Post-Game Talk: [GM 6] Canucks lose to Sabres | 1 - 5 (Garland)

[Dr Black]

Basically two key players (Miller and Demko) have been horrible.

Team overall is driving slightly above-average metrics at ES. We’ve been incredibly unlucky.

It’s the sort of 6-game stretch that is slightly worrisome if it happens in January but an absolute calamity if it happens in October.

Team does seem absolutely broken and fragile in 3rd periods and collapse as soon as something goes wrong.

I think Demko has been average. The problem with that is we got used to Demko regularly standing on his head and stealing games. Going from that to mediocre is very noticeable.

Miller on the other hand has been much worse. Not only is he not putting up points, he is also a turnover machine. Add to that, he has a tendency to pout. Worse yet, he argued with Luke Shen after Luke rightfully gave him shit for poor puck management. That was the time for Miller to be humble, not argue back right in front of the TV cameras and an arena full of fans.

 

[ChuckNorris4Cup]

The PP in the 3rd down by 2 goals and you generate 0 shots tells it all, it felt like deja vu under Green.

 

[tantalum]

The PP in the 3rd down by 2 goals and you generate 0 shots tells it all, it felt like deja vu under Green.

I think what says it all is after 6 games the coach is telling the players to look in the mirror because they quit.

This is a coach that a few weeks ago they were all saying how much they love to play for him etc. throwing those things at them. It’s significant.

 

[EpochLink]

Who the f*** is the social media person for the Canucks!? Stop posting

 

[Hit the post]

Who the f*** is the social media person for the Canucks!? Stop posting

y2k?

 

[MS]

The metrics I see on natural stat trick have them in the bottom half of the league at ES. Certainly not above average.

SCF%= 47.5 % (high danger <45%)
XGF% = 47 % (actual 46).

They aren’t unlucky. They have received the ES performance they have earned. And then the other stuff has been awful. This isn’t a team that is flying at ES or is above average at ES. They aren’t. They at best tread water at ES and it’s almost solely down to one line (Pettersson) things look as good as they do.

The numbers I saw were better than that and had them around 15th.

But whatever - they've been very unlucky. Our goaltending has dropped an overall .852. When you look at how the team has played, if they'd received even meh .900 goaltending we'd have 5 or 6 points. When you get a number like that, it's either unsustainably bad goaltending or unsustainably bad luck.

This has been a totally different start than some of the debacles in prior years - especially the 20-21 team that was bleeding 10+ odd-man rushes/game. This start has been kind of iffy but we simply haven't had the goaltending advantage that everyone expected.

 

[pitseleh]

The metrics I see on natural stat trick have them in the bottom half of the league at ES. Certainly not above average.

SCF%= 47.5 % (high danger <45%)
XGF% = 47 % (actual 46).

They aren’t unlucky. They have received the ES performance they have earned. And then the other stuff has been awful. This isn’t a team that is flying at ES or is above average at ES. They aren’t. They at best tread water at ES and it’s almost solely down to one line (Pettersson) things look as good as they do.

Yeah, generally the majority of their numbers - ES, PP, PK, goaltending - fall within the 15-22 range, basically the 25-50th percentile.

A few other things to consider:

- their Corsi and Fenwick numbers are much stronger if you look at score adjusted stats, which is important given the amount of time they’ve spent leading. But their other numbers are about the same. Seems consistent with people seeing them generating lower quality chances with their shots. Will be interesting to follow if that holds.

- this has been a softer stretch in the schedule so the fact they aren’t generating better results is more concerning.

 

[MS]

Yeah, generally the majority of their numbers - ES, PP, PK, goaltending - fall within the 15-22 range, basically the 25-50th percentile.

A few other things to consider:

- their Corsi and Fenwick numbers are much stronger if you look at score adjusted stats, which is important given the amount of time they’ve spent leading. But their other numbers are about the same. Seems consistent with people seeing them generating lower quality chances with their shots. Will be interesting to follow if that holds.

- this has been a softer stretch in the schedule so the fact they aren’t generating better results is more concerning.

This is basically my point, though.

If they're slightly below-average overall or slightly above-average when you look at score-adjusted, I think most people here would have said that this team would end up being in a pretty good position at the end of the season if we were a pretty average ES team, given our perceived goaltending advantage.

I'm not saying we've played super-well or anything. I just don't think we've played anywhere near as bad as our record. To me this has been an overall kind of meh start that has turned into a 'disaster' based on some outlier small sample size stuff happening, especially in terms of the goaltending. Like, .852.

