But if you assumed that those numbers were correct, and they were in fact super not correct, should you not reevaluate your opinion of the season given that your sense of how things went is detached from reality? They were 5 games under .500 when they went into the eventual covid break, and they were 5 games under .500 after 19 games.
You're basing your assessment of the year off of a belief that after the first 19 games, they jumped to playing .66whatever hockey until the break instead of the reality of a much less significant improvement to .500 hockey during that stretch. If your sense of the season was correct, you'd have realized that OP's numbers looked unrealistic.
Edit: Saw the link you added. So Demko went .950sv in March, and you've previously said that Holtby was also really good after the first stretch of the season, but the team still lost as many games as they won in that period. What are we supposed to expect to have happened "with a rested Demko" after the break to lead to a big surge in the standings? Demko would have just posted shutouts all the way to the cup?
Furthermore, the "back towards the playoff race" sportsnet article linked from that THW piece is from March 18th. The team then proceeded to drop 3 of 4 to go into their break, so it's not like they were roaring into the break nipping on heels.
This is where the Canucks were at heading into their break, rather than the article you posted that was a week before the break. Iain MacIntyre doesn't seem to support your assertion that the team was "back into the playoff race" when they had to stop for covid:
Canucks snap back to reality after another lopsided loss to Jets