Canucks & Beyond
Next entry: Trade Rumor Generator
Previous entry: Increasingly Annoying Alex Burrows Rumors
Final 20: Trying to Understand the Canucks
by Alanah McGinley on 03/03/09 at 12:05 PM ET
Comments (2)
The Canucks are a study in perception vs reality. While it’s just one team with one set of inalienable facts (i.e. stats) about their performance, there are still many ways to interpret those facts. Thus, the varied perceptions of different fans are unique, despite the fact they’re operating from the same set of facts. So with good reason, it seems that a ton of fans are very optimistic about the Vancouver Canucks right now and many others remain quite guarded.
I think both points of view are reasonable given recent events.
Back in January, a 2-10 record led various pundits to decide the Canucks were out of the playoff race entirely. An understandable conclusion, yet here it is, March 3rd, and the team is in fifth place in the western conference standings. So now we have February’s 10-2 record to reflect on, and I ask… is it any more reliable than January’s performance?
It’s not. The only real distinction between January’s performance and February’s is that this win streak is the most recent incarnation of the Canucks. But that doesn’t necessarily mean it’s the best predictor of future performance.
Nontheless, things are currently going well so that definitely gives ‘optimism’ an edge in the debate, but I’m not sure we should relax our cynicism quite yet. What’s to say that the team can’t relive the joys of January with a 3-12 record for the month of March?
Recording an episode of The Crazy Canucks last night (I’ll link it when it’s online today; update: here it is), J.J. reminded us that last season Vancouver had the playoffs in her sight with less than a dozen games remaining, and yet—inexplicably—went into a tailspin that saw them lose 7 out of the last 8 games. Season over.
Of course, this team isn’t destined to follow the same path by any means, but looking at the months of January and February it’s hard to trust that things have changed for the better with any permanancy. And since there were few clear reasons why the team fell apart to open 2009 in the first place, my optimism will remain guarded.
That being said, I wouldn’t advocate any big changes, either. The Vancouver Canucks are a pretty impressive team on paper, and they have every chance of performing well in their final 20 games. Making any notable changes to the roster would risk crippling that potential, so why do it? To what end?
The Canucks do have plenty of concerns of course, but none of them need to be addressed by roster changes so much as by player performance. Presuming that everyone plays up to their potential—and the coach can hold this bewildering flock of inconsistent loonies together (looking at you, D-men)—Canucks fans already have a team they can feel good about. Potentially.
What they don’t have is a team they can ever relax about entirely and feel confident in. But what’s new about that? (I haven’t unclenched in about 20 years and I fully expect to go to my grave uttering expletives about this team.) But as long as they can somehow stumble into that big June trophy sometime before I drop dead, I’ll take it however I can get it. And with this current version of the Vancouver Canucks, my perception of reality is ‘Why not?’
Anything is possible.
So my suggestion is to Mike Gillis is—aside from a minor depth trade or two—just stand pat on Wednesday and ride the roster he has.
It’s March in the NHL and the job of the administrators is virtually over. Now it’s time for the coach and team to take over and we’ll see which version of the Canucks was the ‘real’ Canucks: the January edition or the February edition.
The next 20 games will provide that answer. Playoff hockey for (at least!) the next two months, methinks. Be afraid… 
*schedule graphic courtesy of Canucks.com
Filed in: vancouver canucks | Canucks and Beyond | Permalink
Tags: playoffs, trade+rumors, vancouver+canucks,
Comments
That’s a great analysis, Ryan, and a very fair one. Your last paragraph summed up a lot of the reasons I feel guarded optimism, rather than outright fear. 
Posted by Alanah McGinley from British Columbia on 03/03/09 at 02:40 PM ET
Add a Comment
Please limit embedded image or media size to 575 pixels wide.
Add your own avatar by joining Kukla's Korner, or logging in and uploading one in your member control panel.
Captchas bug you? Join KK or log in and you won't have to bother.
Most Recent Blog Posts
Wellwood Returning to Vancouver
In Defense of Dany Heatley (sort of)
Sedin’s Agent Not Optimistic About a Vancouver Deal, but is Anyone?
Mike Keenan Joins the Canucks?
GM Place Keeps its Name; Disaster Averted
What’s Trevor Linden Been Up To?
About Canucks & Beyond
Alanah McGinley has been blogging hockey since 2003, sharing opinions, rants and not-so-deep thoughts with anyone who will listen. In addition to writing Canucks & Beyond and helping manage Kukla’s Korner, Alanah is one of the founders and co-hosts of The Crazy Canucks Podcast, as featured at Canucks.com.
She has contributed pieces to FoxSports.com and the New York Times Slapshot blog, as well as other stray destinations in cyberspace.
Email:
Alanah’s Twitter: Not really hockey-ish. [LINK]
Other Canucks Blogs
Clearly it’s not an ‘either-or’ question, but a matter of where in between the two extremes Vancouver actually sits. First, notes on the bad month in January.
They played against the Sharks twice and the Devils once.They won 2 games, lost 5 in regulation, lost 2 in OT, and 3 in shootouts. That means they were three coin-flips away from a 5-5-2 record in January. They were outscored 42-34 (including OT but not shootout goals), and outshot 375-347. That makes for a team shooting percentage of 9.8%, which is pretty ordinary, and a team save percentage of .888, which is very bad. Thing is, the Canucks have the best goalie in the world (who only played five games in Jan.), so there’s no reason to think that bad team save percentage will continue. And in fact…
It didn’t. In February, the Canucks outscored their opponents 41-29 and outshot them 372-343. Their team save percentage rebounded to .915, which is good. But for the record, it’s below Luongo’s career save percentage (.919) and save percentage overall this season (.917), so there’s no reason to think it’ll drop. Their team shooting percentage was 11.0%, which is high and probably will drop, unless Sundin has dramatically improved the Canucks PP. The Canucks won 8 games in regulation, 2 in shootouts, and lost 2 in regulation.
The Canucks were further above average in February than they were below it in January. They finally got their superstar goalie back on the roster and into game shape. Their big free agent acquisition (who has been one of the most consistent producers in the league every year of his career) also appears to be rounding into game shape. The Canucks have played most of the season without Sundin and almost two months without Luongo, so their “natural” or expected performace is likely to be higher than their season average so far. There was clearly some luck involved in February’s run (two coin-flip wins, a suspiciously high shooting percentage), but the Canucks are much closer to the team they were in February than the one they were in January.
Posted by Ryan from Toronto on 03/03/09 at 02:26 PM ET