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

[Regal]

A very strange flex considering that the Rangers, Bruins, and Stars have 104612796 games in hand on the Canucks.

Also, it's December.

Well they’re tied with the Kings for second best points percentage, so who cares about Dallas and Boston games in hand? Also, I think a team that was bottom 5 the majority of last year before finishing strong down the stretch now being where they are even if it isn’t 1st in points percentage and it’s “only” December is still a pretty big feat. It’s not like they’ve been a consistent high ranking playoff team.

 

[nucks88]

Rangers have 2 points less and have played 3 less games.

One more time slowly, the Canucks have already played 5 back to backs, the Rangers have played 2. If you think that playing back to backs and Eastern road trips from the West Coast is some sort of advantage I don’t know what more to say….

 

[Old Boys Club]

I'll be sure to drag the rangers, and islanders for their unsustainable shooting percentages on the power play,

TBay has the highest, and even they are < 2 std. dev. above the norm. Additionally, there is a much larger variance in pp sh% as, generally speaking, most teams have spent ~1/10 of the time on PP as they have at 5v5. Further, PP opportunities are not equal across the league and can be highly situationally dependent, whereas 5v5 is the default. This is why the 'PP merchant' crowd naysays teams propped up by hot powerplays.

View attachment 789910

All I'm saying is that the Canucks sh% is likely to normalize, which does not mean they will finish the season at bang on average. Nor does it mean that the Canucks will plummet in the standings. As @Romang67 mentioned above, the Canucks could maintain this pace, however that is not likely given historical context.

 

[krutovsdonut]

I dont think you're lying. People just don't tend to notice it unless it's their own team, which is why we have the semi annual tradition of the talking points:

"This team is literally sent from the Gods."

"I dunno, their shooting percentage and save percentage is mighty high."

"They keep the shots from the outside and mostly shoot when they have scoring chances and/or have tons of snipers on the team."

"They'll probably regress."

"They won't regress."

Followed by a regression to closer where the team has tended to be in previous years. Note that the law of large numbers doesn't actually apply, and it's entirely possible (although unlikely) for a team to get lucky for a full season or even years at a time. The Canucks COULD, without having better snipers or a better goalie, get lucky for the rest of the season. Regression tends to be misconstrued as a gambler's fallacy, where a streak of luck must be followed by a streak of bad luck.

Shooting percentage is easy, since most teams 5v5 tend to not drastically outperform other teams. More shots tend to result in more goals, unless you're the Carolina Hurricanes.

Save percentage being lumped into PDO is pretty dumb (or rather, people talking about save percentage as if every goalie should be expected to have similar save percentage have heard that PDO tends to normalize and don't dig deeper into it), since it's very possible for a team to, long term, have 1-2% higher save percentage than another team just based on goalie skill.

The Canucks have some skilled snipers, and having a slightly higher shooting percentage than average could be expected. Demko has historically been an average to below average starting goalie, so his save percentage to be expected is probably not Vezina level (though as we just saw last year, a team can totally keep that up a full season).

the entire pdo discussion in relation to the canucks is misdirected. the canucks have a high team shooting percentage. that is all there is to discuss. there is nothing odd about the team save % when you look at their goalies. it's good but not historically noteworthy. you can't assume it regresses.

if people want to debate team shooting % that is fine and you can add in the discrepency between expected goals and goals. i agree sh% is too high based on precedent and seems likely to regress, but i think it is also pretty obvious watching the team that at least part of this is by design. their shot attempts are 23rd in the league not because they are lazy or lacking ozone time. whenever they can they are playing a possession ozone game like they are working a shot clock with a lot of cycling and being selective with shot attempts and they are also playing with the lead a lot so no urgency. the only shoot first player on the team is ian cole. in general, the way hughes maintains ozone possession and constantly rotates the puck trying to find a shooting or passing lane is contagious and most of the other dmen on the team now do the same thing. when you remember that the sedins are now heavily involved in hockey ops it may not be a coincidence that the entire team now approaches ozone possession the way they used to, which is more like basketball than traditional hockey in terms of keeping the puck away from opponents as well as looking to score.

also, assuming their shooting percentage was to regress, how much will it need to do so to significantly affect game outcomes considering they are currently outscoring opponents by more than one goal per game?

 

[Drytoast]

It's not quiet if you make a thread about it.

 

[Three On Zero]

TBay has the highest, and even they are < 2 std. dev. above the norm. Additionally, there is a much larger variance in pp sh% as, generally speaking, most teams have spent ~1/10 of the time on PP as they have at 5v5. Further, PP opportunities are not equal across the league and can be highly situationally dependent, whereas 5v5 is the default. This is why the 'PP merchant' crowd naysays teams propped up by hot powerplays.


All I'm saying is that the Canucks sh% is likely to normalize, which does not mean they will finish the season at bang on average. Nor does it mean that the Canucks will plummet in the standings. As @Romang67 mentioned above, the Canucks could maintain this pace, however that is not likely given historical context.

Oh I fully agree, right now the Canucks are in the center of a perfect storm. Something has to give eventually. They have a decent roster but this is a team that should be battling for 2nd/3rd in the Pacific. Not a roster that should be battling for 1st in the league.

Last season they vastly underperformed and this season is the polar opposite

 

[jackjohnson]

He's tied for goals

Yeah tied in 1st for goals. But still you get my point. Hughes is having an amazing year. Broke many Canucks record already like having the most multiple point games with 68 tying Edler's Canucks career while Edler played 925 games for Canucks and Hughes is only at 318. Very impressive

 

[nucks88]

It's not quiet if you make a thread about it.

