Vancouver led the league in points at Christmas, Can they continue this run into the New Year?

[jackjohnson]

What do you call barely beating the Sabres who are one of the worst teams in the league? Can you be a bigger hypocrite?

Difference is Canucks might have bad games or lack energy and don't play at their best here or there, mostly isolated to 1 game or 2 games max. Whereas Oilers this season have shown stretches longer than 3 consecutive games or more where they have absolutely stunk. The stretch where they beat Sens, Detroit, Chicago and Montreal consecutively, by getting outplayed most games or barely beating them shows they are not as consistent as last year but just lucky to get to play trash teams consecutively right when they are playing bad while good enough to barely beat those teams. Canucks have been way more consistent both in effort and the fact they haven't lost more than 2 games in a row.

 

[Hammman]

They are not as good as their "10 game" win streak suggests. Give Canucks 20 of these easy games and they will have a 20 game win streak. Oilers were just lucky to have such a easy stretch along with lots of break in between the Sens and hawks right at middle of their win streak. Switch the Canucks schedule with Oilers and they would not have the 10 game win streak. Anyways everyone knows it's unsustainable play especially when facing weak teams. They will struggle when they face a playoff team that actually plays well.

You do realize that the Canucks lost the first game of this road trip before their current streak to St Louis, right? And that they also lost games this year to San Jose, Calgary, Minnesota, and Seattle (when they were awful)?

 

[mkatcherin00]

Difference is Canucks might have bad games or lack energy and don't play at their best here or there, mostly isolated to 1 game or 2 games max. Whereas Oilers this season have shown stretches longer than 3 consecutive games or more where they have absolutely stunk. The stretch where they beat Sens, Detroit, Chicago and Montreal consecutively, by getting outplayed most games or barely beating them shows they are not as consistent as last year but just lucky to get to play trash teams consecutively right when they are playing bad while good enough to barely beat those teams. Canucks have been way more consistent both in effort and the fact they haven't lost more than 2 games in a row.

WOW LOL

Edit - Not worth it

 

[jackjohnson]

You do realize that the Canucks lost the first game of this road trip before their current streak to St Louis, right? And that they also lost games this year to San Jose, Calgary, Minnesota, and Seattle (when they were awful)?

Again those or isolated to one game. Show me where they lost 3 in a row. Losing a random game is forgivable as you can't win all the games obviously. But having a big losing streak like the Oilers this season is a cause for concern. The only thing that saved them is the coaching bump but I wonder how long that will last. Remember they were pretty good last season under woodcroft and very consistent then they stunk up the joint early this season and got him fired

 

[BurnabyJoe7]

Difference is Canucks might have bad games or lack energy and don't play at their best here or there, mostly isolated to 1 game or 2 games max. Whereas Oilers this season have shown stretches longer than 3 consecutive games or more where they have absolutely stunk. The stretch where they beat Sens, Detroit, Chicago and Montreal consecutively, by getting outplayed most games or barely beating them shows they are not as consistent as last year but just lucky to get to play trash teams consecutively right when they are playing bad while good enough to barely beat those teams. Canucks have been way more consistent both in effort and the fact they haven't lost more than 2 games in a row.

This post is sure ironic seeing as the Canucks were getting outchanced at 5v5 for their entire season up until just recently. They are still in the lower half of the league in that category while the oilers are #1. That doesn't mean the oilers are a better team, but you're out to lunch with this take. Also winning a game doesn't mean your team had a solid effort.

It sure is nice having objective advanced stats that counter homer opinions like this.

 

[jackjohnson]

This post is sure ironic seeing as the Canucks were getting outchanced at 5v5 for their entire season up until just recently. They are still in the lower half of the league in that category while the oilers are #1. That doesn't mean the oilers are a better team, but you're out to lunch with this take. Also winning a game doesn't mean your team had a solid effort.

It sure is nice having objective advanced stats that counter homer opinions like this.

The Canucks are tops in 5 on 5. How do you explain them being number 1 with a number 9 PP?in fact some games they have won without a PP goal while scoring 6 goals 5 on 5. Again you are completely clueless about how Canucks play. Their special team is actually subpar for PK and slightly above average for PP. If anything Oilers are more of a PP merchants compared to Canucks.

