So the Canucks were a product of PDO all this time? Or are they still a legitimate contender?

[RedHawkDown]

Eh, many of those were not necessarily outliers though. Miller was just as good in 22-23. Boeser was just as good as a rookie and in the Covid season. Demko was just as good his previous two healthy seasons. Hronek was just as good for Detroit the year before. Hoglander was just as good in the Covid season. It wasn’t like a Huberdeau having 115 points or William Karlsson having 40 goals type seasons.

Just want to chime in - Hronek wasn’t even in the same zip code for Detroit. You guys had a completely different guy in Vancouver last year lol

 

[x Tame Impala]

The Canucks arguably make it to the WCF last year if they had their starting goaltender against Edmonton and that was with EP40 being a Swedish soggy diaper for 4 months and in the playoffs. They're a dramatic tire fire right now but you stat geeks acting like you've got this insight is completely unwarranted.

Good teams have lots of good players playing well. It's not some anomaly.

 

[K1984]

The Canucks arguably make it to the WCF last year if they had their starting goaltender against Edmonton and that was with EP40 being a Swedish soggy diaper for 4 months and in the playoffs. They're a dramatic tire fire right now but you stat geeks acting like you've got this insight is completely unwarranted.

Good teams have lots of good players playing well. It's not some anomaly.

Strange that they were only ever a good team last year.

 

[bov]

Canucks aren't that good, they've overachieved a bit recently but their roster just doesn't have the depth to be a powerhouse. It's hilarious seeing some people criticize Tocchet.

 

[leafsfan5]

The Canucks arguably make it to the WCF last year if they had their starting goaltender against Edmonton and that was with EP40 being a Swedish soggy diaper for 4 months and in the playoffs. They're a dramatic tire fire right now but you stat geeks acting like you've got this insight is completely unwarranted.

Good teams have lots of good players playing well. It's not some anomaly.

Good teams have good players playing at a level that they can sustain

You know Connor McDavid will score 120+ points for Edmonton, you know the same for Colorado with Mackinnon. You know the Leafs will have 4 PPG forwards. It may vary slightly from year to year, but that production can be counted on to create consistently competitive teams

You can't count on half your forward group having career seasons every year like with what happened to Vancouver last season

 

[Romang67]

The statistical aberration is that they are not scoring this year.

The statistical aberration is not that they did score last year. So that means the whole PDO argument is a red herring.

Is it? Do you think one of out three makes a statistical aberration?

The argument was that the Canucks scoring on 10.6% of their shots 5v5 was unlikely to continue (IIRC, it was closer to 12% when people started pointing out the high PDO). Not that it was impossible to score 270 goals in a season. Teams do that all the time.

 

[Czechboy]

As of today, they are not in a playoff spot by points or win percentage. That's surprising.

I think last year everyone was healthy all at the same time... Hronek had a scorching start (and shit finish), Hughes was unbelievable and Demko was unbelievable! Everything bounced right until the playoffs and some very shitty luck.

Then, in the offsesason, to my eye they made their D worse. Demko became a pandora's box. Hronek has been hurt. Hughes has been hurt.

If those 3 can all get healthy and back to their forms (Vezina, 40 point Dman and Norris calibre) then they'll have a nice second half and could have a great playoffs. BUT it sounds like there is infighting and frustration in the org and it could also go to hell real fast. Also, Blues are pretty good and I'd watch out for them going on a run. Not worred about the Avs one bit to be honest. They'll make playoffs.

 

[FiveFourteenSixOne]

PDO is a ridiculous argument. They didn't regress last year, and with a much lower PDO this year still haven't regressed. Still waiting for that big regression to happen.

They were healthy all season last year aside from Demko's injury near the end and benefitted greatly from that. This year Demko has been out all year, Boeser missed time, Miller is out, Hronek is out, Joshua was out and is still getting up to speed. Still top 10 in point % and 11th in points. 4 points behind Vegas for 1st in the division with 2 games in hand.

