aren't that dissimilar really. Hoglander is further ahead because he took the jump first and has been in a better offensive situation this year because of it. Both have become straight-ahead forechecking demons and I'm hoping Pods improves to a level where he gets a similar opportunity to prove his pedigree.

Lord knows this team needs these contracts but more importantly, Pods size and newly developed game. Take advantage of JTM's still prime to turn slugs into 40 goal scorers and maybe a 10th overall to not be a major disappointment. I know the Baldies are depending on this continuing development of said player.

[JelloPuddingPop]

Agreed, the 1 mil player who plays above replacement level is certainly necessary going forward - especially with HW spending all Van's money on defense.

I just hope Pods shows a bit more, guys who can forecheck, hit and aren't terrible defensively are great for a portion of the season, or filling in for injuries - but 82 games with only a few goals, doesn't move the needle enough. Unless you play like LA.

[JelloPuddingPop]

Donny and I have been saying similar through the season. Big structured teams have been difficult matchups for the Canucks throughout the season.

My feeling is it has a fair bit to do with Vancouver's small forward corps being unable to fight through their checks.

Would you lend credit to the idea of a younger forward group's inability to keep their structure against good opponent structure?

Only having played a system like Toc's for a year and bit? The more seasoned, and familiar with the ins/outs of team structure this team gets - I bet it starts handling some of those structured teams a bit better.

I get the size part of it, but have to think that building a system with that in mind, along with more experience and age will help too.

[Topper]

Knowing where to be is one thing, forcing your way to that spot is another.

[UWSaint]

Donny and I have been saying similar through the season. Big structured teams have been difficult matchups for the Canucks throughout the season.

My feeling is it has a fair bit to do with Vancouver's small forward corps being unable to fight through their checks.

I think there's some truth to this, and there's two areas where fighting through checks matters most -- getting to dirty places in front of the net, and neutral zone transition into the 0-zone. The former is affected by size and structure (do they prioritize net clearance); the latter mostly just by structure. The Canucks score a lot of gritty goals, but there isn't a linear relationship between defensive size and ability to get to spots. In other words, its not 10% harder to get to a mark through Player B who is 10% stronger and positionally solid than Player C, and then 10% harder to get through Player A who is 10% stronger and positionally solid than Player A. There's a point where it get way harder, more logarithmic than linear.

On structure and transition, I think this might be an even greater factor. The Canucks are dangerous in transition. They really benefit from controlled entries. Now, a controlled entry is preferred for any team, the chip and chase is option 2 and the dump and disrupt is option 3. But all teams are different in how much that preference matters. The Canucks might generate good chances on 20% of controlled entries within 5-7 seconds of zone entry compared to a league average of 10%; they might retrieve 65% of chip and chase pucks we will say that's league average, and might gain clean zone possession in 40% of dump and disrupt plays compared to league averages around 50%.

Now, I am making up these numbers completely, but it is to illustrate a point and it is grounded on observation that the Canucks look way more dangerous than the average team when controlling entries (even in non odd-man situations) and don't look all that great on dump in plays. And the point being illustrated is twice as many good chances in transition is way more valuable than a bit more possession on dump ins. It isn't the rate of collection (which could be significantly sized influenced) that particularly makes the Canucks have a tough match up against size and structure, its that the number of controlled entry events is diminished by structure, thus minimizing the event that appears to me to be the Canucks' strongest comparative advantage. So size and its correlation to retrieval has an effect, but its the first opportunity being taken away that seems to diminish the Canucks' output.

The last point I'd make on size is that Garland's probably the team's best retriever to come out of chip and chases and dump plays with full possession of the puck. He does pretty well against giants. Other players, though, seem to struggle a lot on these plays the bigger and stronger the D is.

[Topper]

Donny and I have been saying similar through the season. Big structured teams have been difficult matchups for the Canucks throughout the season.

My feeling is it has a fair bit to do with Vancouver's small forward corps being unable to fight through their checks.

I think there's some truth to this, and there's two areas where fighting through checks matters most -- getting to dirty places in front of the net, and neutral zone transition into the 0-zone. The former is affected by size and structure (do they prioritize net clearance); the latter mostly just by structure. The Canucks score a lot of gritty goals, but there isn't a linear relationship between defensive size and ability to get to spots. In other words, its not 10% harder to get to a mark through Player B who is 10% stronger and positionally solid than Player C, and then 10% harder to get through Player A who is 10% stronger and positionally solid than Player A. There's a point where it get way harder, more logarithmic than linear.