 

[North Cole]

They were in latter end of the stretch that involved 3 3rd games in 4 nights stretch in 15 days. No other team has gone through with the schedule like this Most teams would have gone through 3rd games in 4 night twice in 15 days same stretch with so much travelling. What amazed me the most is that they continue with one win one loss stretch for 10 games in that crazy stretch without a long losing streak. Once they had their rest with home cooking stretch, they started to win games.

The latter end of the stretch during what dates? The 15 days leading up to the Nov 25th SJS loss was 9 games in 15 days. CGY also did this in the same time period, but had a P% of 0.556 to VANs 0.444. 10 teams played 8 games over that stretch, 6 of which were 0.500+, three of which (COL/FLA/PHI) were 0.625 or better. I have trouble believing that extra game at the end against the last place team in the league was the straw that broke the camels back.

The 15 days leading up to Dec 17th 4-3 win over the Hawks they were tied with 13 teams at 8 games played, while 5 teams had 9 games played over those days. Of those 18 teams, they were tied 1st with the knights at 0.813 P% and NSH who played 9 games had a 0.778 P% which is nearly 50% higher than VAN P% over their 9 in 15 stretch.

When you have 12 teams playing 8 or 9 games in 15 days in the first instance and they are mid for P%, and 18 teams playing 8 or 9 games in the second instance, I don't really buy that "No other team has gone through a schedule like this". They happened to do extremely good in the second stretch, but that has nothing to do with what that poster was talking about. Given they think EDM are middling team which they were calling to miss the playoffs earlier, and are trashing us for barely beating other middling or bottom teams. My point was that its kind of funny a top team like VAN has also dropped games vs bottom teams and had issues vs other bottom or middling teams. Similar tight scheduling to half the league is no real excuse.

 

[Kshahdoo]

If you have zero idea about hockey and Canucks then you should not make misinformed opinions. The big reason Bruce got fired was due to the lack of "system" or defensive structure which was clearly pointed out many times by JR even in HNIC interviews if you bothered to watch them. Tocchet bringing a defensive structure is the reason why Myers looks decent and Canucks are tops in Goals Against versus last season where they were at the bottom. Obviously some defensive depth acquired in the summer helped too but it's obvious how forwards are back checking versus pervious season. Watch the Canucks games, research before commenting on things you have zero idea about.

BB had his system, it worked in 21-22 season and stopped working in 22-23 season. That's why "lack of defensive structure". It's always like this when systems stop working. Otherwise coaches like BB or Tocchet would have worked forever with the same team...

 

[Kshahdoo]

Your missing the fact that this is next season for Tocchet.

Two years ago the team started the season 8-15-2 under Travis Green before he was let go. Bruce Boudreau came in and went 32-15-10. Nice but hardly qwning the league. The following season Boudreau went 18-25-3 before he was let go. Tocchet came in and went 20-12-4. Tocchet has continued this season going 29-11-3 so far..

Bruce Boudreau total Games 103- 50-40-13
Rick Tocchet total Games so far 79-49-23-7

So far Tocchet in 24 less games is one win and 10 points away from matching what Boudreau accomplished in Vancouver.

Tocchet already had his so called new coach bump last season.

It won`t suprise me if by the end of the regular season there are a lot of doom and gloom fortune tellers here eating some well deserved crow.

32-15-10 is 0.712 points. Right now Vancouver is at 0.709...

 

[jackjohnson]

BB had his system, it worked in 21-22 season and stopped working in 22-23 season. That's why "lack of defensive structure". It's always like this when systems stop working. Otherwise coaches like BB or Tocchet would have worked forever with the same team...

Nope Bruce never did and players even confirmed regarding this. Stop making BS, Bruce never had a defensive system in place and was the reason he was fired. He was not even the 1st choice to be the coach when JR came on board but it was an Aqua signing. If Bruce had a defensive system or structure, he would be hired already. He was also the reason why Caps never won the cup and his Ducks tenure was short lived. He emphasized on offensive creativity and run and gun.

 

[jackjohnson]

32-15-10 is 0.712 points. Right now Vancouver is at 0.709...

It's OK to say you don't know much about coaching, I won't blame you. But everyone and their mothers know Tocchet is the better coach right now compared to Bruce. Just don't ask us, ask every GM on Why Bruce has not been hired yet. He had his time with Washington capitals and the game has passed him

 

[Kshahdoo]

It's OK to say you don't know much about coaching, I won't blame you. But everyone and their mothers know Tocchet is the better coach right now compared to Bruce. Just don't ask us, ask every GM on Why Bruce has not been hired yet. He had his time with Washington capitals and the game has passed him

We shall see...