 

[Melvin]

I mean it's hard to win with a 55% PK.

Even with last year's league-worst 73.5%, it's a difference of 3-4 goals at this point of the season. Our PP has also been poor, and we're one of the 5 teams who has already given two shorties.

So we can argue about our 5v5 play all day, but we have the worst overall special teams in the NHL.

 

[TruGr1t]

I mean it's hard to win with a 55% PK.

Even with last year's league-worst 73.5%, it's a difference of 3-4 goals at this point of the season. Our PP has also been poor, and we're one of the 5 teams who has already given two shorties.

So we can argue about our 5v5 play all day, but we have the worst overall special teams in the NHL.

Basically everything said in the last few posts mostly comes down to the roster construction is terrible and they clearly have … whatever you want to call them … dressing room problems or whatever.

These high-level stats don’t necessarily reflect the organization is dysfunctional.

 

[pitseleh]

This is basically my point, though.

If they're slightly below-average overall or slightly above-average when you look at score-adjusted, I think most people here would have said that this team would end up being in a pretty good position at the end of the season if we were a pretty average ES team, given our perceived goaltending advantage.

I'm not saying we've played super-well or anything. I just don't think we've played anywhere near as bad as our record. To me this has been an overall kind of meh start that has turned into a 'disaster' based on some outlier small sample size stuff happening, especially in terms of the goaltending. Like, .852.

I certainly agree they’re definitely not playing as poorly as their record shows.

I’m not sure they’re tracking well on the whole even assuming the goaltending gets back to normal - without material improvement they are probably still only fighting for a 7/8 seed at best.

Definitely too early to be drawing firm conclusions on anything.

 

[me2]

- this has been a softer stretch in the schedule so the fact they aren’t generating better results is more concerning.

Somewhere down the track we get hit with our first hard stretch, and that is Nov 12- Nov 26

Leafs
Bruins
Buffalo
Kings
Knights
Avs
Knights

Easier, not much

Sharks
Caps
Panthers

10 games against 1 very bad team, one team on the up, and 8 playoffs teams looking for the playoffs and most getting in.

The Canucks needs to have to have righted the ship by Nov 10 and regained the lost ground. They need to to .500 plus before going into that stretch.

 

[CanucksSayEh]

Best players are letting the team down.

Simply cant win with a PK that gives up atleast 1 goal every game. Dead last again. There are teams still that haven't allowed a PPG.

It's really not much of an ask to get some individual performances to steal a win. None of the games so far have even needed a real "steal". No one looks hungry for a goal, just passing it around instead of taking it upon themselves.

Demko has been brutal. Pretty much every player can have a rough start without such consequence, but not the goalie. We can't afford this, dude needs to wake the *** up.

 

[ChuckNorris4Cup]

I think what says it all is after 6 games the coach is telling the players to look in the mirror because they quit.

This is a coach that a few weeks ago they were all saying how much they love to play for him etc. throwing those things at them. It’s significant.

What I was implying, it's not the coach it's the players just same old same old, under a different coach. This is all on the players, and I agree with Bruce they need to look into the mirror, this is all on them now, no more blame game anywhere else.

 

[tantalum]

This is basically my point, though.

If they're slightly below-average overall or slightly above-average when you look at score-adjusted, I think most people here would have said that this team would end up being in a pretty good position at the end of the season if we were a pretty average ES team, given our perceived goaltending advantage.

I'm not saying we've played super-well or anything. I just don't think we've played anywhere near as bad as our record. To me this has been an overall kind of meh start that has turned into a 'disaster' based on some outlier small sample size stuff happening, especially in terms of the goaltending. Like, .852.

The problem is we have seen this time and again. They love to find ways to lose. The only time they consistently strung things together was when the were dead and buried, made a coaching change and played with zero pressure. And it was still predicated on obscene high danger save% from the goaltending and best in the past half decade performances from other players.

Yes the goaltending has been poor, however on the road trip they faced poor goaltending themselves. We can talk about the PK being absurdly low…perhaps it is. But we are at the point in the last 90 games or so where it’s been historically bad for 30-40% of that time. These things to me are no longer abnormal occurences that will have a substantial correction to expect things will right themselves.

They are a middling team that needs everything to go right for them to hit 95-100 points (playoff position). The flip side is that an 80 point team is also a potential reality. I don’t think the start looks any better at 1-3-2 than 0-4-2 which is really the hairs that are being split here because I don’t think they have played at a level in any aspect to deserve more than 4 points through 6 games.

