Getting outshot a ton, is a F really the need?

[apollo18]

Unless what I have seen is a bias on what I have noticed but alot of the good teams or teams in general outshoot the canucks like crazy. I am a big believer in if you don't allow a shot, whether it is hq or lq, then the other team ofc cannot score

Rumbles are going around that canucks are in the lookout for a 2c or 2W however shouldn't the need be a top 2/3 D even if we have to overpay? I am definetly not in the mix for a player like Tanev (always injured and an offensive blackhole)

but am curious what others think regarding having a stronger D group - maybe canucks can pry Hanifin or a D out of CAR/CBJ etc?

Click to read more...

 

[CherryToke]

Absolutely need a top 4 shutdown dman as highest priority

 

[LuckyDay]

Shots on goal is easy to read stat because of the quantity but what it means is more complicated when you look at it on a team by team and goalie by goalie basis.

The Russians would never dump and chase it in the corner so the trick was to stand up to them in the blue line.
OTOH, they always thought a shot on goal was a good thing. Consequently, they gave up possession a lot on a low percentage chance and the play would turn around the other way quickly.

There are other factors regarding shots. Teams that are losing taking a lot more shots precisely because they are losing and the team winning is defending the lead, trapping the opposition into taking risky plays like having the D men press and gamble in low. If this fails they risk a very good chance going the other way when they trapped in the wrong zone.

Also, rebounds may be a weakness or even a strength of a goalie. Oversized equipment caused players like Roy and Luongo to fumbled a lot of rebounds but consequently they saved a lot because they were good and wore large equipment.
Other goalies like Barasso liked to kick rebounds up to the blue line. Demko likes to deflect them to the corner.
Nabakov invented the dead sweater technique where he allowed the puck to lose momentum instead of hard deflect so he could cover it quickly so he got fewer shots against him.

 

[Yultron]

We need a Second line Centre . Obviously yea a defenseman would be great but if we wanna stay the course with our young players and assets and win now then investing in a 2nd line centre is the way to go .

 

[Diversification]

Getting outshot is a consequence of 3 things:
1. Spending long stretches with the lead and the score effects that follow.
2. Being selective with our own shots that drives down our totals (and inflates PDO)
3. General team fatigue. When we manage to gain the lead, we sit on it to conserve energy as a way to manage our compressed schedule.

So, an extra depth dman would be nice as I’m not loving the list past Juulsen and Friedman. But what would be better is scoring depth to help out when our top players are marked in the playoffs.

 

[vancityluongo]

adding a shot blocking defenseman like prime tanev would absolutely help getting shots against down, but that player will be nearly impossible to acquire, even if they're somehow made available (trouba? brayden mcnabb?)

a true second line center would make a much bigger difference imo

 

[ziploc]

Why not both? If we get another D injury we could start getting into trouble rapidly. But we also need some kind of tweaking to that second line, and even if this is internally done we will likely need another forward to fill the gap that is created.

 

[Canucker]

IMO...the priorities are...

1) A top 4 RHD who can kill penalties, can't be a one-dimensional player, needs to be able to move the puck and not be a deadbeat on offense and has to be able to defend. (ie Alexandre Carrier)

2) A 2nd line RH Center who can play 2-way hockey, kill penalties and win draws. (ie Lindholm)

No interest in any wingers.

 

[Wisp]

i think probably score effects is skewing your perception of this a bunch. Canucks take the lead almost immediately and spend the rest of the game defending. like, we have so little data for this team when they are trailing or even with the score tied.

the lines getting outshot the most are the top lines. the bottom six is fine. does a defensemen fix that? I don't think so. one of the biggest issues is the Miller/Lotto line is probably miscast as a tough minutes matchup line. Part of the way the Canucks handled it on the road trip is they stacked the Lotto line and out-talented whoever they matched against them, beating them on the score sheet if not the shot clock.

Adding a high-end top 6 forward would help a lot. Would let them deploy the lotto line more and still have a secondary scoring threat on another line. Or it gives Pettersson more support if he's anchoring a second line. Personally I would love a 2 way center who can take some match up minutes off Miller/Lotto lines plate.

 

[Shareefruck]

I think a top 4 defenseman is a bigger need than a second line center (which I find blown out of proportion), personally. Not just because of the shots thing, but because our PK is only average, and because Myers is a prime target to be exposed in the playoffs and you NEED a contingency plan for a guy like that faltering in pressure situations, IMO.

A second line center is simply just a luxury. Every other team looks at having both Miller and Pettersson as an embarrassment of riches. With the Lotto line together (no reason to think that's set in stone), you look at the optics of Blueger and Suter as the 2nd/3rd line C and think eww, but the Joshua - Blueger - Garland line has looked more than adept as a 2nd line, and shows no signs of slowing down, really. And any limitations the third line has is mitigated by the fact that the fourth line is every bit as good. And even if the Garland line does not keep this up and reverts back to a really good 3rd line, you can still split the Lotto line (Pettersson hasn't found an ideal line yet, but it doesn't even look outright terrible as a second line, and there's a decent chance Mikheyev/Kuzmenko can somewhat return to form towards the end of the season).