 

[EchoesoftheEighties]

At this point it doesn't even really matter. They're winning games and have put enough of a gap between them and other teams that they can coast comfortably to the playoffs and probably even the division.

I don't think they'll compete for the president's trophy and IMO there will probably be a small drop off but ehhh I wouldn't care if I was a Canucks fan, I'd just enjoy the ride.

 

[Fishy McScales]

Two things on PDO :

1) People act like PDO is a thing that (like a coin flip) regresses to 100.0 over time and anything outside of that isn't sustainable, and that's not the case. If you have a great goaltender and some talented star players, both your save % and your shooting % will be above league average and you'll have a high PDO. TB has driven a 102-ish PDO for the last 5+ years, and it isn't luck. It's because they have elite players and a great goalie.

2) Like any stat, you have to look at the context to evaluate the impact.

If a team had a PDO of 105 and were sitting at 22-2-1 or something in one-goal games and constantly eking out results in games they didn't deserve to win ... yes, there will almost certainly be a big regression in the standings when that unsustainable PDO regulates.

Vancouver is 8-5-3 in one-goal games. Basically a .500 8-8 without loser points. The high PDO has not led to the team winning a disproportionate number of close games.

I tried explaining this to people when the team was 12-3-1 to start the year with a 109 PDO. The team had a +34 goal differential after 16 games but +22 of that was in 3 blowouts they won by a combined score of 24-2. So while the PDO was unsustainable ... it was essentially 'wasted' PDO as it came mostly in blowouts and didn't contribute to winning close games. The team wasn't 12-3-1 because of PDO or luck, they were 12-3-1 because the were outplaying the opposition almost every night. But people who weren't watching the games didn't understand that.

And what I said at that point was that the PDO and goal differential wasn't sustainable, but because those weren't directly leading to wins, that the team's overall record *was* sustainable based on their overall level of play. And that's exactly what's happened. After having a +34 goal differential in the first 16 games, it's +31 in the the next 27 - a drop basically in half - but the team just kept winning.

It's a bizarre thing where if the Canucks had won those three games by a combined score of 8-4 or something instead of 24-2 leading to a much lower PDO but the same record, the masses would consider that record *more* sustainable despite a *worse* overall performance, which obviously makes zero sense. And this is the problem with blindly looking at statistics out of context.

You are kind of cherry picking, though. Those games didn't happen in a vacuum. The stat is looked at in bulk, where the team over time has had a bigger share of puck luck.

The fact they are roughly .500 in one-goal games says little about PDO. With lower PDO they likely lose more of those games, more games that were close would be clearer losses and the big wins would be closer wins.

Yet of those examples you elected to cherry pick only the big wins in order to prop up your argument and get 20 likes from coping Canucks fans.

Also, you're making these condescending remarks about the "masses" like we're a bunch of sheep while all these enlightened Canucks fans, many of whom in this very thread are showing a very limited understanding of the stat in question, have it right with their "the Canucks are different" nonsense.

No, people aren't saying it will revert back to 100, people say it will REGRESS. When and to what number, who knows but it WILL HAPPEN and it WILL AFFECT THE RECORD. Their team is good enough and their record is good enough that it probably won't affect the standings too much but who knows; there's a lot of season left and look what's happening to the other two "locks" in the Pacific right now, or indeed what happened to the cup-or-bust Oilers earlier in the season.

Ironically, you even pointed out that the Canucks had a 109 PDO earlier in the year and what happened when the sample size grew? It regressed. Why? It was unsuitable looking at historical data. It still is, so we can expect it to regress further. Back to 100? Not a chance because that would require their PDO to be exactly equally as bad as it's been good from here on in, and I think we all agree that would be ridiculous. Just as ridiculous as their current PDO in fact.

 

[andora]

Difference is Canucks might have bad games or lack energy and don't play at their best here or there, mostly isolated to 1 game or 2 games max. Whereas Oilers this season have shown stretches longer than 3 consecutive games or more where they have absolutely stunk. The stretch where they beat Sens, Detroit, Chicago and Montreal consecutively, by getting outplayed most games or barely beating them shows they are not as consistent as last year but just lucky to get to play trash teams consecutively right when they are playing bad while good enough to barely beat those teams. Canucks have been way more consistent both in effort and the fact they haven't lost more than 2 games in a row.

