logo
CanucksArmy has no direct affiliation to the Vancouver Canucks, Canucks Sports & Entertainment, NHL, or NHLPA
Accounting for Variations in the Canucks Possession Statistics
alt
Jeremy Davis
Nov 4, 2015, 17:21 ESTUpdated:
Comments
The completion of the first month of the hockey season is always a good time for reflection. How did the Canucks fair in the opening month? How do they stack up against competition around the league?
I’m a stats-loving blogger writing for a stats-loving website, so obviously I’m curious to see where the Canucks sit in terms of possession numbers. Research has shown time and time again the relationship between controlling a higher ratio of shot attempts and long term success. It’s not the be-all-end-all, but it can be a very telling statistic.
So it’s hard to be anything but disappointed after finding the Canucks down near the bottom of the league in Corsi. So I thought to myself, how can I manipulate these fancy stats to make myself feel better? What I found were a number of peculiarities in their possession numbers that warranted further investigation.
Despite their current win-loss record and favourable position in the standings, the Canucks have changed few minds about where they are headed this season. A cursory glance at even strength Corsi number over the course of October would suggest that the Canucks are in some kind of trouble. As of November 4th, the Canucks sit in an abysmal 26th place in 5-on-5 CorsiFor percentage (and they’re tied with 27th and 28th place, essentially making them third worst).

Statistically-inclined minds around the league see these possession numbers as evidence that the Canucks are who they were predicted to be – an aging team destined to finish somewhere between the middle and bottom of the standings, with playoffs being little more than a pipe-dream – they’ve just had some bounces go their way to start the season.
I don’t see it that way. Maybe it’s my excessive positivity and optimism, but I think that Vancouver has performed well enough to deserve better than 26th in the league in possession.
When I did some digging (a.k.a. fiddling with various factors on war-on-ice.com), I found that the Canucks’ analytical statistics change pretty drastically when you change the context just a little bit – more so than most other NHL teams.
While the Canucks are 26th in even strength Corsi (CF%), they improve to 19th when blocked shots are removed (otherwise known as FenwickFor percentage, or FF%). When misses are removed, they again improve, this time to 16th. They’re regrettably awful when it comes to Scoring Chances For percentage (SCF%), but when only high danger scoring chances are considered (HSC%), they again improve to 11th. Finally, they sit in 11th again in terms of Goals For percentage (GF%).

Now there are a couple of points to consider. First, the Goals For ratio, which they are strongest at, is also the most influenced by luck (and the opposing goaltender). Second, these number are all from all score situations. What happens when we manipulate the score factor?
Good things apparently.
When it comes to Score Close situations (meaning within one goal in the first and second period, or tied in the third period), the Canucks Corsi numbers jump up from 46.8 to 49.1, good enough to move up to 17th from 26th. Similar trends occur with Fenwick (49.5 to 52.2, 19th to 10th), Shots (50.2 to 52.8, 16th to 8th), Scoring Chances (46.9 to 48.6, 26th to 20th), High Danger Scoring Chances (51.5 to 54.7, 11th to 6th), and goals (53.8 to 65.0, 11th to 5th).

So what exactly is accounting for this variability?

Defensive Systems

At least part of the Canucks current Corsi “problems” may be accounted for by their defensive style. The Canucks seem generally unconcerned with allowing opponents to try large numbers of shots, although they are concentrated right in the middle of the ice (below, right).

Either the Canucks are unable to prevent opponents from getting shots from the high slot, or they just don’t mind it happening. In any case, their opponents’ above average high slot shot rates are not translating into more goals – rather, they are being seriously stymied (below, right).

The league average shooting percentage in the high slot this year is just 3.8%, and Vancouver’s opponents are converting at a rate just higher than half of that. So while these high slot shots are considered scoring chances (influencing Vancouver’s poor SCF%), the area has been far from dangerous.
Opponents also have to contend with the Canucks block-happy defenders. The Canucks have blocked 141 shots this season, 8th most in the NHL. This high volume of blocked shots is creating the difference between the Canucks Corsi and Fenwick percentages. The increase between their Corsi and Fenwick percentage (+2.7%) is the second-highest in the league.

Score Situation

It is fairly common for possession numbers to fluctuate depending on the score situation. After all, the deeper into a game you get, the more likely a leading team is going to go into shutdown mode and the more likely a trailing team is to take more chances. These two factors tend to work together to influence possession stats. Leading teams tend to have possession stats decrease while trailing teams tend to have them increase. The bigger the deficit, the larger the variation.