 

[bossram]

This is basically my point, though.

If they're slightly below-average overall or slightly above-average when you look at score-adjusted, I think most people here would have said that this team would end up being in a pretty good position at the end of the season if we were a pretty average ES team, given our perceived goaltending advantage.

I'm not saying we've played super-well or anything. I just don't think we've played anywhere near as bad as our record. To me this has been an overall kind of meh start that has turned into a 'disaster' based on some outlier small sample size stuff happening, especially in terms of the goaltending. Like, .852.

I mean, they're a mediocre team. That's what people should've expected. That's what I was saying in the offseason.

If you're a mediocre team, you need a bunch of things to break right to make the playoffs. If things break the wrong way, you're sunk.

Well, they broke wrong. This was always my indictment of the team.

 

[MS]

The problem is we have seen this time and again. They love to find ways to lose. The only time they consistently strung things together was when the were dead and buried, made a coaching change and played with zero pressure. And it was still predicated on obscene high danger save% from the goaltending and best in the past half decade performances from other players.

Yes the goaltending has been poor, however on the road trip they faced poor goaltending themselves. We can talk about the PK being absurdly low…perhaps it is. But we are at the point in the last 90 games or so where it’s been historically bad for 30-40% of that time. These things to me are no longer abnormal occurences that will have a substantial correction to expect things will right themselves.

They are a middling team that needs everything to go right for them to hit 95-100 points (playoff position). The flip side is that an 80 point team is also a potential reality. I don’t think the start looks any better at 1-3-2 than 0-4-2 which is really the hairs that are being split here because I don’t think they have played at a level in any aspect to deserve more than 4 points through 6 games.

As I've said to others, I hate this argument that the 2020-21 Canucks were the 'real' Canucks and the 2022 Canucks were a Bruce Bump fraud.

Yes, there might have been an artificial bump of sorts from the coaching change etc.

But there was also equally clearly an artificial splat post-bubble where the team and players were miserable playing under a rudderless ship and poor coach and virtually everyone was underachieving. The performances between the start of the shortened season until the firings were not representative of the actual quality of the roster.

And as I've said before, the biggest reason for the improved performances last year wasn't LOL BRUCE THERE IT IS. It's that the team's best and most important player went from 18 months of playing like absolute trash (or being hurt) to looking like a superstar again. And he's carried that forward into this season.

This team on merit should be 2-3-1 or something and we should still be in an evaluation phase. But they've had some bizarre (and in the case of goaltending, totally unexpected) small sample stuff happen leading to the 0-4-2 record.

 

[MS]

I mean, they're a mediocre team. That's what people should've expected. That's what I was saying in the offseason.

If you're a mediocre team, you need a bunch of things to break right to make the playoffs. If things break the wrong way, you're sunk.

Well, they broke wrong. This was always my indictment of the team.

Our 3 best players last year were :

1) JT Miller
2) Thatcher Demko
3) Quinn Hughes

In a tiny sample size, two of those players have had an absolutely shocking and unexpected terrible run of play and the other has clearly been playing hurt and has been missing practices etc. since the preseason.

There are zero teams in the NHL that would look anything other than mediocre when 3 of their 4 best players perform at the level we've seen from these guys so far.

This team may very well be mediocre. But I'm not going to be posting hot takes yet after these 6 very weird games.

 

[David71]

why not try reuniting the lotto line together... had sucess before. miller petey boeser. get those two going. then u have micheveyev/horvat/garland.

 

[4Twenty]

the Canucks have been a bottom 10 team for a long time. Its not just the 20/21 version. It’s the 2018-2022 version.

At this early stage this looks like more of that. And the 60 games while out of it in 21/22 look like the mirage.

 

[MS]

the Canucks have been a bottom 10 team for a long time. Its not just the 20/21 version. It’s the 2018-2022 version.

At this early stage this looks like more of that. And the 60 games while out of it in 21/22 look like the mirage.

There are literally 3 players left on this team who were on the 18-19 Canucks. That season doesn't have anything to do with anything at this point.

19-20 Canucks were not a bottom-10 team.

This group of players stunk from January 2021 when the post-bubble season started until December 2021 when Benning and Green were fired. And it's pretty obvious that there were external factors in why they stunk when morale collapsed after the 'shocking retool' and Pettersson went AWOL for that entire calendar year.