Honestly asking if you watched any of those games

 

[Saltcreek]

Honestly asking if you watched any of those games

Of course he hasn’t. This is the person that thinks the current Canucks is comparable to the 80s Oilers. 99% of what he says is pure nonsense and fabrication.

 

[snu22fint]

You are kind of cherry picking, though. Those games didn't happen in a vacuum. The stat is looked at in bulk, where the team over time has had a bigger share of puck luck.

The fact they are roughly .500 in one-goal games says little about PDO. With lower PDO they likely lose more of those games, more games that were close would be clearer losses and the big wins would be closer wins.

Yet of those examples you elected to cherry pick only the big wins in order to prop up your argument and get 20 likes from coping Canucks fans.

Also, you're making these condescending remarks about the "masses" like we're a bunch of sheep while all these enlightened Canucks fans, many of whom in this very thread are showing a very limited understanding of the stat in question, have it right with their "the Canucks are different" nonsense.

No, people aren't saying it will revert back to 100, people say it will REGRESS. When and to what number, who knows but it WILL HAPPEN and it WILL AFFECT THE RECORD. Their team is good enough and their record is good enough that it probably won't affect the standings too much but who knows; there's a lot of season left and look what's happening to the other two "locks" in the Pacific right now, or indeed what happened to the cup-or-bust Oilers earlier in the season.

Ironically, you even pointed out that the Canucks had a 109 PDO earlier in the year and what happened when the sample size grew? It regressed. Why? It was unsuitable looking at historical data. It still is, so we can expect it to regress further. Back to 100? Not a chance because that would require their PDO to be exactly equally as bad as it's been good from here on in, and I think we all agree that would be ridiculous. Just as ridiculous as their current PDO in fact.

Well, the DPO dropped, who cares? That was not what was debated back then. People like you said that Vancouver would regress back in the standings or maintain a lower PPG, because they had a high PDO. People like MS tried to tell you (or ppl like you, I dont recall who was debating who, I just remeber the arguments) that the PDO was mostly influenced by blow-out victories at that point, which was correct, and that the overall play was much improved from last season, which is evendentely true as well. They won the argument, you lost, lets move on.

Now, I will admit that I did not think myself that Van would be able to maintain this for so long. But it actually looks like they are even better now when Pettersson is finding his form again. Impressive.

 

[Fishy McScales]

Well, the DPO dropped, who cares? That was not what was debated back then. People like you said that Vancouver would regress back in the standings or maintain a lower PPG, because they had a high PDO. People like MS tried to tell you (or ppl like you, I dont recall who was debating who, I just remeber the arguments) that the PDO was mostly influenced by blow-out victories at that point, which was correct, and that the overall play was much improved from last season, which is evendentely true as well. They won the argument, you lost, lets move on.

Now, I will admit that I did not think myself that Van would be able to maintain this for so long. But it actually looks like they are even better now when Pettersson is finding his form again. Impressive.

You misunderstood my entire argument.

The PDO is an average across all games, not just the blowouts. Hell yeah with a 109 PDO I'd expect there'd be a few of those.

You also keep conflating the PDO argument with people saying the Canucks aren't good. I even said they are in my post, but you're just tripping over yourself to be outraged.

 

[Phrasing]

You misunderstood my entire argument.

The PDO is an average across all games, not just the blowouts. Hell yeah with a 109 PDO I'd expect there'd be a few of those.

You also keep conflating the PDO argument with people saying the Canucks aren't good. I even said they are in my post, but you're just tripping over yourself to be outraged.

Canucks PDO over their first 20 games did regress over the next 20 games. Want to know what happened to their record? It was nearly identical. I’m not sure you’re getting MS’ point. Regression of the PDO hasn’t affected their record as you said in your post.

 

[Fishy McScales]

Canucks PDO over their first 20 games did regress over the next 20 games. Want to know what happened to their record? It was nearly identical. I’m not sure you’re getting MS’ point. Regression of the PDO hasn’t affected their record as you said in your post.

I didn’t say it has, I said it will. Regressing from astronomical to merely stratospherical will mean you probably keep winning, just not as convincingly as before.

At least you bothered following up your insecure laughing emoji with an actual post.

 

[Phrasing]

I didn’t say it has, I said it will. Regressing from astronomical to merely stratospherical will mean you probably keep winning, just not as convincingly as before.

At least you bothered following up your insecure laughing emoji with an actual post.

