19
Photo Credit: Anthony Gruppuso - USA TODAY Sports

Should Derrick Pouliot Feature in The Canucks Top-Six?

The greatest beneficiary of Quinn Hughes’ decision to return to the University of Michigan may just be Derrick Pouliot.

Quite frankly, it’s difficult to fathom a scenario where Troy Stecher, Derrick Pouliot and Quinn Hughes would have made up half of the Canucks’ defence group entering the 2018/19 season. Removing Hughes from the equation subdues the defence logjam and exacerbates the need for a puck-moving offensive defenceman of Pouliot’s nature. Whether Pouliot fits that role long-term is questionable, though in the interim he’s the best option the Canucks have. And if his performance this season serves as any indication, the team would be wise to give him another chance in the top-6.

Player GP G A P CF%
Derrick Pouliot 71 3 19 22 50.1

At 24-years-old, what you see is what you get with Derrick Pouliot. Unfortunately, it’s difficult to pinpoint precisely what the team has in the former first-round pick after an inconsistent season that featured just as many ups as it did downs.

Fortunately, aggregate data for the season paints a fairly accurate picture of both the value and shortcomings that Pouliot brings to the table with his skillset.

Number within brackets indicates ranking among Canucks defenders(minimum 100 minutes TOI) in each specified category

The question was never if Pouliot was good enough with the puck to make it as an NHL defender, but rather if those strengths could outweigh his flawed own zone play. As it pertains to his defending, the simple fact that he wasn’t a complete disaster this year constitutes a step in the right direction. In this case, Pouliot suppressed shot attempts at a better rate than any other Canucks’ defencemen, though the team’s high danger rate suggests that quality was an issue. In other words, while the team excelled at preventing the number of shot attempts allowed with Pouliot deployed, a significantly higher proportion of those attempts came from dangerous scoring areas. Such an assertion is corroborated by Micah McCurdy’s shot map visualization.

As is always the case, context is key and in this regard, Pouliot certainly received no favours. It’s true that he faced easier competition than most on the team, but the consensus from the analytics community remains that teammate quality is a more important factor given its more constant state. By that virtue, one would be within their rights to wonder if Pouliot would have fared better defensively without Michael Del Zotto as his most common partner. If Pouliot’s performance away from him holds any value, the answer’s an equivocal yes.

Data courtesy Natural Stattrick; xGF% pairing data via Corsica. Green indicates better performance relative to partnership; red indicates worse.

Pouliot’s on-ice results improved dramatically away from Del Zotto, while the latter’s play stayed more or less the same regardless of Pouliot’s presence. Most telling is that Pouliot conceded five fewer scoring chances per hour when on the ice with any defence partner not named Del Zotto.

This isn’t an indictment on Del Zotto, but rather evidence that it’s unwise to pair two defensively lacking blueliners together; with results showing that the pairing hurt Pouliot far more than it did Del Zotto. Moving forward, it’s a sign that perhaps Pouliot can deliver a better aggregate defensive showing with a more appropriate partner.

One key figure that you’ll notice missing is Pouliot’s raw goals against rate, which at 2.79 per 60 minutes of five-on-five play ranks last among Canucks’ defenders. It’s a paltry rate to be sure, but it bears mentioning that Pouliot suffered from the 24th lowest on-ice save percentage among defencemen who played at least 500 minutes in the league. Research into the matter of on-ice save percentages suggests that anomalies likely derive from poor luck rather than substandard defending in the vast majority of cases.

Given that Pouliot’s on-ice save percentage hasn’t been an issue in the 67 NHL games that he suited up in prior to joining Vancouver, I’m inclined to believe that it’ll normalize over time. I’m especially confident in that belief because expected goal models and shots are better predictors for future scoring than goals themselves — both shares(CF%, xGF%) by which Pouliot shines brightly relative to the team.

Much like it is with Pouliot’s defensive play, his offensive performance is more complex to tackle than one might think. For starters, seven of Pouliot’s even-strength points came via secondary assists. Research conducted by analytics expert Eric Tulsky theorizes that these assists are largely random and unrelated to one’s talent or actual influence on a goal. This is bad news for Pouliot as refining his production to only include primary points leaves him with just five at even-strength — only one more than Erik Gudbranson. In fact, Pouliot’s five-on-five primary points per hour rate ranks second-last among Canucks’ blueliners and 194th out of 212 league-wide defenders.

Adding a layer of confusion is that Pouliot actually generated shot assists at a rate commensurate with the top 15th percentile of league defenders according to Ryan Stimson’s passing project.

So why was Pouliot unable to register primary points during five-on-five play? Well, for one the Canucks converted on just 6% of their shots with Pouliot deployed — a conversion rate that slots Pouliot 16th lowest out of that same group of 212 NHL defencemen. The difference between Pouliot and some of the other rearguards near the bottom of the pile is that the team frequently generated scoring chances with Pouliot on the ice.