I do think forward depth is necessary, because Aman playing with everyone healthy and basically no injury depth after that beyond AHL call-ups is really really bad, but that doesn't need to be a second line center, it can be a second line winger or just bottom six depth. We gave up Beauvillier and Studnicka and replaced them with nothing, so I think you do need to pick up some forward bodies, at least.

How easy it is to get them is another story.

 

[PG Canuck]

Why not both? If we get another D injury we could start getting into trouble rapidly. But we also need some kind of tweaking to that second line, and even if this is internally done we will likely need another forward to fill the gap that is created.

Cap space

 

[Just A Bit Outside]

100% 2nd line player who can play C and W.

Juulsen has proven his ability to play bottom 6 minutes and Friedman has shown well in spurts too.

Myers is going nowhere.

So unless you're getting a Top 4 RHD can minimal costs, I'd rather focus on strengthening upfront.

 

[Billy Kvcmu]

Don't be a lazy stats watcher and actually watch the game

Most of our opponents' shots came from low chance area, it's how Tocchet's system works

 

[Josepho]

Our 5v5 xGF% is exactly 16th in the league, between the Rangers and Bruins.

 

[Jay Cee]

The team is what it is on defense now and they did a pretty good job in a short period of time with the absolute shit they had to work with. I would love to take out Myers and replace him but I don't see that as being so realistic at this time. On forward Kuze isn't working for this group and there needs to be a change to someone else who fits a bit better with the team. A second line center would be really great. Time will tell!

 

[bossram]

Our 5v5 xGF% is exactly 16th in the league, between the Rangers and Bruins.

This is the "PDO Zone" of consistently good teams that outperform their shot based metrics with efficient shooting and good goaltending.

Getting outshot, given the reasons many mentioned above, is not a huge issue.

 

[Nucker101]

Our 5v5 xGF% is exactly 16th in the league, between the Rangers and Bruins.

Post this over on the main board Canucks thread:

"Canucks rank 11th in the league at xgf% at 5v5 when the score is within 1 goal according to NST as of this post (they've also spent quite a bit more time being up by 1 than being down by 1 so if anything score effects hurt them a bit here). That's ahead of teams like Boston, Toronto, NYR, etc and close behind Vegas and Colorado.

Now factor in their scoring talent and top tier goalie on top of the fact that they've spent more time up by 1 instead of down by 1 and I'd say it's reasonable to expect them outperform that 11th ranked xgf% by a bit, so in my opinion this a top 10 team that's overperforming as a top 3 team.

So this is really a top 10 team instead of a top 3 team? Oh the horror!

Edit: and for you salty Oilers fans, you guys actually rank #1 in xgf% when the score is within 1 so that's pretty promising for you. But again the Canucks have spent 200 more minutes leading by 1 compared to the Oilers so that skews things a bit."

Also people also need to get over the shot attempts = possession mentality. I heard Kevin Woodley on 650 a couple of weeks ago and IIRC he said that private models show that the Canucks are top 10 in average time spent per game in the opponent's zone, that's what possession literally means, not shot attempts.


TLDR: This team's record/goal differential is inflated, but it's still pretty easily a top 10 team.

 

[Hoglander]

Pick up a depth dman, worry about a top 4 Myers replacement in the offseason.

Move Kuzmenko out to acquire a rugged digger that isn't a rental, to line up with EP and Boeser (poor man's lotto line), then put Miller between Garland and Joshua.

Call up Podkolzin, and have Blueger between him and Mikheyev. I like Blueger's game, and think he'd play well with virtually anybody.

Other line: Suter/Lafferty/Hoglander. Decent chemistry with good offensive puck-possession capabilities.

Extra: Aman

Don't go all in on rentals

 

[iceburg]

Shots on goal is easy to read stat because of the quantity but what it means is more complicated when you look at it on a team by team and goalie by goalie basis.

The Russians would never dump and chase it in the corner so the trick was to stand up to them in the blue line.
OTOH, they always thought a shot on goal was a good thing. Consequently, they gave up possession a lot on a low percentage chance and the play would turn around the other way quickly.

There are other factors regarding shots. Teams that are losing taking a lot more shots precisely because they are losing and the team winning is defending the lead, trapping the opposition into taking risky plays like having the D men press and gamble in low. If this fails they risk a very good chance going the other way when they trapped in the wrong zone. Nabakov invented the dead sweater technique where he allowed the puck to lose momentum instead of hard deflect so he could cover it quickly so he got fewer shots against him.

