Behind The Numbers - Advanced Stats Game #18 Canucks vs. Sharks

The Sharks were Push-overs! - Thearon W. Henderson

A look at the scoring chance summary, on-ice scoring chances, team scoring chances, neutral zone stats, & the expected score from the Canucks 4-2 vicotry over the Sharks.

TEAM SCORING CHANCE TOTALS

Period

Totals

EV

PP

SH

VAN

SJS

VAN

SJS

VAN

SJS

VAN

SJS

1

5

3

5

3

0

0

0

0

2

3

2

2

1

1

1

0

0

3

0

4

0

3

0

0

0

1

OVR

8

9

7

7

1

1

0

1

  • Good News: It was another even game (in SCD) on the road versus a division rival.
  • The Canucks gave up a below average number of chances (5 on 5).
  • The Canucks held the Sharks to 5 less chances then their average of 12/gm. (at ES).
  • Bad News: The Canucks did not create enough high quality scoring chances.
  • The Canucks power play also failed to create any scoring chances.
  • COMPLETE SCORING CHANCE SUMMARY

    Team Period Time Note Home Away State
    Away 1 15:33 Richardson off turnover, goal 8 31 44 61 81 83 1 2 3 9 15 49 5v5
    Home 1 12:04 Pavelski from Kennedy on 3on2, miss 8 31 44 61 81 83 1 5 9 15 23 49 5v5
    Away 1 11:22 Bieksa backhand from D. Sedin, save 9 12 31 39 44 61 1 3 17 18 22 33 5v5
    Away 1 10:36 Santorelli rebound from Higgins, goal 5 19 31 48 57 61 1 2 8 14 20 25 5v5
    Home 1 9:45 Hertl deflection from Demers, miss 5 7 19 31 48 57 1 5 17 22 23 33 5v5
    Home 1 9:16 Brown from Sheppard on 2on0, goal 7 10 15 18 22 31 1 3 9 15 18 49 5v5
    Away 1 3:30 Kesler wraparound from H. Sedin, save 7 12 15 22 31 81 1 2 3 13 21 49 5v5
    Away 1 1:06 Higgins off turnover, goal 5 19 27 31 48 57 1 2 8 14 20 25 5v5
    Home 2 15:52 Marleau from Braun, save 12 31 39 44 61 81 1 5 17 22 23 33 5v5
    Away 2 14:39 Kassian deflection from Bieksa, goal 7 8 9 22 31 83 1 3 9 15 18 49 5v5
    Away 2 12:16 H. Sedin rebound from Bieksa, save 12 32 39 44 61 81 1 3 17 18 22 33 5v5
    Away 2 5:42 H. Sedin rebound from Hamhuis, miss (5v4 PP) 8 12 32 44 61 1 2 14 17 22 33 4v5
    Home 2 4:45 Desjardins from Vlasic on 2on1, save (4v5 SH) 10 19 32 44 61 1 5 9 20 23 25 4v5
    Home 3 16:02 Thorton - pp , rebound 8 12 19 22 32 39 1 2 8 15 25 5v4
    Home 3 12:36 Wingels from Pavelski, save 8 32 44 48 57 61 1 3 9 15 18 49 5v5
    Home 3 11:46 Couture from Havlat, save 7 9 22 32 39 83 1 5 14 20 23 25 5v5
    Home 3 1:22 Marleau - 5 on 4, Puck battle loss D. sedin 8 12 19 22 39 1 2 8 22 33 4v4

    CANUCK ON-ICE SCORING CHANCES FOR AND AGAINST

    # Player EV PP SH
    1 LUONGO, ROBERTO 7 7 1 1 0 1
    2 HAMHUIS, DAN 17:30 4 1 03:43 1 0 03:17 0 1
    3 BIEKSA, KEVIN 16:22 5 2 01:24 0 0 02:55 0 0
    5 GARRISON, JASON 15:01 0 4 02:44 0 1 00:00 0 0
    8 TANEV, CHRISTOPHER 16:25 2 1 00:06 0 0 03:17 0 1
    9 KASSIAN, ZACK 11:51 2 3 01:32 0 1 00:00 0 0
    13 WELSH, JEREMY 04:40 1 0 00:00 0 0 00:00 0 0
    14 BURROWS, ALEXANDRE 12:44 2 1 03:19 1 0 00:34 0 0
    15 RICHARDSON, BRAD 13:16 2 3 00:06 0 0 01:20 0 1
    17 KESLER, RYAN 17:15 2 2 03:40 1 0 01:41 0 0
    18 STANTON, RYAN 10:30 3 2 00:00 0 0 00:00 0 0
    20 HIGGINS, CHRIS 14:35 2 1 02:23 0 1 01:55 0 0
    21 DALPE, ZAC 03:46 1 0 00:00 0 0 00:00 0 0
    22 SEDIN, DANIEL 17:00 2 3 03:31 1 0 02:15 0 0
    23 EDLER, ALEXANDER 19:48 0 4 01:32 0 1 02:55 0 0
    25 SANTORELLI, MIKE 13:52 2 1 02:04 0 1 02:20 0 1
    33 SEDIN, HENRIK 17:35 2 3 03:50 1 0 02:19 0 0
    49 ARCHIBALD, DARREN 10:37 3 3 00:06 0 0 00:00 0 0