While his even-strength production leaves doubt, there’s no question that Pouliot excelled at manning the second power-play unit. His primary points rate on the man advantage eclipses Alex Edler’s by more than half a point per hour, despite the fact that the latter had more talent to work with on the first unit.

Where Pouliot’s individual contributions become easier to quantify is with his work in transition. Starting from the defensive zone, Pouliot did an excellent job of exiting the zone with possession of the puck — his 41% success rate topping the Canucks’ defence corps in Corey Sznajder’s sample. Unfortunately, Pouliot also developed a nasty habit of turning the puck over; failing to exit the zone 29.3% of the time he gained possession in his own zone. For reference, that failure percentage is only marginally better than Luca Sbisa’s disastrous turnover mark from 2016/17. It’s clear that Pouliot has the raw skills to be an effective puck mover, but he needs to work on processing the game and making safer decisions.

On the flipside, an area that stood out as an undeniable success was Pouliot’s proficiency at preventing controlled offensive zone entries.

Data via Corey Sznajder; visualization courtesy CJ Turtoro

In January, I pegged Pouliot’s ability to defend the rush as a chief reason for his defensive success to that point in the season. Back then, I didn’t have the microdata to support my theory, but now that it’s available, it’s evident that it aligns with my previous faith in his anticipation, gap control, and adept stickwork. All those qualities were flashed in the first three clips of the video compilation I made around the time of that article.

Pouliot’s plaudits in transition are a big reason why the Canucks were able to control possession and tilt the shot clock in the right direction with the 24-year-old on the ice. The last bit of that assertion is part of the reason why Pouliot owns the second best goals above replacement(GAR) mark among Canucks’ defencemen.

GAR data courtesy Chace McCallum, visualization via Bill Comeau

For those unfamiliar, GAR is a single, composite figure that takes a multitude of raw and on-ice metrics into account in an attempt to determine one’s net two-way impact relative to a replacement level player. Pouliot’s ranking among this group says more about the state of the Canucks’ backend than it does about the player himself, but it’s clear based on the data we’ve explored in this piece that the Canucks control play notably better with Pouliot on the ice than with him off.

Where Should Pouliot Slot Into the Top-Six Moving Forward?

So we’ve established that Pouliot deserves another shot in the top-six, but where exactly does he slot in and who should he play with?

One of the best uses for training camp is trying new line combinations and defence pairings heading into the regular season. Based on last season’s results, there are a few partners that Pouliot should audition alongside.

Alex Biega coupled with Pouliot to drive play remarkably well on the bottom pairing — owning a 50% or higher share of shot attempts, scoring chances, expected goals and actual scoring. Biega won’t feature in the top-six barring unforeseen circumstances, so it’s better to shift our focus to the other two names on the list.

32-year-old Alex Edler could prove to be a steady partner for Pouliot, with the latter’s aggressive neutral zone defending complementing Edler’s more passive approach. The raw on-ice numbers may not bear that out at first glance, though they’re more than respectable after accounting for their deployment as the team’s first-pairing following injuries to right-handed defencemen Chris Tanev and Troy Stecher. Most interesting about this situation is that Edler’s play suffered precipitously away from Pouliot.

It’s unlikely the two are reunited as it would require moving Pouliot to his off side and consequentially forcing one of Tanev, Stecher, or Gudbranson out of the lineup.

Speaking of Gudbranson, he looks to make the most sense as Pouliot’s partner given the likely construction of the rest of the defence corps. If we’re to trust the on-ice stats the duo posted in the limited time they spent together last season, they could prove to form a sound bottom pairing combination moving into the 2018/19 season. That’s all the Canucks can really hope for after a preceding campaign that saw the team cycle through various combinations with little success.

Author’s note: Since this article went well beyond the scope of a typical year in review piece, I decided it deserved its own standing. Given the article’s analysis of Pouliot’s play this year, there will be no additional year in review article for him.

  • Rodeobill

    I’m sold!
    Gudbranson it is! What a well thought out and written article. I have been thinking of Pouliot and Hutton as interchangable spare parts, and you, sir, have forced me to reconsider!

  • TheRealRusty

    Man I would love for Pouliot to be put in a position to succeed. Always thought that he would pair well with Tanev, wish our coaches would shake things up and give that pairing a try in the preseason. What is there to lose?

    • Harman Dayal

      Not a bad idea, but you have to keep in mind that Tanev’s pair is always going to be given shutdown duty. Is Pouliot suited for that? It would be a challenge and I’d much rather try some of the other combinations first.

      • Dirty30

        Given what you outlined for Pouliot he wouldn’t seem a good fit with Tanev. However, Burrows didn’t look like a good fit with the Sedins until he was.

        One of Pouliot’s strengths is preventing zone entries which would take some pressure off Tanev.

        The question then becomes what can the rest of the D handle?

        One can only hope Hutton turns his game around and Pouliot steps up and that would give the team 5 decent D: Tanev, Edler, Steiger, Hutton, Pouliot.