Also, rebounds may be a weakness or even a strength of a goalie. Oversized equipment caused players like Roy and Luongo to fumbled a lot of rebounds but consequently they saved a lot because they were good and wore large equipment.
Other goalies like Barasso liked to kick rebounds up to the blue line. Demko likes to deflect them to the corner.

I would add that, in Tocchet's system, giving up half the ice to prevent cross ice chances at least theoretically should lead to more low danger chances. i.e not shot prevention but high danger prevention. I would need to dig into the fancy stats to see if that is what is actually happening.

 

[Peen]

Post this over on the main board Canucks thread:

"Canucks rank 11th in the league at xgf% at 5v5 when the score is within 1 goal according to NST as of this post (they've also spent quite a bit more time being up by 1 than being down by 1 so if anything score effects hurt them a bit here). That's ahead of teams like Boston, Toronto, NYR, etc and close behind Vegas and Colorado.

Now factor in their scoring talent and top tier goalie on top of the fact that they've spent more time up by 1 instead of down by 1 and I'd say it's reasonable to expect them outperform that 11th ranked xgf% by a bit, so in my opinion this a top 10 team that's overperforming as a top 3 team.

So this is really a top 10 team instead of a top 3 team? Oh the horror!

Edit: and for you salty Oilers fans, you guys actually rank #1 in xgf% when the score is within 1 so that's pretty promising for you. But again the Canucks have spent 200 more minutes leading by 1 compared to the Oilers so that skews things a bit."

Also people also need to get over the shot attempts = possession mentality. I heard Kevin Woodley on 650 a couple of weeks ago and IIRC he said that private models show that the Canucks are top 10 in average time spent per game in the opponent's zone, that's what possession literally means, not shot attempts.


TLDR: This team's record/goal differential is inflated, but it's still pretty easily a top 10 team.

Thanks for pointing this out. Kind of tracks with my eye test. I never felt when watching that this was a bottom half team at evens.

I’ve always said in the past that if you are a true top 8 team in the league, you need to be going all in. You just never know about next year.

Now given the uncertainty with EP, the OEL buyout penalty in Y3/4, you have to be careful with moving prospects you think have a shot to be big ELC producers. But it seems they know that and the murmurs seem to be that they’d only do that in a deal for someone with term.

 

[Raistlin]

with all the travel this team does, a top shutdown Dman is of the highest priority. Soucy is a bit of a letdown so far, if he cannot stay healthy, it makes an extra PK-able defensemen much more of a necessity. There will be no doubt injuries along the way with travel and the lack of rest time in a playoff series, unless its Kraken -> Kings -> Oilers -> Leafs for them. The second line C is a luxury because its proven at the beginning of the season that the lotto line is a luxury, and they do have forward depth when all is said and done. Getting a guy like Tanev or (Ferraro? Lyabushkin?) would ensure that we dont have to overplay the first pair in a run. (I am assuming that they will have a long run with all the all-in talk)

 

[apollo18]

IMO...the priorities are...

1) A top 4 RHD who can kill penalties, can't be a one-dimensional player, needs to be able to move the puck and not be a deadbeat on offense and has to be able to defend. (ie Alexandre Carrier)

2) A 2nd line RH Center who can play 2-way hockey, kill penalties and win draws. (ie Lindholm)

No interest in any wingers.

1. Is exactly why I don’t want Tanev, he was trash for offence

 

[WTG]

I'll say it: the cope I hear from people about "high-quality shots" "hur hur PDO is bullshit" is nonsense. This team absolutely needs to do a better job evening out the shot share; it is a problem. Canucks are 20th in the league, so bottom-half in allowing high-danger chances. The Canucks are 10th in high-danger chances, and it's not enough to justify getting pummeled in shots.

Right now, this team is about a 3rd seed playoff team on an incredible heater. Next year, I'd expect them to contend for the 3rd playoff seed. Myers can't transition the puck. Zadorov can, or at least he does a better job than Myers. Soucy seems like he can, but he's injured.

To build for the future, you need to bring someone in the same age as the core who can transition the puck so they don't get hemmed in. Myers is 33 going on 34.

I think it's an absolute joke that they are now supposedly in on Guentzel; it's an idiot idea and incredibly short-sighted. I refuse to believe that they are actually going to do this. It's all just media speculation.

 

[rea]

When playoffs come they will need the extra dmen, and up front I feel a 2c isn't the necessity more than heavy big bodies. Playoff hockey is a diff beast, and we would need the guys up front to help fight those battles. Losing dmen to penalties is the worst without the depth, and since ours seem to fight all the battles, it's prob a good idea to get a cheaper heavy fast up front and depth in back, 2c is not a priority imo. It just helps load the top line but it wasnt like they weren't producing pre being put together again.

 

[Grumbler]

The answer is replace Myers.