  • No Canuck forward stood out in SCD.
  • Kevin Bieksa and Dan Hamhuis were the best D-men, they had a combined 9-3 SCD at ES.
  • Alexander Edler returned to his norm - He was 0- 4 in SCD at (ES) and is now -33 for the year.
  • Again, I ask: 'How low can Eddie go?'
  • No Shark player stood out in SCD.
  • This was a great credit to the Canucks' effort and defensive play.
  • Statistical Three Stars:

    1. Dan Hamhuis (A 61% Pos. F. Close).

    2. Mike Santorelli (He had some 'heavy lifting' - 36% O/D zone starts).

    3. Coach Torterella - (He has complete buy-in from all players. ++ Grit ++Puck Battles).

    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 Exit Success Rate (OZE%) attempts to identify the skill of gaining puck possession in the opponents defensive zone}. Offensive Zone Exit Success Rate (OZE%) is expressed as a percentage-{Successful Possessions Gained ('Carry-ins'+'Dump-wins') / Total Attempts at entry}.


    VANCOUVER


    SAN JOSE


    Period

    Successful

    Attempted

    %

    Successful

    Attempted

    %

    1

    13

    26

    50%


    16

    28

    57%

    2

    13

    28

    48%


    14

    26

    54%

    3

    4

    15

    27%


    10

    17

    59%









    Total

    39

    89

    44%


    40

    71

    56%

    • OZE% shows that the Sharks were the stronger team in transition.
    • This stats clearly shows why the Sharks are so dominant and so dangerous.
    • In a game they 'lost badly'; they still clearly were better at OZE %.
    • The Canucks did not 'shut-down' the Sharks as much as they neutralized their attack.
    • The Canucks positional play in their own zone was extremely effective.
    • Coach Torts' has changed the teams' defending system from man to man to zone def.
    • The Canucks clearly sat back once they had the two goal lead.
    • The Canucks had 18 successful 'carry ins', but only 3 in the final period.
    • The Canucks had 16 successful 'dump ins' (out of 46) for an ave. rate of (35%).
    • San Jose had a high total of 27 'carry ins'.
    • As a result, the Sharks should have been the more dangerous team.
    • And, the Sharks 'should' have created more scoring chances.
    • The Sharks had 13 'dump in' wins out of 31 (42%).

    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


    PHOENIX


    Period

    Successful

    Attempted

    %

    Successful

    Attempted

    %

    1

    15

    35

    43%


    17

    33

    52%

    2

    8

    29

    28%


    11

    25

    44%

    3

    8

    22

    36%


    10

    17

    59%









    Total

    38

    86

    44%


    38

    75

    51%

    • The Sharks were also the better team in terms of DZE%
    • The Canucks aggressive forecheck had average success.
    • DZE% shows that the Canucks really sat back in the third period.

    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

    SAN JOSE


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

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


    2.8 = 1.9 (9) {0}

    2.5 = 1.3 (1) {.2}

    • Expected Score suggests the most likely outcome was Vancouver 3 - 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.
    • The Sharks Goaltenders' had an {EGA} of ~ 2.6.
    • Luongo's rating was 0.
    • The Sharks Goaltenders' rating was -1.4.
    • Vancouver won the goaltending battle by nearly a goal and a half.

    TURNOVERS (EvenStrength)

    • Both teams were sloppy with the puck.
    • Vancouver had another  high total of 24 turnovers.
    • The Sharks had an above average total of 17 turnovers.

    THE DECIDING FACTORS

    • The Canucks' play in their own zone was the key difference.
    • The Canucks limited the Sharks' scoring chances, even though the team had many turnovers and the Sharks were better in neutral zone stats.
    • Very poor goaltending by Antti Nemi was the other reason the Canucks won the game.
    • The Canucks continued to create below average scoring chances against better teams.
    • The Sharks were forced to flop and embellish trying desperately to get on the power play!
    • It was a great win for the Canucks, However, they won't usually get such poor goaltending.
    • The Sharks are currently ~+85 in scoring chance differential (~5/ gm.).
    • The Canucks are ~+10 in scoring chance differential (~.5/gm.).
    • There is still room for the Canucks to improve and close the gap between the two teams.

    SHOTS ATTEMPTED CHART

    (courtesy of extraskater.com)

    Fenwick-graph-2013-11-07-canucks-sharks_medium

    Feel free to comment below!

    X
    Log In Sign Up

    forgot?
    Log In Sign Up

    Forgot password?

    We'll email you a reset link.

    If you signed up using a 3rd party account like Facebook or Twitter, please login with it instead.

    Forgot password?

    Try another email?

    Almost done,

    Join Nucks Misconduct

    You must be a member of Nucks Misconduct to participate.

    We have our own Community Guidelines at Nucks Misconduct. You should read them.

    Join Nucks Misconduct

    You must be a member of Nucks Misconduct to participate.

    We have our own Community Guidelines at Nucks Misconduct. You should read them.

    Spinner.vc97ec6e

    Authenticating

    Great!

    Choose an available username to complete sign up.

    In order to provide our users with a better overall experience, we ask for more information from Facebook when using it to login so that we can learn more about our audience and provide you with the best possible experience. We do not store specific user data and the sharing of it is not required to login with Facebook.

    tracking_pixel_9355_tracker