They are a legit cup contender.

 

[PuckG]

The Canucks arguably make it to the WCF last year if they had their starting goaltender against Edmonton and that was with EP40 being a Swedish soggy diaper for 4 months and in the playoffs. They're a dramatic tire fire right now but you stat geeks acting like you've got this insight is completely unwarranted.

Good teams have lots of good players playing well. It's not some anomaly.

The Oilers arguably win the Florida series if they had Klefbom from 2018 before injury and Skinner not giving up a few softies but so what? They didn’t.

Such a dumb hypothesis. Especially when we see what Demko currently is and when Silovs kept them in the series.

 

[FiveFourteenSixOne]

Nice little thread speaking to some of the "unsustainability", specifically their transition game :







Read on for more. And that's just transition play.

All of these stats go to prove their success was based on luck.

They managed to extend the luck over virtually an entire season, which is miraculous, when most of the time runs like they had only last a month.

 

[Beerz]

The Nucks roster is better than the Sabres imho. Sabres have better Dman, but even then too many of their D are way too similiar and that creates a conflict of interest. Canucks have the better forward core and depth though. Another issue is imho Sabres have arguably some of the lowest IQ Dman in the entire league. None of Dahlin, Power, or Byram are particularly intelligent, and rely more on raw skating and physicality for their success. In contrast Hughes is one of the most intelligent players in the league, and Hronek isn't too shabby there either. Even Brannstrom is relatively smart.

If you don't think Dahlin has high hockey iq then you don't watch him. That is an absurd statement.

 

[The Nuge]

The Canucks arguably make it to the WCF last year if they had their starting goaltender against Edmonton and that was with EP40 being a Swedish soggy diaper for 4 months and in the playoffs. They're a dramatic tire fire right now but you stat geeks acting like you've got this insight is completely unwarranted.

Good teams have lots of good players playing well. It's not some anomaly.

When Silovs was already the best player on the Canucks that series, that’s kind of a ridiculous argument. They got outplayed by Edmonton but Silovs standing on his head, and Skinner imploding made it look close. Them getting by would have been a fluke

 

[Coach Reggie Dunlop]

Just want to chime in - Hronek wasn’t even in the same zip code for Detroit. You guys had a completely different guy in Vancouver last year lol

The second half of the season he looked a lot closer to Detroit Hronek with all his warts.

 

[Norwegianoiler]

Don't know about this season, but last year they would surely for a fact and in reality absolutely have won against the Oilers if Demko was playing, for sure. In all possible universes.

 

[nucks88]

Just want to chime in - Hronek wasn’t even in the same zip code for Detroit. You guys had a completely different guy in Vancouver last year lol

Yeah playing with a Norris winning partner tends to do that….

 

[PuckG]

All of these stats go to prove their success was based on luck.

They managed to extend the luck over virtually an entire season, which is miraculous, when most of the time runs like they had only last a month.

Careful, you might get hit with a “Stats don’t apply to the Canucks because of their style and selective shooting.”

 

[KirkAlbuquerque]

Yes they were. But they should be better than they are now

Yeah playing with a Norris winning partner tends to do that….

Hronek isn’t elite by any means but he did lead an NHL team in scoring one season. That’s gotta count for something.

View attachment 963079

As of today, they are not in a playoff spot by points or win percentage. That's surprising.

I think last year everyone was healthy all at the same time... Hronek had a scorching start (and shit finish), Hughes was unbelievable and Demko was unbelievable! Everything bounced right until the playoffs and some very shitty luck.

Then, in the offsesason, to my eye they made their D worse. Demko became a pandora's box. Hronek has been hurt. Hughes has been hurt.

If those 3 can all get healthy and back to their forms (Vezina, 40 point Dman and Norris calibre) then they'll have a nice second half and could have a great playoffs. BUT it sounds like there is infighting and frustration in the org and it could also go to hell real fast. Also, Blues are pretty good and I'd watch out for them going on a run. Not worred about the Avs one bit to be honest. They'll make playoffs.

