/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_image/image/22025263/186159199.0.jpg)
TEAM SCORING CHANCE TOTALS
VAN |
WSH |
||||||
ES |
PP |
SH |
ES |
PP |
SH |
||
1 |
3 |
3 |
0 |
4 |
2 |
0 |
|
2 |
5 |
3 |
0 |
1 |
1 |
0 |
|
3 |
6 |
3 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
0 |
|
0T |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
Totals |
14 |
9 |
1 |
6 |
4 |
0 |
|
VAN |
23 |
|
WSH |
10 |
|
COMPLETE SCORING CHANCE SUMMARY
Team | Period | Time | Note | Home | Away | State | ||||||||||
Away | 1 | 18:42 | Ove - beat Edler (penalty shot) | 1 | 5 | 17 | 23 | 29 | 33 | 8 | 19 | 30 | 52 | 88 | 90 | 5v5 |
Home | 1 | 16:29 | D. Sedin (takeaway H. Sedin | 1 | 3 | 22 | 23 | 33 | 16 | 21 | 30 | 61 | 88 | 4v4 | ||
Home | 1 | 15:49 | Kesler - beat D one on one | 1 | 5 | 17 | 22 | 23 | 33 | 10 | 20 | 30 | 61 | 88 | 5v4 | |
Home | 1 | 15:37 | Burrows - screen | 1 | 2 | 5 | 14 | 20 | 25 | 20 | 25 | 27 | 30 | 74 | 5v4 | |
Away | 1 | 14:55 | Johansson - beat Edler wide | 1 | 3 | 17 | 22 | 23 | 33 | 8 | 19 | 30 | 52 | 88 | 90 | 5v5 |
Home | 1 | 11:41 | Santorelli - pp | 1 | 2 | 3 | 14 | 20 | 25 | 10 | 16 | 30 | 34 | 61 | 5v4 | |
Away | 1 | 10:39 | Brower - beat Higgens | 1 | 2 | 8 | 17 | 20 | 8 | 19 | 20 | 30 | 52 | 90 | 4v5 | |
Away | 1 | 9:42 | Grabowski - turnover D. Sedin | 1 | 2 | 8 | 22 | 33 | 8 | 10 | 21 | 30 | 42 | 74 | 4v5 | |
Home | 1 | 8:30 | Kassian Goal - pass Higgins | 1 | 5 | 9 | 13 | 20 | 23 | 16 | 25 | 30 | 52 | 84 | 88 | 5v5 |
Home | 1 | 6:21 | Kassian - takeaway and pass Burrows | 1 | 3 | 9 | 18 | 20 | 25 | 16 | 24 | 30 | 34 | 43 | 61 | 5v5 |
Away | 1 | 5:23 | Ward - deflection, turnover Sesito | 1 | 5 | 17 | 22 | 23 | 33 | 8 | 19 | 30 | 52 | 88 | 90 | 5v5 |
Away | 1 | 0:22 | Johansson - beat Edler | 1 | 8 | 17 | 22 | 23 | 33 | 8 | 19 | 30 | 52 | 88 | 90 | 5v5 |
Home | 2 | 15:54 | Kesler - deflection pp | 1 | 2 | 5 | 17 | 22 | 33 | 21 | 27 | 30 | 42 | 74 | 5v4 | |
Home | 2 | 15:52 | H. Sedin -rebound pp | 1 | 2 | 5 | 17 | 22 | 33 | 21 | 27 | 30 | 42 | 74 | 5v4 | |
Away | 2 | 14:06 | Ovi - rush - beat Hamhuis and Tanev | 1 | 2 | 8 | 15 | 25 | 8 | 19 | 20 | 30 | 52 | 90 | 4v5 | |
Home | 2 | 11:49 | Archibald wins puck battle and pass. | 1 | 8 | 13 | 14 | 18 | 49 | 16 | 25 | 27 | 30 | 74 | 84 | 5v5 |
Home | 2 | 9:45 | Richardson - rush , Kassian puck battle win | 1 | 5 | 9 | 15 | 23 | 29 | 8 | 25 | 27 | 30 | 74 | 84 | 5v5 |
Home | 2 | 8:29 | H. Sedin -takeaway Kesler | 1 | 3 | 13 | 17 | 22 | 23 | 8 | 19 | 30 | 61 | 88 | 90 | 5v5 |
Home | 2 | 5:30 | Kesler - ms , pass H. sedin pp | 1 | 3 | 17 | 22 | 23 | 33 | 10 | 16 | 30 | 34 | 74 | 5v4 | |
Away | 2 | 3:45 | Grabowski - deflection - ms | 1 | 3 | 9 | 15 | 18 | 29 | 25 | 30 | 42 | 52 | 84 | 88 | 5v5 |
Home | 2 | 1:39 | Kesler - ms, pass Henrik | 1 | 3 | 17 | 18 | 22 | 33 | 10 | 20 | 21 | 30 | 34 | 61 | 5v5 |
Home | 2 | 0:54 | Santorelli - won puck battle | 1 | 5 | 17 | 20 | 23 | 25 | 25 | 27 | 30 | 42 | 74 | 84 | 5v5 |
