I recall even with this core group prior to this season the team was bad and was routinely being outshot, but scoring goals was never really a problem with them. They've always been fairly good at scoring and making the most of their chances. This team is just actually good now. They're playing much better defensively, have been fairly healthy and have pretty competent management and coaching compared to before.
PDO is easily explained in this situation IMO: highly talented players who go above and beyond in shot selection and the ability to execute , and a team that invests in excellent goal-tending ( seriously, the goalie is the most important most and its like some people treat it a bonus when the goalie is actually good instead of a correct part of team construction). the team tries to select higher percentage plays instead of throwing it on net all the time.the save percentages are fair for each of the goalies they have, in the situations they are in , compared to their historical averages
Exactly and yet these so-called "experts" are utterly clueless on how this could be. Listening to these "experts" is a consistent facepalming experience.
and puck movement to get the besat scoring chances rather than blindly throwing the puck on net. The Canucks are near the top in puck possession so really the major difference is they utilize their puck possession differently.
No such thing as luck... especially extended puck luck. When you start to see a pattern over an extended, you have to acknowledge that there are reasonable factors. This is essentially the same core the Canucks had last year. Not only have they been together for a few years, they have also had a training camp and their first full year with their head coach. They have collectively bought into his system and are finally playing together as a team. Demco has always been stellar - last year he was recovering from surgery, but came on and returned to form at the end of the regular season - De Smith has been a stolen gem of an acquisition. The Canucks have two solid starters, so that every night there is no weakness in goal. This allows the defense and forwards to be more confident on the attack. They have some strength and size and stability on defence (could be more), so much that even Myers is playing like an almost NHL-level defenceman. With all these factors in place, the Canucks are way more able to choose quality shots, rather than just throw the puck at the net all the time. Opposing offenses are less willing to commit to the forecheck - they play back because of the Canucks quick exit to attack once they get a hold of the puck zone. Therefore, teams take more shots from the perimeter, which the goalies handle with ease.
I have noticed myself that the canucks are the most lethal team in the league in the sense that they might not out shoot the opposing team but all of a sudden they smack in 2 or 3 goals consecutive out of nowhere
Even when they were pretty bad before this season they were still decent at scoring goals despite being outshot most games. They are just really good at capitalizing on their chances.
@@jacksonjacob7791 completely agree. This year, alot of the time i will look at the shots at the end of a period and it felt like the canucks just dominated because they scored twice and had 4 quality scoring chances but are still getting outshot.
I think there is an element of luck to it, but there's also the saying that "Good teams create their own luck" and I'd say it's true. The Canucks may get lucky bounces, but they're doing the hard work to put themselves in a position for that bounce to even happen in the first place, or to benefit from it when it does. If Petterson and JT aren't clogging up the slot, that turnover never happens in one of the highlights. Then, if they don't both charge the net at just the right speed and positioning to both keep both their shooting and passing lanes open, the goalie can key onto one of them and not be stuck in limbo or the D can break up the play. But because their positioning themselves to give themselves options, the goalie has to guess and he guessed JT shoots. He guessed wrong, JT passes, and Pettey takes the return feed and finishes up in the wide open net. If the Goalie had stayed with Pettey, anticipating a return pass, JT could have just shot and scored the easy tap in himself, and again the goalie guesses wrong, meaning the goalie was doomed to give up a goal on that play once the puck was coughed up, as no matter what he does, Pettey and JT will make it be wrong. Their lucky plays are full of decisions like that. If that puck trickles through the goalie in a lucky break, it's only a "lucky break" if you've got a guy on the back door ready to tap it in. If everybody's standing around in the corners, then the goalie just turns around and smothers it and nobody notices the luck the team had that they gave up on by being lazy.
The structure and depth has unlocked these types of performances from a core that's very talented. Also, they've been putting together all different types of wins to some very good teams on this past road trip. It's real, they're real , and it's NOT unlikely at this point bud.