10 OT losses in January is nuts

 

[Else Ermine]

Not sure why this topic is so controversial. There is no team that consistently massively outperform all other teams' sh% numbers 5v5 year after year, so a team's sh% is largely down to chance over a season long sample.

If you're not rolling out a consistently elite goalie, which Demko hasn't been even while not injured, your save percentage is probably also not going to be super high.

That's all that PDO is.

My confusion and pushback with this discussion is that the Canucks ultimately didn't massively outperform other team's PDO last year, and yet it's become this meme on here that they were some all-time anomaly in that regard but that's just not accurate to my understanding.

5v5 2023-24
Vancouver 1.028
Boston 1.027
Winnipeg 1.025

All situations 2023-24
Vancouver 1.025
Winnipeg 1.023
Boston 1.022
Am I wrong that the PDO difference between Winnipeg and Vancouver is 0.2% there? Is that really the sort of difference we're getting in a twist over after an 82 game sample size?

For context this year Winnipeg currently sit at:
1.026 5v5
1.042 all situations
They're playing well and have a great goalie.

To be clear I'm not arguing it wasn't an unexpectedly good season for the Canucks that they weren't likely to repeat. They got hot, avoided injuries, were a legitimately good (not great) team who eventually lost to a better one.
It's just when we're so focused on a percentage statistic that doesn't account for differences shot totals, let alone average shot quality we're sort of trying to big-brain answers by disregarding a wealth of other relevant information. It's like making your player assessments purely off JFresh cards. It might lead to the right conclusions but there's a lot you'll be missing.

 

[Cancuks]

They were never a contender but they have enough talent on paper together into the playoffs and win a round or two. But the problem is two of their top forwards have mental issues and it's becoming a serious distraction.

 

[Svencouver]

They absolutely got fairly lucky last year with everything going right for them, but if that's true, then it's also reasonable to say they've been unlucky this year with literally everything going wrong for them. It's not dissimilar to how the Oilers were playing before Woodcroft was fired, and we all know that the Oilers are and were a good team.

 

[Romang67]

My confusion and pushback with this discussion is that the Canucks ultimately didn't massively outperform other team's PDO last year, and yet it's become this meme on here that they were some all-time anomaly in that regard but that's just not accurate to my understanding.

5v5 2023-24
Vancouver 1.028
Boston 1.027
Winnipeg 1.025

All situations 2023-24
Vancouver 1.025
Winnipeg 1.023
Boston 1.022
Am I wrong that the PDO difference between Winnipeg and Vancouver is 0.2% there? Is that really the sort of difference we're getting in a twist over after an 82 game sample size?

For context this year Winnipeg currently sit at:
1.026 5v5
1.042 all situations
They're playing well and have a great goalie.

To be clear I'm not arguing it wasn't an unexpectedly good season for the Canucks that they weren't likely to repeat. They got hot, avoided injuries, were a legitimately good (not great) team who eventually lost to a better one.
It's just when we're so focused on a percentage statistic that doesn't account for differences shot totals, let alone average shot quality we're sort of trying to big-brain answers by disregarding a wealth of other relevant information. It's like making your player assessments purely off JFresh cards. It might lead to the right conclusions but there's a lot you'll be missing.

That's why I specified having a consistently elite goaltender. Without exaggeration, Hellebuyck is a regular season all timer. There is a strong case to be made that he's had 4 regular seasons that were better than Demko's best season.

In that way, PDO is flawed. The sv% portion really either means that your goalie is having an uncharacteristically good season, or your goalie is really good. In Demko's case, there was very little indicating that he had gotten elite all of a sudden.

The sh% is much more consistent. Your team isn't unusually good at finding soft spots on the ice, and even if your team has unusually good scorers, that doesn't explain a 2% higher sh%.

 

[BB79]

Its a VERY advanced stat. You have to add save percentage and shooting percentage together to get it.

Yeah. We always talk about PDO around the dinner table. My kid's high school team missed the playoffs because their PDO was atrocious...said no one ever.

 

[Else Ermine]

That's why I specified having a consistently elite goaltender. Without exaggeration, Hellebuyck is a regular season all timer. There is a strong case to be made that he's had 4 regular seasons that were better than Demko's best season.

In that way, PDO is flawed. The sv% portion really either means that your goalie is having an uncharacteristically good season, or your goalie is really good. In Demko's case, there was very little indicating that he had gotten elite all of a sudden.

The sh% is much more consistent. Your team isn't unusually good at finding soft spots on the ice, and even if your team has unusually good scorers, that doesn't explain a 2% higher sh%.

Demko has been a very good NHL goalie during his time in the league. A very porous defence prior to Tocchet's tenure made his save percentage look fairly average historically but him having a Vezina contending season in him wasn't a surprise. He not Hellebuyck but he can touch that level.

I do fully agree they're no masters of finding soft spots to shoot from but I don't know how much of a difference team strategy is affecting sh% league wide or team to team. Sv% has been going down across the league and anecdotally it seems a growing number of teams are shooting more selectively with the notion that a low percentage shot is akin to a turnover. I don't have numbers for that, I may be wrong.
Tocchet's Canucks had a early season run last year where teams weren't stopping a bump pass set play that gave them odd man rushes and a power play that gained o-zone entry with ease. Both got scouted and shut down and the star players production rate dropped along with their sh%. Wonky early season stuff that feeds into the numbers. Their only reliable go-to is to pile traffic in front of net a throw pucks into or through the bodies. That sort of offense can lead to high sh% thanks to a lot of the shot attempts not being factored into that equation because so much gets blocked.
My arguement is high PDO can come out of not only a very good goalie but by being a superior team, a lucky team, or even a bad team that doesn't shoot enough to make up for a high conversion rate. It's a starting point for questions but it isn't an answer in isolation.

 

[Romang67]

Demko has been a very good NHL goalie during his time in the league. A very porous defence prior to Tocchet's tenure made his save percentage look fairly average historically but him having a Vezina contending season in him wasn't a surprise. He not Hellebuyck but he can touch that level.

I do fully agree they're no masters of finding soft spots to shoot from but I don't know how much of a difference team strategy is affecting sh% league wide or team to team. Sv% has been going down across the league and anecdotally it seems a growing number of teams are shooting more selectively with the notion that a low percentage shot is akin to a turnover. I don't have numbers for that, I may be wrong.
Tocchet's Canucks had a early season run last year where teams weren't stopping a bump pass set play that gave them odd man rushes and a power play that gained o-zone entry with ease. Both got scouted and shut down and the star players production rate dropped along with their sh%. Wonky early season stuff that feeds into the numbers. Their only reliable go-to is to pile traffic in front of net a throw pucks into or through the bodies. That sort of offense can lead to high sh% thanks to a lot of the shot attempts not being factored into that equation because so much gets blocked.
My arguement is high PDO can come out of not only a very good goalie but by being a superior team, a lucky team, or even a bad team that doesn't shoot enough to make up for a high conversion rate. It's a starting point for questions but it isn't an answer in isolation.

And if you can show that either of those other three that aren't the consistently elite goalie one is replicable and predictable, we can have a conversation about whether a high PDO isn't an indicator of a future fall-off.

 

[Else Ermine]

And if you can show that either of those other three that aren't the consistently elite goalie one is replicable and predictable, we can have a conversation about whether a high PDO isn't an indicator of a future fall-off.

Fall off of points in the standings or fall off of PDO? If it's the one that matters how do we convert the PDO into a reliable measurement of excess points gained/lost?
I'm genuinely looking for answers.