You can't say that the 2021 Canucks were the 'real' Canucks and that the 2022 Canucks were a Bruce There It Is fraud. You can't write off one stretch as overachieving unless you acknowledge that the other stretch was underachieving for the reverse reasons.

 

[4Twenty]

There are literally 3 players left on this team who were on the 18-19 Canucks. That season doesn't have anything to do with anything at this point.

19-20 Canucks were not a bottom-10 team.

This group of players stunk from January 2021 when the post-bubble season started until December 2021 when Benning and Green were fired. And it's pretty obvious that there were external factors in why they stunk when morale collapsed after the 'shocking retool' and Pettersson went AWOL for that entire calendar year.

You can't say that the 2021 Canucks were the 'real' Canucks and that the 2022 Canucks were a Bruce There It Is fraud. You can't write off one stretch as overachieving unless you acknowledge that the other stretch was underachieving for the reverse reasons.

There’s literally more than 3. But the point went over your head.


The Canucks have been a dog shit bottom 10 team for nearly a decade. The 19/20 season they were 15th and plummeting the standings. Like usual.

I don’t really see it as underachieving. It’s what they’re used to achieving.

The bubble and Bruce bounce look like clear anomalies at this point. You seem to have fallen hard for those 60 games.

 

[MS]

There’s literally more than 3. But the point went over your head.


The Canucks have been a dog shit bottom 10 team for nearly a decade. The 19/20 season they were 15th and plummeting the standings. Like usual.

I don’t really see it as underachieving. It’s what they’re used to achieving.

The bubble and Bruce bounce look like clear anomalies at this point. You seem to have fallen hard for those 60 games.

No, there are literally 3. Horvat, Pettersson, Boeser. Demko/Pearson/Hughes joined late in the season with the team already miles out of the playoffs and had zero impact on their record that year.

Of course they've been bad for a decade. But what happened in 2015 has literally zilch to do with what's happening with this team now and evaluation of that team. To even suggest that to be the case is ... bizarre.

This team was in an (accidental) tank from 2015-2019.

We started coming out of it in 19-20 and had a solid season as the high picks taken in those poor years matured and hit their strides.

If the team had been properly managed, we should have had $20+ million in cap space for 20-21 to augment that promising team and take it to the next level. Instead, we ended up in comical cap crunch and had to cull multiple quality veterans. The dressing room collapsed, morale collapsed. Further veterans wanted out. Most of the key remaining players (Pettersson, Miller, Myers, Pearson, Hughes) saw their play regress badly.

This period lasted 80 games and 11 months.

This core has basically been together for ~220 games since the summer of 2019. You're taking that 80 game period as the 'real Canucks' and trying to argue a 140-game period for the same core before/after is a fraud. It's ridiculous.

I'm not basing anything on 'Bruce bump'. I based my expectations by looking at this roster on paper, and based on Pettersson's return to form. This team should have one of the best 1-2-3 punches in the NHL at C and everyone expected elite goaltending. Instead, 2 of the team's best 3 players are playing by far the worst hockey of their careers and they've had small-sample terrible luck.

 

[Hit the post]

Basically two key players (Miller and Demko) have been horrible.

Team overall is driving slightly above-average metrics at ES. We’ve been incredibly unlucky.

It’s the sort of 6-game stretch that is slightly worrisome if it happens in January but an absolute calamity if it happens in October.

Team does seem absolutely broken and fragile in 3rd periods and collapse as soon as something goes wrong.

Urban legend has it that Napoleon Bonapart asked this about a prospective general for promotion "Is he lucky"? Not whether he was any good. However, there is no proof Napoleon actually said this

"Give me lucky Generals - This is quote that is often attributed to Napoleon, but there is no evidence to suggest he ever said the words. If he did, then as an avid amateur historian he probably based them on something Cardinal Mazarin, chief minister of France in the 17th century, said.

Mazarin had noted that one must not ask of a general “Est-il habile?” (“Is he skillful?”), but rather “Est-il heureux?” (“Is he lucky?”)"

ok, history lesson over.

 

[Hit the post]

Markstroms's return from the Abyss to prominence when Vancouver sent him to Utica after camp broke in 2014-15 (Benning had 0 faith and I guess figured that would be the last he heard of him) was due to the work of Rollie. Day in and day out before practice began he was on the ice with Marky and day by day Marky became par excellence. He did a lot for Demko early on as well.

Rollie is an excellent teacher and strategist. Not many under his tutelage have failed.

Another random OT posting: wtf? Louis Rossmann "moved" to Texas?