GDT: GM 12 | Vancouver Canucks @ Los Angeles Kings | 7:30PM PST | SPAC

pitseleh

Registered User
Jul 30, 2005
19,367
3,337
Vancouver
Those naturalstattrick numbers need to be taken with a big grain of salt.

They had the canucks like 5th in XGA.. some private models had them bottom ten. And based on the eye test of what we’d been giving up in the middle of the ice up until the last game against Anaheim, there’s absolutely zero world where we are top 5.
With samples this small those models are also going to be noisy given the assumptions they make about shot quality.

That said the Canucks are also top five in CA/60. There’s been some glaring breakdowns but on the whole they are limiting shots against really well. Could also just be some bad luck in the number of plays that have turned into those ugly GA.

Plus the difference between their xGA and their actual goals against is basically just the difference between Silovs and an average-ish goalie. To my eye that’s more on Silovs than the Canucks giving up higher danger chances than the xG models suggest.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Vector and God

theguardianII

Registered User
Jan 30, 2020
3,681
1,863
BA lot of people (IIRC Drancer noted this very early) thought stylistically that Debrusk was a better fit with Miller because he is more of straightline player, though obviously the need was to upgrade Petey's wing.

It's not three shooters. Debrusk and Miller have pretty low shot rates.
Petey has had a week of no real media attention and it hasn't appeared to had any effect. He shows spurts of the talent that got him to a point per game player but without results.

I agree Debrusk was always a match with Miller's line mostly because Boeser struggles to be the first fore checker into the OZone.

While that huge contract is NOT Pettersson fault, it does put huge pressure on him. Now, once again, all the talk is finding one player a partner to improve the star player's play.

A week out of the lime light should help EP's "head"

A tough test for EP, LA's defence is better than Anaheim's
 

ChilliBilly

Registered User
Aug 22, 2007
7,287
4,581
chilliwacki
still saddened by Tuesday night, and the stench of the next 4 years, but life goes on.

8 teams with a better record, leaving the Canucks alone in 9th at +4, and tied with 3 teams for the least number of games played (11).

LAK are one of the teams with a better record (+5) but I suspect they will miss Doughty (broken ankle, month to month).

I am calling this one a nail biter, with the Canucks scoring an EN for a 5 - 3 win.
 

ManVanFan

Registered User
Mar 28, 2024
720
700
Those naturalstattrick numbers need to be taken with a big grain of salt.

They had the canucks like 5th in XGA.. some private models had them bottom ten. And based on the eye test of what we’d been giving up in the middle of the ice up until the last game against Anaheim, there’s absolutely zero world where we are top 5.
I can't say I've watched every game this year but from the games I've seen. Lankinen has been good but definitely not that good to think the Canucks are in the bottom 10 on XGA but are 11th in actual GA. Lankinen's GSAA is 22nd at 1.5. (according to money puck)

Moneypuck's numbers are around the same as that up there in the graph.

Hockey reference also seems to have numbers close to those other 2. I don't know where they get their numbers from.

I'm not a fanboy of numbers but I think if the story is saying they are bottom 10 in xGA, the eye test would probably have a heavy debate about it.
 

Ernie

Registered User
Aug 3, 2004
13,099
2,765
I can't say I've watched every game this year but from the games I've seen. Lankinen has been good but definitely not that good to think the Canucks are in the bottom 10 on XGA but are 11th in actual GA. Lankinen's GSAA is 22nd at 1.5. (according to money puck)

Moneypuck's numbers are around the same as that up there in the graph.

Hockey reference also seems to have numbers close to those other 2. I don't know where they get their numbers from.

I'm not a fanboy of numbers but I think if the story is saying they are bottom 10 in xGA, the eye test would probably have a heavy debate about it.

Natural Stat Trick has him at 7th with 5.13 GSAA. Don't know how they would explain the discrepancy.

Both agree that Silovs is the worst in the league on a per game basis. He's virtually unplayable, the team would be better off calling up Patera if he craps the bed on his next start.
 

Peen

Rejoicing in a Benning-free world
Oct 6, 2013
31,406
27,652
I can't say I've watched every game this year but from the games I've seen. Lankinen has been good but definitely not that good to think the Canucks are in the bottom 10 on XGA but are 11th in actual GA. Lankinen's GSAA is 22nd at 1.5. (according to money puck)

Moneypuck's numbers are around the same as that up there in the graph.

Hockey reference also seems to have numbers close to those other 2. I don't know where they get their numbers from.