Their PDO over the last 20 games has not been stratospheric. It left their 109 PDO at a level that is now 105, but it’s been lower than that for the last 20 games. Still same record. That’s the point. Ultimately blowout games skewed the PDO, but Canucks were capable of wining close games and that’s been shown so far.

 

[Fishy McScales]

Their PDO over the last 20 games has not been stratospheric. It left their 109 PDO at a level that is now 105, but it’s been lower than that for the last 20 games. Still same record. That’s the point. Ultimately blowout games skewed the PDO, but Canucks were capable of wining close games and that’s been shown so far.

Their PDO over their first 20 games was in fact 104.1 and over their next 20 games it was 106.1.

I'm not sure which stretch the 109 comes from, it was mentioned by MS. All I know is that it wasn't sustainable.

 

[StumpyTown]

It's OK to say you don't know much about coaching, I won't blame you. But everyone and their mothers know Tocchet is the better coach right now compared to Bruce. Just don't ask us, ask every GM on Why Bruce has not been hired yet. He had his time with Washington capitals and the game has passed him

Coaches have shelf lives. Bruce is as good a coach as Rick. He showed it with all the teams he was previously with. Same goes with Bowness in Winnipeg. They are all great coaches. The problem is that over time the message waters down and motivation decreases in the dressing room due to numerous factors. I think it's great that the 'Nucks have bought into Tocchet's systems and are playing fantastic hockey this year. Same I say for Bowness and the Jets this season. What I'd like the best is a Vancouver/Winnipeg west final. (Let's see Bettman keep a Canadian team out the final in that scenario)

 

[coolboarder]

The latter end of the stretch during what dates? The 15 days leading up to the Nov 25th SJS loss was 9 games in 15 days. CGY also did this in the same time period, but had a P% of 0.556 to VANs 0.444. 10 teams played 8 games over that stretch, 6 of which were 0.500+, three of which (COL/FLA/PHI) were 0.625 or better. I have trouble believing that extra game at the end against the last place team in the league was the straw that broke the camels back.

The 15 days leading up to Dec 17th 4-3 win over the Hawks they were tied with 13 teams at 8 games played, while 5 teams had 9 games played over those days. Of those 18 teams, they were tied 1st with the knights at 0.813 P% and NSH who played 9 games had a 0.778 P% which is nearly 50% higher than VAN P% over their 9 in 15 stretch.

When you have 12 teams playing 8 or 9 games in 15 days in the first instance and they are mid for P%, and 18 teams playing 8 or 9 games in the second instance, I don't really buy that "No other team has gone through a schedule like this". They happened to do extremely good in the second stretch, but that has nothing to do with what that poster was talking about. Given they think EDM are middling team which they were calling to miss the playoffs earlier, and are trashing us for barely beating other middling or bottom teams. My point was that its kind of funny a top team like VAN has also dropped games vs bottom teams and had issues vs other bottom or middling teams. Similar tight scheduling to half the league is no real excuse.

3rd game in 4 night began in Eastern Canada trip followed by a back to back games, including a trip home and Calgary game. This felt like a 5 game road trip even if they have had a home game against the Islanders.

The Canucks have had to go out on Eastern Canada swing, 2 weeks after they got home for first trip in southern Florida and Nashville from their first 5 game trip. They barely have had time to settle down, having back to back games for two home games followed by a normal rest and a trip to San Jose followed by two home games. When you factored it in with just two weeks at plus a game trip to San Jose and barely have had a chance to really settle down and have some practice during this hectic stretch in middle of November leading to Thanksgiving weekend. At Calgary's game, they had virtually no leg at all at end of the b2b games.

That is the reason why the Canucks have had first losing streak which lasted 2 games. Also, they have played the most games played in the league which was tied with Vegas however, Vegas also have had favorable schedule to start the season. The Canucks have played the most road games in the league goes along with most games played at start of December before their 5 games home stand in December.

November is the worst stretch of scheduling I ever seen for a NHL team.

 

[UrbanImpact]

Whats most impressive to me is their 5 on 5 play.

The Canucks have 1 powerplay goal during this tough road trip in which theyve gone 5w-1L.


Side note:

I see that the Canucks are heavy favorites in Columbus this morning. I would strongy disagree with that if we have any bettors on this site.

1. They got stuck in buffalo and had to stay an extra night... They then had to bus to Toronto yesterday before flying to Columbus last night.

2. 10 am pacific time game

3. Last game of 7 game road trip

4. Demko likely resting