        • I like this quite a bit – a top four of Pouliot / Tanev and Edler / Stetcher would give the Canucks two D-pairings who are pretty good at preventing zone entries and moving the puck up the ice. Of course that leaves a Hutton / Gudbranson or Del Zotto / Gudbranson pairing to get absolutely eaten alive…

          • Dahlenfan

            Wow. I was just trying to project a decent top 6 out of this defense and I cant see it. In a perfect world you would have elder with tanev. But then you have to put stecher with mdz pouliot or Hutton on 2nd pair. Yikes. So then it has to be elder stecher. Pouliot/mdz with tanev and then pouliot/mdz/Hutton with guddy. Wow. I don’t see how we aren’t a bottom 5 team with that defense
            The only thing that could save us is if juolevi or sautner come into training camp and blows the doors off. That’s asking a lot. I am a huge canuck fan and I don’t mind one more year of sucking and picking up some picks for players at beginning of year and tdl. They need more out of Hutton out of every defenseman this year to flirt with .500. Good thing our forward grip at the AHL lvl is starting to good. We will have boeser and horvath and Peterson to look forward to. But man the forward grp for this year is looking pretty bleak too. Oh well. 19-20is the season when we start seeing things come to fruition. As long as JB stay patient like hes preaching
            Too bad what he says isn’t necessarily what he does

          • Bud Poile

            Tryamkin LHD
            Hughes LHD
            Juolevi LHD
            Utenen LHD
            Rathbone LHD

            MDZ and Guddy aren’t going anywhere until one or two legit RHD’s are NHL ready or traded for some LHD’s

          • Bud Poile

            Ooops should read Guddy isn’t going anywhere as a RHD.
            They can trade MDZ any time this coming season.
            Loads of LHD’s in the system.
            McEneny,Sauntner,Dirk,Brisebois,Cederholm and Stewart.
            Chatfield is the only young RHD in the system.

  • Jim "Dumpster Fire" Benning

    Canucks need puck moving dmen. Sign Jyrki Lumme, Jeff Brown and Christian Ehrhoff to league minimum deals and stash Guddy, and any other 2 (flip a coin it really doesn’t matter) in Utica.

  • Defenceman Factory

    Where Poulliot starts of course depends on how hard he, Hutton and Joulevi have worked over the summer. As Hutton hasn’t moved by now it should be safe to say he isn’t tradable. Hopefully he shows up in top shape and is highly effective starting in Utica. Joulevi’s surgery means he likely needs to be in Utica to start and it would be fine for him to stay there at least until the trade deadline. A top 6 role is Poulliot’s to lose. Hopefully he sticks and plays well enough to be a tradable asset.

    Only one of Edler, MDZ, Poulliot and Hutton are needed longer term. Hopefully Edler changes his tune and decides to waive his NTC. Two of the other 3 should also be traded based on value of return and not value to the team. The top two left side spots belong to Hughes and Joulevi in the future. Time to get some assets for the placeholders.

    • canuckfan

      Place holders do not have any trade value. Being a warm body to fill a position on a bottom team does not get noticed by opposing teams except as an area where Canucks are vulnerable when attacked. Hutton and Poulliot are going to be going at an open position head to head but it will be Juolevi who will win the spot playing with Tanev, Gudbranson will be paired with Edler and then Stecher and MDZ. Hutton the extra d man will likely be one who can play both sides as needed. Stecher may find himself battling for a position with Chatfield.
      As for trading MDZ may give us something at the trade deadline as he only has a year left on his contract , Edler will get an extension and will slide down the line up as Hughes and Juolevi get more and more ice time based on their performance. Jet Woo will end up pushing for a spot in the 19/20 season.

  • Chris the Curmudgeon

    Good analysis, thanks. One small quibble: benefactor =/= beneficiary. Pouliot was the beneficiary of Hughes’ decision, not the benefactor. Always drives me nuts.

  • Tedchinook

    I think the real answer on Pouliot is can he become consistent. Last year there were games he looked really good and games where he looked lost. He’s still young enough it could happen for him, but if he can play those good games night after night he will be a top 4 guy. If he can’t find that consistency then he becomes a placeholder as someone else put it.

  • Fred-65

    Pouliot has the tools and the IQ to be a prominent NHL player IMO. That’s not to say he’ll grasp the ring. He’s a player that I’m sure management are looking to see how he reports to camp. He’s on the cusp but it could go either way. That’s why he has a 1 year extension. It has to be exasperating to see all that talent not pout to full use

    • Cageyvet

      On the plus side, the whole “they are what they will always be by age 24” is just a statistic. I agree there’s still doubt with Pouliot, he hasn’t had that many games in the NHL. Pittsburgh could afford to give up on him, this team clearly has room to give him this season to prove he can hit another level. At least he has the tools, unlike too many on the squad. Fingers crossed.