I'm not a fanboy of numbers but I think if the story is saying they are bottom 10 in xGA, the eye test would probably have a heavy debate about it.
It was either Nov 5 or 6th Canucks talk where Drance looked into a private model’s data and found it was much more alarming. I think Kevin Woodley’s analytics point to something similar.

I think that we’d been awful defensively up until the Anaheim game. And, fwiw, Tocchet’s commentary seems to be similar
 

tantalum

Hope for the best. Expect the worst
Sponsor
Apr 2, 2002
25,485
14,689
Missouri
still saddened by Tuesday night, and the stench of the next 4 years, but life goes on.
Yep. The hope I have is that the GOP have traditionally been very, very bad at governing. Even when Trump had 2 years of full control they couldn't get anything truly damaging done.

It'll be a bit different this time around as there are less adults in the room around trump but I do think this time it won't just be "retiring" GOP members that speak out and vote against the severe proposals. I think others will grow a backbone if only to save their job in 2 years...they will not want another blue wave.

Don't get me wrong they are going to do some just awful things (especially at state levels) but I think enough checks and balances are still in place to escape complete destruction (especially if Biden can get the judges appointed to the empty positions). But it's sort of the last stand at this point.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Pastor Of Muppetz

ManVanFan

Registered User
Mar 28, 2024
720
700
Natural Stat Trick has him at 7th with 5.13 GSAA. Don't know how they would explain the discrepancy.

Both agree that Silovs is the worst in the league on a per game basis. He's virtually unplayable, the team would be better off calling up Patera if he craps the bed on his next start.
That is strange. Hockey reference has him at 5.2 GSAA.

Silovs, man who knows what's going on with him. Two years ago when he played his 5 games, I wasn't a fan, I thought he needed a lot of work. Last year in playoffs, he was good enough to make a game of it but he still wasn't good. He was a shade below back up avg. So far this year, I'm surprised he has remained on the roster. Obviously he needs work but I think before his value goes away all together, trading him might not be a bad idea. Mikey D been doing pretty well for Providence the past two years in the AHL.
 

ManVanFan

Registered User
Mar 28, 2024
720
700
It was either Nov 5 or 6th Canucks talk where Drance looked into a private model’s data and found it was much more alarming. I think Kevin Woodley’s analytics point to something similar.

I think that we’d been awful defensively up until the Anaheim game. And, fwiw, Tocchet’s commentary seems to be similar
Canucks been very middle of the road this season as a whole I'd say. Defensive match ups, Petey not firing, a lot of new bodies to mesh in. Team play is off but it will come. .653 hockey since Tocchet took over and .682 right now.

I don't think my the eye test reflects the numbers of a team that belongs in the bottom 10 in the league but I'm just a fan haha
 

ChilliBilly

Registered User
Aug 22, 2007
7,287
4,581
chilliwacki
Yep. The hope I have is that the GOP have traditionally been very, very bad at governing. Even when Trump had 2 years of full control they couldn't get anything truly damaging done.

It'll be a bit different this time around as there are less adults in the room around trump but I do think this time it won't just be "retiring" GOP members that speak out and vote against the severe proposals. I think others will grow a backbone if only to save their job in 2 years...they will not want another blue wave.

Don't get me wrong they are going to do some just awful things (especially at state levels) but I think enough checks and balances are still in place to escape complete destruction (especially if Biden can get the judges appointed to the empty positions). But it's sort of the last stand at this point.
I am very afraid that he is going to try to dismantle the election process so that it favours the GOP ... and stack the courts even more.
 

tantalum

Hope for the best. Expect the worst
Sponsor
Apr 2, 2002
25,485
14,689
Missouri
I am very afraid that he is going to try to dismantle the election process so that it favours the GOP ... and stack the courts even more.
That's already been done but it's MUCH harder to stack the federal courts as those are also lifetime positions. It's why they need to fill the open positions. At the very least you can tie things up in the court system for a long time.

The election process is already in GOP favor with the electoral college crap but mainly the ridiculous 2 senators per state thing. Wyoming's 600k population has as much representation in the senate as 40 million californians. The house is more balanced but let's face it the country is mostly governed through the senate.

Anyways...highly off topic!
 

Bgav

We Stylin'
Sponsor
Sep 3, 2009
24,217
6,019
Vancouver
They played the ducks last game. 😉
019590c53ec078541b755a2fc5d3b1872f-bush-shoe-gif.rhorizontal.w1100.gif
 
  • Like
Reactions: Vector

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad