2013-12-05



A look at the scoring chance summary, on-ice scoring chances, team scoring chances, neutral zone stats, & the expected score from the Canucks 3-1 victory over the Predators .

TEAM SCORING CHANCE TOTALS

Period

Totals

EV

PP

SH

VAN

NSH

VAN

NSH

VAN

NSH

VAN

NSH

1

0

4

0

4

0

0

0

0

2

10

7

7

6

3

0

0

1

3

7

4

4

3

3

1

0

0

OT

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

OVR

17

15

11

13

6

1

0

1

SCORING CHANCE AREA



{*From BroadStreetHockey.com}

Scoring chances are defined as attempts at goal from the area above.

It includes close missed shots (posts and near misses).

It includes deflections if they occur in the area.

They also include shots slightly outside the area if they are difficult.

For example: screened shots and/or chances that force goalies to move (i.e. one-timers).

There is still some subjectivity in this on behalf of the scorer. However, I try to be as consistent as possible from team to team and game to game.

Good News:

The power play created 6 chances and finally got rewarded.

The Canucks came alive in the 2nd half of the game recording a 16-7 SCD edge.

In many ways this game was the reverse of those frustrating Canuck losses.

Coach Tortorella echoed this and said what I have been saying for many posts...

"The team played better during the homestand and lost...then they did in this game."

Such is hockey and its 'puck luck' variance.

Bad News

The Canucks started very very slowly!

Vancouver managed only one chance in the first half of the game. (8-1 SCD NSH).

COMPLETE SCORING CHANCE SUMMARY

Team

Period

Time

Note

Home

Away

State

Home

1

19:26

Hornqvist

3

12

24

27

39

59

1

5

17

20

23

25

5v5

Home

1

8:57

Wilson rush, neat Hamhuis

3

12

27

33

39

59

1

2

8

22

25

33

5v5

Home

1

3:58

Stalsberg - rush 2 on 1

4

11

25

39

57

64

1

3

17

18

20

36

5v5

Home

1

2:19

Smith , one timer, turnover Tanev

7

13

15

39

42

47

1

2

7

8

15

32

5v5

Away

2

18:12

Santorelli rush ms, takeaway H. Sedin

3

11

25

33

39

59

1

3

18

25

32

33

5v5

Home

2

15:50

Fisher , pp one timer

3

11

12

27

39

59

1

2

3

15

25

5v4

Home

2

14:47

Henrdicks rush

4

26

33

39

57

59

1

7

8

18

22

33

5v5

Home

2

12:27

Cullen lost puck battle Kes

4

7

13

15

39

64

1

5

8

17

20

36

5v5

Home

2

11:02

Legwand beat Richardson

11

25

39

42

47

57

1

8

15

18

25

32

5v5

Away

2

8:57

Higgins backhand created by Kesler

4

7

13

15

39

64

1

3

17

18

20

25

5v5

Away

2

8:56

Santorelli rebound

4

7

13

15

39

64

1

3

17

18

20

25

5v5

Away

2

8:45

D. Sedin deflection

3

12

27

33

39

59

1

2

7

8

22

33

5v5

Home

2

7:42

Legwand rush

11

25

39

42

47

57

1

5

15

18

32

36

5v5

Away

2

6:30

Garrison - pp screen Kesler

3

26

28

39

59

1

2

5

17

22

33

4v5

Home

2

4:56

Stalberg rush

3

11

25

39

57

59

1

2

3

15

32

36

5v5

Away

2

4:37

Weise - Richardson puck battle won

3

7

13

15

39

59

1

5

8

15

32

36

5v5

Away

2

4:37

Richardson (Goal) rebound

3

7

13

15

39

59

1

5

8

15

32

36

5v5

Home

2

4:10

Wilson (Goal) bad rebound Luongo

3

12

27

33

39

59

1

5

7

8

22

33

5v5

Away

2

2:06

Booth - ind. effort

4

24

26

28

39

64

1

3

17

18

20

25

5v5

Away

2

1:22

Hamhuis pp one timer , pass H. Sedin

3

26

28

39

59

1

2

5

17

22

33

4v5

Away

2

0:12

Garrison pp pass H. Sedin

26

28

39

59

64

1

2

5

7

17

33

4v5

Home

3

19:11

Wilson ms

12

27

33

39

42

64

1

2

3

17

20

25

5v5

Home

3

17:35

Spalding puck battle lost Bieksa

13

15

28

39

42

47

1

3

15

18

32

36

5v5

Away

3

15:40

Santorelli , puck battle won Kesler

4

11

25

39

57

64

1

5

8

17

20

25

5v5

Away

3

12:24

Kesler (Goal) banl of opposition

4

11

25

39

57

64

1

3

5

17

20

25

5v5

Home

3

10:27

Nystrom

3

24

28

39

59

1

2

5

17

22

33

4v5

Away

3

9:44

D. Sedin pp ms

3

12

13

39

59

1

2

5

17

22

33

4v5

Home

3

7:20

Wilson - off rush

3

12

27

33

39

59

1

2

7

8

22

33

5v5

Away

3

6:41

Kesler pp rush

3

13

24

39

59

1

3

5

17

22

33

4v5

Away

3

5:46

Kesler pp

26

28

39

42

64

1

3

5

17

22

33

4v5

Away

3

4:47

Higgins

3

12

15

33

39

59

1

8

15

18

20

25

5v5

Away

3

3:13

Higgins 2 on 1 rush

4

7

13

15

39

42

1

3

5

17

20

25

5v5

CANUCK ON-ICE SCORING CHANCES FOR AND AGAINST

#

Player

EV

PP

SH

1

LUONGO, ROBERTO

11

13

6

1

0

1

2

HAMHUIS, DAN

21:41

1

5

03:35

4

1

02:27

0

1

3

BIEKSA, KEVIN

16:56

6

4

03:58

2

0

01:13

0

1

5

GARRISON, JASON

18:00

5

4

05:42

6

1

00:09

0

0

7

BOOTH, DAVID

13:54

1

4

02:20

1

0

00:00

0

0

8

TANEV, CHRISTOPHER

20:18

5

7

01:51

0

0

02:01

0

0

15

RICHARDSON, BRAD

13:23

3

5

00:00

0

0

02:10

0

1

17

KESLER, RYAN

14:19

6

4

05:29

6

1

01:13

0

0

18

STANTON, RYAN

13:49

5

5

00:00

0

0

00:56

0

0

20

HIGGINS, CHRIS

15:30

7

4

02:19

0

0

01:13

0

0

22

SEDIN, DANIEL

16:24

1

4

04:58

5

1

00:00

0

0

23

EDLER, ALEXANDER

07:28

0

1

00:00

0

0

00:00

0

0

25

SANTORELLI, MIKE

18:09

8

4

02:19

0

0

02:10

0

1

32

WEISE, DALE

11:41

3

5

00:00

0

0

00:00

0

0

33

SEDIN, HENRIK

15:57

2

4

05:14

6

1

00:00

0

0

36

HANSEN, JANNIK

12:53

2

5

00:00

0

0

00:00

0

0

Mike Santorelli was a stand out again. He led the way with an 8-4 SCD!

Santorelli has been truly amazing. It is very rare that a fringe, low-budget player is able to play Top  6 minutes and dominate the chance battle for 30 NHL games?!

Higgins and Kelser were also strong. They were a combined 13 -8 in ES SCD.

As I said at the beginning of the season, "Of Course, Kesler would be back?!"

HE...WAS...JUST...INJURED!

Also, Kesler is the ONLY player I can find in the league -

- that plays Top (TOI) in all three game states (PP/Pk?ES).

It's really great to see most of  Vancouver media eating humble pie.

They have an ignorant habit of evaluating hockey players/staff based on personality.

(Clouiter, AV, Gillis, Kesler, 'early' Luongo, 'later' Luongo, etc...).

The Sedin twins had a rare rough night.

They were ineffective most of the night and they were 2-8 at ES SCD.

Dan Hamhuis also struggled playing versus his old team.

Patrick Hornqvist and  Joe Piskula were the best Predators. {who?!}

They had a 9-1 ES SCD.

9+ years in the league and the Nashville "No-Names" are still irrelevant.

Statistical Three Stars.

Ryan Kelser {12-5 total SCD}.

Roberto Luongo {+1.5 EGA}

Mike Santorelli

OFFENSIVE ZONE ENTRY SUCCESS RATE (OZE%) (Even Strength)

Most Advanced stat analysis centers around the idea that possession of the puck is huge key to long term success. {Accordingly, Offensive Zone Entry Success Rate (OZE%) attempts to identify the skill of gaining puck possession in the opponents defensive zone}. Offensive Zone Entry Success Rate (OZE%) is expressed as a percentage-{Successful Possessions Gained ('Carry-ins'+'Dump-wins') / Total Attempts at entry}.