On structure and transition, I think this might be an even greater factor. The Canucks are dangerous in transition. They really benefit from controlled entries. Now, a controlled entry is preferred for any team, the chip and chase is option 2 and the dump and disrupt is option 3. But all teams are different in how much that preference matters. The Canucks might generate good chances on 20% of controlled entries within 5-7 seconds of zone entry compared to a league average of 10%; they might retrieve 65% of chip and chase pucks we will say that's league average, and might gain clean zone possession in 40% of dump and disrupt plays compared to league averages around 50%.

Now, I am making up these numbers completely, but it is to illustrate a point and it is grounded on observation that the Canucks look way more dangerous than the average team when controlling entries (even in non odd-man situations) and don't look all that great on dump in plays. And the point being illustrated is twice as many good chances in transition is way more valuable than a bit more possession on dump ins. It isn't the rate of collection (which could be significantly sized influenced) that particularly makes the Canucks have a tough match up against size and structure, its that the number of controlled entry events is diminished by structure, thus minimizing the event that appears to me to be the Canucks' strongest comparative advantage. So size and its correlation to retrieval has an effect, but its the first opportunity being taken away that seems to diminish the Canucks' output.

The last point I'd make on size is that Garland's probably the team's best retriever to come out of chip and chases and dump plays with full possession of the puck. He does pretty well against giants. Other players, though, seem to struggle a lot on these plays the bigger and stronger the D is.

Size/strength to get there combined with the will.

Something Garland uses more than most, CoHog has been learning, is leverage and angles against bigger players.

[Raile]

I know Podz hasn't turned in to the scorer most expected but his rookie season he had 26 points, 14 of those goals. He looked like a guy who could play in the league.
This years almost-literally-no-offence is more of an outlier, not the player we have.

Him with Miller and Boeser is a great idea.. iirc he played with Miller a bunch in that rookie year. I hope they give him the chance, and this new contract certainly seems like they plan to.

[Topper]

Would posting Pod 1.16 per have sent a message

[Carl Yagro]

Well, that was a most enjoyable 23-24 regular season spent with all 17 of you boys and girls here on Team CC.

Even though some of you most certainly don't play the right way, some of you can't post a 200ft game or those of you who are lazy-ass floaters who can't forecheck, backcheck or spellcheck... I'm glad none of you were traded on TDD.

But that's over with.

I'm expecting you all to step up your postseason game starting on Sunday. Quit lurking and start contributing (looking at you, Lever).

Let's flip this muthafucka switch!

[Topper]

Fuck off

[Cornuck]

Round one schedule, with the conflicts that mess it up.

April 21 - Game 1 at Rogers Arena
April 22
April 23 - Game 2 at Rogers Arena
April 24
April 25 - Tim McGraw at Bridgestone Arena
April 26 - Game 3 at Bridgestone Arena
April 27 - The Postal Service and Death Cab for Cutie at Bridgestone Arena
April 28 - Game 4 at Bridgestone Arena
April 29 - Justin Timberlake at Rogers Arena
April 30 - Game 5 at Rogers Arena (if necessary)
May 1 - 21 Savage at Rogers Arena
May 2 - Game 6 at Bridgestone Arena (if necessary)
May 3 - Game 7 at Rogers Arena (if necessary)
May 4 - Pearl Jam at Rogers Arena; Gloria Trevi at Bridgestone Arena
May 5
May 6 - Pearl Jam at Rogers Arena

[Todd Bersnoozi]

Round one schedule, with the conflicts that mess it up.

April 21 - Game 1 at Rogers Arena
April 22
April 23 - Game 2 at Rogers Arena
April 24
April 29 - Justin Timberlake at Rogers Arena
April 30 - Game 5 at Rogers Arena (if necessary)
May 1 - 21 Savage at Rogers Arena
May 3 - Game 7 at Rogers Arena (if necessary)
May 4 - Pearl Jam at Rogers Arena; Gloria Trevi at Bridgestone Arena
May 5
May 6 - Pearl Jam at Rogers Arena

Man, looks like Nucks ownership wasn't anticipating their team to make the playoffs with all these musical acts lined up. Shame on them!

[Chef Boi RD]

Not worried about Pods, he’s learning not to be a liability on shifts a La Kuzmenko, the offence will come. Players like Barbeshev, Vilardi and Tage Thompson took a hella long time to evolve, he’s gonna be a good player solid player. What I’m hoping is Raty and D-Peter start to get some looks nexr season. We need to keep the pipeline strong to offset the costs of being a good team and the inability to sign players they will lose to UFA season like Joshua. I think a team is gonna throw big bucks at Joshua this summer that will be too rich for us. I think we’ve learned what not to do when it comes to big contracts on bottom 6 players. What about this scenario? Trade Garland (his stock has never been higher than it is now) and sign Joshua to the bucks we don’t want to dole but can for clearing space with moving Garland? Lekkerimaki the future replacement of Garland?