Home | 3 | 18:38 | Kesler pass H. Sedin | 1 | 2 | 8 | 17 | 22 | 33 | 8 | 19 | 27 | 30 | 74 | 90 | 5v5 |
Away | 3 | 18:09 | Grabowski - Goal -Bieksa lost PB, Stantion out of pos. | 1 | 3 | 9 | 15 | 18 | 29 | 25 | 30 | 34 | 42 | 61 | 84 | 5v5 |
Home | 3 | 17:45 | Burrows - wraparound, takeaway | 1 | 5 | 14 | 20 | 23 | 25 | 10 | 20 | 21 | 30 | 34 | 61 | 5v5 |
Home | 3 | 17:08 | Kesler (Goal) - rebound, pass H. Sedin | 1 | 3 | 17 | 18 | 22 | 33 | 8 | 19 | 27 | 30 | 52 | 90 | 5v5 |
Home | 3 | 15:43 | H. Sedin - pass D. Sedin | 1 | 2 | 8 | 17 | 22 | 33 | 8 | 19 | 27 | 30 | 74 | 90 | 5v5 |
Home | 3 | 15:20 | D. Sedin - deflection | 1 | 2 | 8 | 17 | 22 | 33 | 8 | 19 | 27 | 30 | 74 | 90 | 5v5 |
Home | 3 | 15:00 | D. Sedin (Goal) - screen | 1 | 2 | 8 | 17 | 22 | 33 | 8 | 19 | 27 | 30 | 74 | 90 | 5v5 |
Home | 3 | 13:01 | H. Sedin - ms | 1 | 2 | 5 | 17 | 22 | 33 | 20 | 21 | 27 | 30 | 74 | 5v4 | |
Home | 3 | 12:45 | H. Sedin | 1 | 2 | 5 | 17 | 22 | 33 | 25 | 30 | 34 | 42 | 52 | 5v4 | |
Home | 3 | 6:20 | Santorelli - ms, takeaway | 1 | 5 | 15 | 23 | 25 | 8 | 19 | 20 | 30 | 52 | 90 | 4v5 | |
Away | 3 | 5:34 | Erat - rebound, ms | 1 | 2 | 8 | 17 | 20 | 8 | 10 | 20 | 21 | 30 | 74 | 4v5 | |
Home | 3 | 2:04 | Santorelli - rush pp, pass Higgins | 1 | 3 | 14 | 20 | 23 | 25 | 25 | 30 | 34 | 42 | 61 | 5v4 |
CANUCK ON-ICE SCORING CHANCES FOR AND AGAINST
# | Player | EV | PP | SH | ||||||
1 | LUONGO, ROBERTO | 14 | 6 | 9 | 0 | 1 | 4 | |||
2 | HAMHUIS, DAN | 12:54 | 4 | 0 | 05:36 | 6 | 0 | 04:33 | 0 | 4 |
3 | BIEKSA, KEVIN | 16:34 | 5 | 3 | 04:52 | 3 | 0 | 01:44 | 0 | 0 |
5 | GARRISON, JASON | 13:55 | 4 | 2 | 06:00 | 6 | 0 | 01:24 | 1 | 0 |
8 | TANEV, CHRISTOPHER | 12:59 | 5 | 1 | 00:00 | 0 | 0 | 04:25 | 0 | 4 |
9 | KASSIAN, ZACK | 10:28 | 3 | 2 | 00:07 | 0 | 0 | 00:00 | 0 | 0 |
13 | WELSH, JEREMY | 07:20 | 3 | 0 | 00:00 | 0 | 0 | 00:00 | 0 | 0 |
14 | BURROWS, ALEXANDRE | 12:03 | 2 | 0 | 03:54 | 3 | 0 | 00:00 | 0 | 0 |
15 | RICHARDSON, BRAD | 09:47 | 1 | 2 | 00:47 | 0 | 0 | 03:07 | 1 | 1 |
17 | KESLER, RYAN | 14:57 | 8 | 4 | 06:08 | 6 | 0 | 02:48 | 0 | 2 |
18 | STANTON, RYAN | 11:42 | 4 | 2 | 00:08 | 0 | 0 | 00:03 | 0 | 0 |
20 | HIGGINS, CHRIS | 11:44 | 4 | 0 | 04:34 | 3 | 0 | 02:39 | 0 | 2 |
22 | SEDIN, DANIEL | 15:56 | 8 | 3 | 06:11 | 6 | 0 | 01:06 | 0 | 1 |
23 | EDLER, ALEXANDER | 17:07 | 6 | 4 | 05:13 | 3 | 0 | 01:35 | 1 | 0 |
25 | SANTORELLI, MIKE | 11:51 | 3 | 0 | 04:32 | 3 | 0 | 03:04 | 1 | 1 |
29 | SESTITO, TOM | 06:06 | 1 | 3 | 00:07 | 0 | 0 | 00:00 | 0 | 0 |
33 | SEDIN, HENRIK | 16:04 | 7 | 4 | 06:11 | 6 | 0 | 01:00 | 0 | 1 |
49 | ARCHIBALD, DARREN | 04:52 | 1 | 0 | 00:00 | 0 | 0 | 00:00 | 0 | 0 |
Statistical Three Stars:
1. Ryan Kesler
2. Daniel Sedin
3. Micheal Neuvirth
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 |
|
|
WASHINGTON |
||||
Period |
Successful |
Attempted |
%
|
|
Successful |
Attempted |
% |
1 |