VANCOUVER

NASHVILLE

Period

Successful

Attempted

%

Successful

Attempted

%

1

15

31

48%

15

34

44%

2

14

23

61%

12

23

51%

3

14

21

66%

13

29

45%

Total

43

75

57%

40

86

47%

OZE% confirms the flow that the scoring chance data showed.

We can clearly see Vancouver took the game over in the final two periods.

It's great to see the Canucks with +60% OZE% the mark of an elite team.

The Canucks had a low total of 23 successful 'carry-ins'.

The Canucks had a high 21 successful 'dump ins' (in 40 att.) for a  terrific rate of (51%).

Nashville had a high total of 34 'carry ins'.

However, their lack of top off. skill meant they didn't create the expected # of scoring chances.

The Predators had only 6 'dump in' wins out of 38 for a putrid rate of (16%).

The Canucks dominated the puck battles decisively.

DEFENSIVE ZONE EXIT SUCCESS RATE (DZE%) (Even Strength)

Most Advanced stat analysis centers around the idea that possession of the puck is huge key to long term success. {Accordingly, Defensive Zone Exit Success Rate (DZE%) attempts to identify the skill of exiting the defensive zone successful with possession}. Defensive Zone Exit Success Rate (DZE%) is expressed as a percentage-{Successful Exits with possession / Total Exits Attempts}.

VANCOUVER

NASHVILLE

Period

Successful

Attempted

Successful

Attempted

1

14

35

40%

11

36

31%

2

10

21

48%

15

29

52%

3

10

27

37%

12

20

60%

Total

33

83

39%

38

85

45%

Although Nashville was the better team in terms of DZE% -

Both teams were below the average 50% mark.

The Canucks did play with only five D-men the last 40 minutes.

The Canucks consistently below average DZE% clearly shows -

That the team misses a Christian Erhoff type of puck carrying defencemen.

Alexander Edler has really fallen short of his potential in this area.

Of Course, the Predators missed their all-star Stud D-man, BC native - Shea Weber.

As an aside, it seems that the lower the total DZE% -

-The less entertaining the game is to watch.

EXPECTED SCORE

{Expected Score is calculated by assigning an approximate percentage value to each shot attempt. It's goal is to capture a truer picture of the game}.

VANCOUVER

NASHVILLE

TOTAL EXP. SCORE= ES (PP) {SH}

TOTAL EXP. SCORE= ES (PP) {SH}

2.9 = 2.2 (.7) {0}

2.5 = 2.3 (.1) {.1}

Expected Score suggests the most likely outcome was Vancouver 3 - Nashville 2

GOALTENDER RATING - EXPECTED GOALS AGAINST

{Expected Goals Against is calculated by estimating an expected score value to every save made}.

Roberto Luongo had an Expected Goals Against {EGA} of ~ 2.5.

Luongo's rating was a +1.5. (B+)

Marek Mazanec had an Expected Goals Against {EGA} of  ~2.9.

Mazanec's rating was -.1 (C)

Yeah! The Canucks won the goaltending battle by ~ 1.6 goals.

TURNOVERS (Even Strength)

Vancouver had a lower total of 16 turnovers.However, Nashville had an anemic forecheck.

The Predators had an high total of 24 turnovers.

I repeat.... Nashville obviously missed Weber badly.

THE DECIDING FACTORS

Luongo was very solid.

It was only the third game that the Canucks held their opponent to 0 or 1 goal against.

Unfortunately, the three teams they shut down were:

The sad sack Leafs, the even worse Sabres...

And, the Tooth-less Predators.

It should be obvious to enlightend Canuck fans that -

The team can dominate offensively even versus good teams (in terms of scoring chances).

....especially if their Power play kicks in to gear!

However, and conversely, they have yet to demonstrate that they can...

...shut the door defensively, or, with top goaltending versus strong teams.

The Power play (as I predicted)  'has' come alive 6 for 6...and counting!

The next  two games ARE very important. Phoenix, and to a lesser extent Colorado, are my two picks to fall off their 'hot' pace. Vancouver simply must win the seasons series with these two teams. If they do this the research says they will improve their playoff chances significantly.! Phoenix will be playing their 3rd game in 4 nights. It IS virtually a MUST win! (With 50+ games to go?! :) ) Will we see the  NHL refs  favor PHX? - And, work hard to help out a new, sunbelt US owner?...Stay Tuned!

Feel free to comment below!

Also, if you have any questions about advanced stats and would prefer to email me you can reach me at danthestatman1@gmail.com. I would be happy to try and answer them! I learned  this way when I started!

SHOTS ATTEMPTED CHART

(courtesy of extraskater.com)

Show more