Now consider this: for all of the Canucks troubles this season, they have only trailed by two or more goals in one game this season (a feat only Montreal has matched to this point). That was the St. Louis game in which they fell to 3-0 in the middle frame (before eventually losing 4-3), and even then they trailed by two-plus goals for just 34.6 minutes, the second lowest such time in the league.
In fact, the Canucks have only trailed for 102.5 minutes through their first 12 games of the season, the third-lowest in the league. Conversely, they’ve led for 347.3 minutes, trailing only Montreal.

Given that information, the Canucks all score situations statistics are not particularly surprising. They are heavily influenced by score effects when leading, and have spent a little over ten times as many minutes leading than trailing.

Player Deployment

Much has been made about the ice time that head coach Willie Desjardins doled out to his rookies in recent weeks. A matter had begun to emerge late in games – if the Canucks were winning, or losing, the young guns sat on the bench, while coach steadily fed veterans shift after shift.
Now it’s difficult to say what would have happened if the rookies kept on playing. Perhaps they’d see their possession numbers crater. But that’s just pure speculation. Here’s what we do know: two of the players that were repeatedly benched during earlier games – Sven Baertschi and Jake Virtanen – have some of the highest possession numbers on the team, 51.16 and 50.74 CF% respectively, 2nd and 3rd on the team.
Instead of these players, the Canucks tried to cling on to leads by giving increased minutes to more reliable forwards like Brandon Prust (46.2 CF%), Adam Cracknell (45.8), Brandon Sutter (45.5), Alex Burrows (44.5), Jannik Hansen (43.2) and Derek Dorsett (41.8).
When these factors are combined, some of the Canucks possession struggles are explainable. Whether or not things will continue in this manner is a mystery, as usual. At this point however, it appears that the Canucks have been better than their standard Corsi percentage would suggest. This in turn would suggest an increased chance of being able to sustain at least some of their current success.

About Those Blown Leads

Despite the general optimism of this article, the Canucks will not escape criticism. One area where the Canucks simply have to get better is protecting leads.
Dave Tomlinson is on point here. During Vigneault’s tenure (2006-07 to 2012-13), the Canucks averaged 0.86 regulation losses per season when leading after two periods, and 2.43 overtime losses per season when leading after two periods. So far the Canucks are already 5-1-3 when leading after two, and they’ve only played 12 games.

Vancouver’s CorsiFor percentage is 32.7% when playing with a one-goal lead in the period. Not only does that put them third worst in the NHL this season (above), it’s also the worst Corsi number the Canucks have had in that context in the last ten years, Torts year included. In the same situation, they are fifth worst in Fenwick and sixth worse in scoring chance ratio.

To top it off, in spite of Ryan Miller’s otherwise impressive goaltending the Canucks on-ice saving percentage with a one-goal third-period lead is just 0.824 – better than only the two Alberta teams. While they’re scoring on 18.2% of shots in this situation (sixth best), they are controlling only 39.3% of shots on net (sixth worse).
The Canucks biggest weakness to this point seems to be an inability to defend a lead. Much to the satisfaction of fans, the Canucks have now managed to close out consecutive games when leading after two. Hopefully this is a trend that can continue.
One intriguing question then is, what changes have been made in the past few games? The most noticeable one is the ice time of the young players – specifically Jared McCann, Jake Virtanen and Sven Baertschi.
Over the last seven games, the four games in which the kids were benched in the third period were losses (Edmonton, Washington, Detroit and Dallas), while the games in which they received regular third-period shifts were wins (Montreal, Arizona and Philadelphia). Is this a coincidence? It’s hard to say at this point (but it sure looks suspicious).
What is becoming clear though is that the Canucks are in the process of establishing a new identity. They are not the same team that was bounced from the playoffs by Calgary last April. They are faster, they are more physical, and they have an injection of youthful energy the likes this city has not seen in years, decades even.
The youth in the lineup is now part of the Canucks identity. It seems to me that when they step away from that, they begins to lose their grip on games. To me, that suggests that the Canucks need to stick to who they are. Play fast, play hard and play young, not just in the first two periods, but – to borrow an old cliche – for the whole 60 minutes.
(All possession statistics were taken from war-on-ice.com)

Breaking News