I think it was Shorty that said back in November that PDO doesn’t account for bad goaltending. Other words, it doesn’t take into consideration that high shooting percentage may not be the result of luck but of poor goaltending on the part of the other team. Canucks beat the Oilers with 8 goals and the Sharks with 10 goals early on in the season. Bad goaltending, or puck luck? Either way, it made their PDO shoot sky high.
Would be curious to see PDO adjusted for games where it was clear that they had poor goaltending on the opponents (i.e What is Canucks' PDO when the other team doesn't pull their goaltender due to getting shelled?) and adjusted for empty-netters.
You make your own luck in hockey. But it helps to have the bounces fall your way. Tampa in 2019 and Boston last year both had a ton of good fortune (in the regular szn) with bounces, injuries, contracts, etc. You don't perform like that without a little help.
I’ve watched every game! And I’m not claiming it’s all luck by any means. But even the Bruins finished the season with a PDO of 104 last season when they had the single greatest regular season of all time. I’m just trying to say they’re running on a good streak of fortune, but that doesn’t mean they’re not also a great team. Both of those statements can be true at the same time!
@@CunuckHockey Come on my friend. get on the hype train! this is real. this team has a unique chemistry and crazy skills. they are the real deal. enjoy the ride.
A prime example a team that has improved team defense, excellent goaltending and the ability to outscore its problems. When theres less problems than before, it simply means youre more often outscoring your opposition. Thusly, winning more games.
Not sure why no one else has noticed or pointed this out: they look and play like a team that is being coached and taught by..... The Sedins. All of them, all the players, and the way they work together is very Sedin-esque. Puck protection, passing, against the play passes, deceptions, the way they're opening up the ice. Nobody else is seeing that? You can see it, and explains the PDO.
Hey, that's Matt Murray's line about Brock Boeser scoring on him....but seriously, I believe that the Canucks have been historically more unlucky than lucky. 😢
It's weird for PDO to be proclaimed as a luck factor, then to see the all-time leaders in the category be a murderer's row of great teams. Dynasties, in fact. Are you sure you understand this stat?
That’s what I mean though. If you truly think the Canucks are at the same level as those great teams, then yes they’re not “getting lucky”. Would you say this team is better than the Bruins last year? Because their PDO is higher than the Bruins was last season when they broke the regular season record. You need to be good to have a high PDO. And these Canucks are great. But a PDO THIS high is a statistical anomaly which is all I’m saying.
@@CunuckHockey PDO isn't the only metric of being a great team though. It's a stat that points to being an impressive shooting team with great goaltending. I have no doubt that the Bruins were better than us, but they could win a bunch of 1-0 games. When we just did, everyone was shocked! Lol
Lol, the whole team structure is doing something that you rarely see in the NHL. Every play has bought into a system - a grindy one - that expects each individual to push on and off the puck. That's constant pressure no matter whether a player is having a good or bad day - and their structure clearly emphasizes getting the puck on the net which the Canucks historically haven't done. This isn't by chance - this is the structure that their coaching staff has them playing - and then the scorers are able to rise to the top because teams they're playing against are frustrated and overwhelmed the entire game. Most teams have a single line of this type of play if they're lucky
I think between 1982, 1994, 2011, and the Rick Rypien, Luc Bourdon and Bertuzzi/Moore incidents the Canucks deserve ALL the luck they're getting. After the shit reffing in the 1994 and 2011 Cup finals i think they damn well deserve the cup as well and so do us fans, so you'll hear no friggin apology from me for what's happening to them currently.
Oh, and kuzmenko isn't buying into the system, doesn't play like the rest of the team and therefore sticks out like a sore thumb because he doesn't mesh. He's been a healthy scratch multiple times this season because of this - and he is now a rogue player on successful team with a structured formula, that's why he isn't shooting like he was last year. Easy to be a big shot when you play on a crap team like he did last year, and there is no regulation on how much he carries the puck or the way that he plays. He honestly should be traded just because of the fact that he doesn't sync wth the team, call it ego or whatever you want - but it's so clear when he does get ice time - lower statistical players like the entire Dakota Joshua line are outperforming guys like kuzmenko because they're playing for the team structure, not for themselves. Guess we will see if this "luck" runs out 😂. You have to be good to be lucky kid
If 5 players not one or two in the team are out-performing their career average, I would say that the team is really playing a efficient hockey LOL. Not that we are lucky lol
Are you kidding me? Lucky? They were one of the worst teams in the league for 3 years. This is a team. That is different. They are a talented team. Stats are for suckers
I recall even with this core group prior to this season the team was bad and was routinely being outshot, but scoring goals was never really a problem with them. They've always been fairly good at scoring and making the most of their chances.
This team is just actually good now. They're playing much better defensively, have been fairly healthy and have pretty competent management and coaching compared to before.
Plus minus is not luck, it’s superiority.
Haters gon hate tho
1 season where they were almost bottom 5 and almost no changes and they are now top 5? That's not skill. Some is but most is.
What do you mean almost no changes? They have like 10 new players this year
Almost no change?? Are you blind??@@4u2nvHock3y
@@4u2nvHock3y no changes? LMFAO
PDO is easily explained in this situation IMO: highly talented players who go above and beyond in shot selection and the ability to execute , and a team that invests in excellent goal-tending ( seriously, the goalie is the most important most and its like some people treat it a bonus when the goalie is actually good instead of a correct part of team construction). the team tries to select higher percentage plays instead of throwing it on net all the time.the save percentages are fair for each of the goalies they have, in the situations they are in , compared to their historical averages
Exactly and yet these so-called "experts" are utterly clueless on how this could be. Listening to these "experts" is a consistent facepalming experience.
I feel like the shooting percentage is a result of a more structured system and consistent lines, instead of just luck.
and puck movement to get the besat scoring chances rather than blindly throwing the puck on net. The Canucks are near the top in puck possession so really the major difference is they utilize their puck possession differently.
No such thing as luck... especially extended puck luck. When you start to see a pattern over an extended, you have to acknowledge that there are reasonable factors. This is essentially the same core the Canucks had last year. Not only have they been together for a few years, they have also had a training camp and their first full year with their head coach. They have collectively bought into his system and are finally playing together as a team. Demco has always been stellar - last year he was recovering from surgery, but came on and returned to form at the end of the regular season - De Smith has been a stolen gem of an acquisition. The Canucks have two solid starters, so that every night there is no weakness in goal. This allows the defense and forwards to be more confident on the attack. They have some strength and size and stability on defence (could be more), so much that even Myers is playing like an almost NHL-level defenceman. With all these factors in place, the Canucks are way more able to choose quality shots, rather than just throw the puck at the net all the time. Opposing offenses are less willing to commit to the forecheck - they play back because of the Canucks quick exit to attack once they get a hold of the puck zone. Therefore, teams take more shots from the perimeter, which the goalies handle with ease.
I have noticed myself that the canucks are the most lethal team in the league in the sense that they might not out shoot the opposing team but all of a sudden they smack in 2 or 3 goals consecutive out of nowhere
Even when they were pretty bad before this season they were still decent at scoring goals despite being outshot most games. They are just really good at capitalizing on their chances.
@@jacksonjacob7791 completely agree. This year, alot of the time i will look at the shots at the end of a period and it felt like the canucks just dominated because they scored twice and had 4 quality scoring chances but are still getting outshot.