It is disingenuous to come in to said thread and complain about it’s existence…..free world Bud…..you should try and take advantage of it….

 

[Regal]

Win-loss

Rangers +15
Canucks +14
Stars +12
Bruins +12
Golden Knights +12
Kings +12
Jets +11
Avalanche +10

The Rangers are your true best record but the Canucks 2nd overall by multiple games and 1st in West is certainly a lot to be proud of.

Don’t really see the value in looking at wins that involve shootout and overtime but ignoring losses that involve shootout and overtime. Either we take overall win-loss record (So +13 Rangers, +11 Canucks), or just regulation (+13 Canucks, +10 Rangers)

 

[The Crypto Guy]

One more time slowly, the Canucks have already played 5 back to backs, the Rangers have played 2. If you think that playing back to backs and Eastern road trips from the West Coast is some sort of advantage I don’t know what more to say….

You may want to recheck your information, this time go very slowly, the Rangers have played 5 back to backs. But good try!

 

[kranuck]

“Cushy schedule”? May wanna look up who the Oilers have played
In any case, it’s been goaltending

It’s been team defense.

 

[KirkAlbuquerque]

One more time slowly, the Canucks have already played 5 back to backs, the Rangers have played 2. If you think that playing back to backs and Eastern road trips from the West Coast is some sort of advantage I don’t know what more to say….

Rangers have more than 2 back to backs , I don’t have the numbers in front of me but I feel like they’ve had a ton already

 

[jackjohnson]

Oh I fully agree, right now the Canucks are in the center of a perfect storm. Something has to give eventually. They have a decent roster but this is a team that should be battling for 2nd/3rd in the Pacific. Not a roster that should be battling for 1st in the league.

Last season they vastly underperformed and this season is the polar opposite

They might get another boost on defense and PK with Soucy being close to returning. And possible trade deadline deals to improve the team even more. So they might be able to keep this pace. Since Suter returned and recent Zadorov acquisition our PK has improved significantly. Soucy will add to that. I just don't see Canucks regressing much if they did regress. Right now their PP has not been good while the PK has improved. They have scored and won many games just because of their 5 on 5 scoring. I expect the PP to pick it up if Kuzy is back on PP number 1 unit. So they have a couple of gears left.

 

[Bizzare]

“Cushy schedule”? May wanna look up who the Oilers have played
In any case, it’s been goaltending

True, they’ve played the Canucks three times!

Oilers have also only had 1 B2B and it didn’t involve any travel.

 

[jackjohnson]

Rangers have more than 2 back to backs , I don’t have the numbers in front of me but I feel like they’ve had a ton already

Rangers have a much easier road trip and travel schedule. Canucks normally have one of the toughest road trip schedules and travel schedule just because of geography. Eastern Conference teams have much easier schedule than teams from Pacific division. It's just the way it has always been.

 

[MVP of West Hollywd]

Don’t really see the value in looking at wins that involve shootout and overtime but ignoring losses that involve shootout and overtime. Either we take overall win-loss record (So +13 Rangers, +11 Canucks), or just regulation (+13 Canucks, +10 Rangers)

Because getting 1 pt of a game is a neutral result, at the end of the season comparing wins to losses column alone will 100% correlate to how high a team is in the standings. For that reason I have used it as quickhand way to see how a team is doing independent of games played for a few years.

If you go by pts % the Kings are tied with the Canucks which differs from my list, however I think that's because the Kings are "on pace for" to eventually have the same win/loss record as the Canucks 5 games from now. I would argue that having a 2nd best in the league rate with 5 more games played in the bag is a slightly better position to be in.

 

[pcruz]

That makes it 5 games against San Jose and Edmonton this year?

That's an gifted 10 points and 45 goals for.

Nice little Christmas present from the makers of the schedule.

 

[Tralfamadore]

Nothing involving Vancouver has ever been quiet.

 

[nucks88]

Rangers have more than 2 back to backs , I don’t have the numbers in front of me but I feel like they’ve had a ton already

Sorry my bad, I misread the schedule….I will see myself out…..Merry Christmas…Canucks are frauds……..

 

[The Crypto Guy]

Rangers have a much easier road trip and travel schedule. Canucks normally have one of the toughest road trip schedules and travel schedule just because of geography. Eastern Conference teams have much easier schedule than teams from Pacific division. It's just the way it has always been.

Ok? Not sure why that matters at all. Should we feel bad and give them extra points in the standings?

Sorry my bad, I misread the schedule….I will see myself out…..Merry Christmas

Please do it slowly.

 

[MK9]

35 games in. Nothing could possibly change in the next 47 games. Plan the parade.

 

[LemonSauceD]

So who pissed in Rangers fans cheerios this morning?

 

[WetcoastOrca]

They’re a good team. Just how good remains to be seen.
Some people just have trouble accepting that things change in the NHL. Bad teams improve and good teams decline. The circle of life.

 

[LemonSauceD]

they seem to play the Sharks every other game

We literally lost to the Sharks in regulation this year.

Meanwhile we won all 3 games against the supposed cup favourites.

 

[Regal]

Because getting 1 pt of a game is a neutral result, at the end of the season comparing wins to losses column alone will 100% correlate to how high a team is in the standings. For that reason I have used it as quickhand way to see how a team is doing independent of games played for a few years.

If you go by pts % the Kings are tied with the Canucks which differs from my list, however I think that's because the Kings are "on pace for" to eventually have the same win/loss record as the Canucks 5 games from now. I would argue that having a 2nd best in the league rate with 5 more games played in the bag is a slightly better position to be in.

Oh gotcha, I guess it does work as a decent shorthand for pace. Never really considered that