15 |
24 |
63% |
10 |
20 |
50% |
|
2 |
15 |
26 |
58% |
12 |
24 |
50% |
|
3 |
13 |
19 |
68% |
13 |
26 |
50% |
|
Total |
43 |
69 |
62% |
35 |
70 |
50% |
- The Canucks were the better team in the neutral zone.
- Overall, it was one of the teams' best games in terms of OZE%.
- The final score did not reflect the Canucks' advantage in the neutral zone.
- OZE% (against) shows the Capitals were an average team offensively.
- It was an even game in terms of OZE attempts.
- The Canucks had 26 successful 'carry ins' .
- Washington had an above average total of 29.
- The Capitals were an above average 'puck moving' team.
- However, they failed to create the expected number of scoring chances.
- The Canucks had 18 successful 'dump ins' out of 36 (50%).
- The Capitals had only 8 'dump in' wins out of 33 (24%).
- The Canucks' won the puck battle stat decisively.
- Coach John Torterella and his aggressive forecheck system was a big factor in the game.
DEFENSIVE ZONE ENTRY 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 |
|
|
WASHINGTON |
||||
Period |
Successful |
Attempted |
%
|
|
Successful |
Attempted |
% |
1 |
15 |
29 |
52% |
15 |
25 |
60% |
|
2 |
15 |
29 |
52% |
12 |
25 |
49% |
|
3 |
16 |
29 |
54% |
11 |
25 |
44% |
|
Total |
46 |
86 |
52% |
38 |
75 |
50% |
- Overall, the game was even in terms of DZE%.
- The Capitals defense moved the puck very well in the first period.
- The Capitals defence were above average in the first period.
- The Canucks forechecking put pressure on the Capitals defence in the last 2 periods.
- The Canucks defence were a little above average in DZE% for the game.
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 |
WASHINGTON
|
|
ES (PP) {SH} = TOTAL EXP. SCORE |
ES (PP) {SH} = TOTAL EXP. SCORE |
|
3.4 (2) {.1}= 5.5 |
1.5 (.8) {.2} = 2.5 |
- Expected Score suggests: the Canucks should have won the game 5 - 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 {EPA} of ~ 2.3.
- Michael Neuvrith had an {EPA} of ~5.5.
- Luongo's rating was +.3 goals.
- Neurith's rating +3.5 goals.
- The Capitals actually won the goaltending battle by a large margin.
- Luongo's performance looked better or more important because the Canucks did not score on an average number of their chances.
TURNOVERS (EvenStrength)
- The Canucks won the turnover battle.
- Vancouver had an above average total of 17 turnovers.
- The Canucks had 10 turnovers in the 1st period.
- Washington had a high total of 21 turnovers.
- The Capitals had 16 turnovers in the final two periods.
THE DECIDING FACTORS
- The 'Ry and Ginger' Line were terrific!
- The Canucks forecheck took over in the final two periods.
- The Capitals goaltender Micheal Neuvith kept the game close.
- The Canucks could not take full advantage of their high number of SC's.
- This was especially true on the power play where the team had 9 chances and 16 shots.
Feel free to add comments and questions below!