I think there is an element of luck to it, but there's also the saying that "Good teams create their own luck" and I'd say it's true. The Canucks may get lucky bounces, but they're doing the hard work to put themselves in a position for that bounce to even happen in the first place, or to benefit from it when it does. If Petterson and JT aren't clogging up the slot, that turnover never happens in one of the highlights. Then, if they don't both charge the net at just the right speed and positioning to both keep both their shooting and passing lanes open, the goalie can key onto one of them and not be stuck in limbo or the D can break up the play. But because their positioning themselves to give themselves options, the goalie has to guess and he guessed JT shoots. He guessed wrong, JT passes, and Pettey takes the return feed and finishes up in the wide open net. If the Goalie had stayed with Pettey, anticipating a return pass, JT could have just shot and scored the easy tap in himself, and again the goalie guesses wrong, meaning the goalie was doomed to give up a goal on that play once the puck was coughed up, as no matter what he does, Pettey and JT will make it be wrong. Their lucky plays are full of decisions like that.
If that puck trickles through the goalie in a lucky break, it's only a "lucky break" if you've got a guy on the back door ready to tap it in. If everybody's standing around in the corners, then the goalie just turns around and smothers it and nobody notices the luck the team had that they gave up on by being lazy.
PDO is a bad stat if the team elects to pass in order to get a higher scoring opportunity attempt. As it's based on shot % not scoring chances.
PDO should probably be modified to use HDGF, HDGA, xHDGF, and xHDGA in the formulae, as well.
"the Canucks have just been lucky 28 times"
C'mon.. The only stat worth considering is win to loss ratio. Are you sealing the deal when it counts.
The structure and depth has unlocked these types of performances from a core that's very talented.
Also, they've been putting together all different types of wins to some very good teams on this past road trip. It's real, they're real , and it's NOT unlikely at this point bud.
I think it was Shorty that said back in November that PDO doesn’t account for bad goaltending. Other words, it doesn’t take into consideration that high shooting percentage may not be the result of luck but of poor goaltending on the part of the other team. Canucks beat the Oilers with 8 goals and the Sharks with 10 goals early on in the season. Bad goaltending, or puck luck? Either way, it made their PDO shoot sky high.
Would be curious to see PDO adjusted for games where it was clear that they had poor goaltending on the opponents (i.e What is Canucks' PDO when the other team doesn't pull their goaltender due to getting shelled?) and adjusted for empty-netters.
whats the saying " you got to be good to be lucky, and you got to be lucky to be good"
Yep, that’s the best way to describe this Canucks team! Fingers crossed we can carry this into the playoffs 🤞🤞
You make your own luck in hockey. But it helps to have the bounces fall your way. Tampa in 2019 and Boston last year both had a ton of good fortune (in the regular szn) with bounces, injuries, contracts, etc. You don't perform like that without a little help.
Yep, gotta be good to be consistently lucky in this league.
i dont know man. it doesn't look like luck to me. Have you been watching the games? that usually helps.
I’ve watched every game! And I’m not claiming it’s all luck by any means. But even the Bruins finished the season with a PDO of 104 last season when they had the single greatest regular season of all time.
I’m just trying to say they’re running on a good streak of fortune, but that doesn’t mean they’re not also a great team. Both of those statements can be true at the same time!
@@CunuckHockey Come on my friend. get on the hype train! this is real. this team has a unique chemistry and crazy skills. they are the real deal. enjoy the ride.
@bobbroseph they’re absolutely the real deal! Going to be incredible to have playoff hockey in Van again
A prime example a team that has improved team defense, excellent goaltending and the ability to outscore its problems. When theres less problems than before, it simply means youre more often outscoring your opposition. Thusly, winning more games.
Not sure why no one else has noticed or pointed this out: they look and play like a team that is being coached and taught by..... The Sedins. All of them, all the players, and the way they work together is very Sedin-esque. Puck protection, passing, against the play passes, deceptions, the way they're opening up the ice. Nobody else is seeing that? You can see it, and explains the PDO.
Since there is no such thing as luck it's not really a question.
Exactly
Gotta be lucky to be good and good to be lucky
1:03 I mean on that list are basically the greatest dynastic teams since the 80s, so… 🤷
I actually told my friend this, "They aren't Jim Benning." They are good and as a result of being good they make there luck.
Canucks shooting percentage is due to the Canucks defence - it’s sustainable if the defence keeps up
You have to be good to be lucky and lucky to be good.
5 game win streak now for Vancouver
Hey, that's Matt Murray's line about Brock Boeser scoring on him....but seriously, I believe that the Canucks have been historically more unlucky than lucky. 😢
Time to update the models. The Canucks are actually good, and some analytics just don't do a good job of explaining why.
I didn't make the NHL because I wasn't lucky enough
what did you just become a fan this year??? this team has had epically bad puck luck over the years its about damn time they get some good luck
Like I said in the video, we’ve been terribly unlucky for the past decade. So I don’t disagree with you
@@CunuckHockey been unlucky for 54 years since day 1 .... didnt mean to come off like an ahole i like what you do with your vids 👍 keep it up
It's weird for PDO to be proclaimed as a luck factor, then to see the all-time leaders in the category be a murderer's row of great teams. Dynasties, in fact. Are you sure you understand this stat?
That’s what I mean though. If you truly think the Canucks are at the same level as those great teams, then yes they’re not “getting lucky”.
Would you say this team is better than the Bruins last year? Because their PDO is higher than the Bruins was last season when they broke the regular season record.
You need to be good to have a high PDO. And these Canucks are great. But a PDO THIS high is a statistical anomaly which is all I’m saying.
@@CunuckHockey PDO isn't the only metric of being a great team though. It's a stat that points to being an impressive shooting team with great goaltending. I have no doubt that the Bruins were better than us, but they could win a bunch of 1-0 games. When we just did, everyone was shocked! Lol
Good teams have had high PDOs, maybe they're underestimated.
Lol, the whole team structure is doing something that you rarely see in the NHL. Every play has bought into a system - a grindy one - that expects each individual to push on and off the puck. That's constant pressure no matter whether a player is having a good or bad day - and their structure clearly emphasizes getting the puck on the net which the Canucks historically haven't done. This isn't by chance - this is the structure that their coaching staff has them playing - and then the scorers are able to rise to the top because teams they're playing against are frustrated and overwhelmed the entire game. Most teams have a single line of this type of play if they're lucky
I think between 1982, 1994, 2011, and the Rick Rypien, Luc Bourdon and Bertuzzi/Moore incidents the Canucks deserve ALL the luck they're getting. After the shit reffing in the 1994 and 2011 Cup finals i think they damn well deserve the cup as well and so do us fans, so you'll hear no friggin apology from me for what's happening to them currently.
Brad Marchand would love another shot at you this year..might happen..
Oh, and kuzmenko isn't buying into the system, doesn't play like the rest of the team and therefore sticks out like a sore thumb because he doesn't mesh. He's been a healthy scratch multiple times this season because of this - and he is now a rogue player on successful team with a structured formula, that's why he isn't shooting like he was last year. Easy to be a big shot when you play on a crap team like he did last year, and there is no regulation on how much he carries the puck or the way that he plays. He honestly should be traded just because of the fact that he doesn't sync wth the team, call it ego or whatever you want - but it's so clear when he does get ice time - lower statistical players like the entire Dakota Joshua line are outperforming guys like kuzmenko because they're playing for the team structure, not for themselves. Guess we will see if this "luck" runs out 😂. You have to be good to be lucky kid
I dont think people understand what luck is
You "earn" your luck...it's called Karma :)
If 5 players not one or two in the team are out-performing their career average, I would say that the team is really playing a efficient hockey LOL. Not that we are lucky lol
Gotta be good to be lucky …
Lol what a question not luck hard work
Are you kidding me? Lucky? They were one of the worst teams in the league for 3 years. This is a team. That is different. They are a talented team. Stats are for suckers
Not as much luck as ur insinuating
Smartnup your supposed to be supporting the team not post this bs change your site name
Canucks are beat because thwy are the best. Not luxk at all its common sense when watching.
You can't be lucky for the whole season 😂
Luck is not real
Nonsence!!!