Canucks Army Report Cards: Nov. 19th, 2014

desjardins

Photo courtesy of Sportsnet.

For some of you, getting your report card was one of the most exciting times of the year. If your grades were good, maybe your parents would give you a little extra allowance to spend, or let you get that video game you wanted. For others, report card time was a tangled mess of gut-wrenching nervousness and oh my god Mr. Smith gave me a C- in English MY PARENTS ARE GOING TO KILL ME.

Either way, welcome to the Canucks Army Weekly Report Card, where we’ll take all that repressed childhood anxiety, bottle it back up, and apply it to your (presumably) favourite hockey team instead. 

Read past the jump!

A bit of housekeeping before we begin: although it’s Wednesday today, this series will be running Mondays from now on. Also, when you disagree with something (and you will), be sure to let us know in the comments!

*Need help with some of the fancy stats abbreviations and definitions, click here first

HSedin

The Canucks’ best player has been Henrik Sedin. The sky is blue.

DSedin

In an unexpected twist, the Sedins are actually really good at killing penalties.

RVrbata

ABurrows

CHiggins

JHansen

No points and pretty fantastic possession numbers. Or as Thom Drance calls it, “an elite first line winger.”

NBonino

Nick Bonino looks like he’s starting to remember that he’s Nick Bonino.

SMatthias

Just when you think Shawn Matthias is bad, he goes and has a week like this and you’re like “YES DO THAT MORE.”

DDorsett

If you don’t break the Glass ceiling, you fail fancystats. No exceptions.

BRichardson

Brad Richardson isn’t a 3rd line C. Except if you’re playing the Senators and Coyotes.

LVey

BHorvat

I don’t want to alarm anyone, but John Scott has infinity percent more points than Bo Horvat does this season, and in four fewer pro games too.

BDeFazio

NJensen

This is a bit of a test run, but we’ll be rolling out player report cards every Monday morning from now on, including player grades for defensemen and goalies too. Grades are totally subjective, but generally based on how a player performs relative to their role. A 3rd liner may get an “A” for one goal in two games, but a 1st liner with PP time may be given a “B” for the same stat line. Feel free to argue about them. 

If you have a funny or insightful comment about a player’s week that was, post it in a future postgame thread or send it to me over Twitter, and a player might see it on a future report card. Keep an eye out!

  • NM001

    This grading should occur over a longer period measured by number of games (i.e. every 10 games). If I want an assessment of a player’s performance over a calendar week I will read the Province.

  • NM001

    Homer is spot on. Good concept but it will be watered down every week. Make it a standardized amount of games, gives you more power to compare report cards and gives you more time to write something meaningful.

  • Smithertime

    This website has become obsessed with advanced statistics to the point that a website that was once must-read daily, has become something that I might check once every 3 weeks if I happen to remember.

    Look, advanced statistics add to our knowledge. They are worth comparing to the eye-test, and if things jive, you can draw a more significant conclusion. But I often feel that some of the bloggers here simply look at numbers and think they can infer the entire narrative from there.

    For example, Derek Dorsett is not a particularly strong Advanced Stats player and so he gets a low grade. I have been impressed with him nearly every shift I have seen.

    I would like to add that the stats community forgets that these are people playing the game, not automatons. So a player like Dorsett who is fast, can get in on the forecheck and lay a hit (creating turnovers) and plays like he’s 10 feet tall impacts the psychology of the team.

    My further sense is that those who obsess over advanced statistics (and I’m not opposed to their use, but they should be supplementary), never played hockey at any decent level. You just can’t reduce human life to numbers and percentages.

    Not to go crass, but I kind of compare it to the engineering student in his basement trying to create a theoretical framework for talking to the opposite sex while the rest of us are out there getting laid.

    • Smithertime

      Agreed Dorsett looks decent using the eye test, but using that same test he sure takes a lot of really dumb penalties. I have seen him skate out from the box following a goal too many times this season.