Evaluating Chris Tanev

With the news that Kevin Bieksa has started practicing with the team again, the next step will be his return to the Canucks lineup, maybe even as early as tomorrow's game against Detroit. This means that one of the Canucks' current defensemen will be hitting the pressbox, unless Sami Salo breaks again. It's almost a certainty that the odd man out will be Chris Tanev. The reasons are numerous: he's an inexperienced rookie, he's not yet used to the long haul of an NHL schedule, and Aaron Rome has kidnapped Vigneault's children and is holding them for ransom in a ploy to get more ice-time.

You will notice, however, that none of those reasons mention the quality of Tanev's play. Part of this is that it's been very difficult to properly assess Tanev: the word that keeps coming to commentator's lips is "poised", but poise is remarkably hard to quantify. It's hard to miss his lack of panic with the puck and his ability to make good outlet passes; mentally, he seems ready for the NHL and certainly has a higher ceiling than someone like Aaron Rome. But is he currently ready physically for the NHL, particularly the grind of the playoffs? Alain Vigneault has stated that Tanev won't be returned to the minors and that he has been impressed with his play, but he'll likely see significant time in the pressbox; come playoff time, with Alex Edler and Andrew Alberts returning, will Tanev see any playing time at all? Would his development be better served playing more significant minutes with the Manitoba Moose?

Manny Malhotra is an Enabler

Pictured: Manny Malhotra, ultimate team player, enabling Ryan Kesler to complete a fist-bump.

It wasn't that long ago that Manny Malhotra was receiving premature buzz for the Selke Award. Now, mired in a 16-game pointless drought, questions are being raised about his role as the third-line center, with some suggesting that Hodgson might supplant him before the season is done. I heard from some quarters that Hodgson's line with Tanner Glass and Jeff Tambellini may as well have been the third-line against the Coyotes, as they often seemed more effective on the ice than the trio of Malhotra, Torres, and Hansen. And tonight on the Team 1040, one of the topics of conversation was whether Malhotra is actually worth his pricey 2.5 million dollar contract.

Yes. The answer is yes, he is.

Don't get me wrong. His point-scoring drought is regrettable and it would be nice if he and Torres broke out of their slumps to provide some tertiary scoring, but Malhotra's value isn't found in directly providing scoring. Instead, Malhotra is an enabler. He enables the scoring in others, particularly in Ryan Kesler and the Sedins.

Unlike a playmaker, who enables scoring in linemates, Malhotra enables the scoring of those on other lines.

The addition of Malhotra has had a trickle up effect, as he takes on the checking role previously held by Kesler, freeing Kesler up to greater offensive opportunities, which he has capitalized on with aplomb. Meanwhile, despite Kesler's increased offensivity, Henrik Sedin and his line have been able to continue in their primarily offensive role thanks to Malhotra's presence in the lineup.

Alex Edler is Not a Number One Defenceman

I had intended to write this article prior to hearing that Edler was out one game and then indefinitely. Now, it almost seems in poor taste to write it, as the consensus seems to be wailing and gnashing of teeth now that Edler is gone for the foreseeable future. However, I noticed that Puck Daddy and the Vancouver Sun referred to Edler as the Canucks' "top defenceman" and some Canucks fans were coming just short of throwing themselves off bridges with the news that Edler would be out of the lineup. Heck, Jeff Paterson compared the Canucks losing Edler to the Flyers losing Pronger. I'm hoping he wasn't saying that Edler is as important to the Canucks' success as Pronger is to the Flyers', and instead, merely pointing out that good teams overcome injuries to good players. Yes, I hope that's all he's saying.

Let's not go overboard, people. Edler is a great defenceman: he leads the Canucks in average ice-time, powerplay time, and points from the defense. But he is not the Canucks' top defenceman. To be quite frank, the Canucks don't have a "top defenceman." Edler is merely a very good defenceman who plays with other very good defencemen. No one is doubting his contributions to the Canucks or that those contributions will be sorely missed, but there are too many components missing to label him the Canucks' top defenceman. While he has the potential, he is not yet a number one defenceman.

Ask it to Bulis: The Greatest Canucks' Moustache & Other Inquiries

Ask it to Bulis is a regular feature wherein casual readers and hardcore Bulies alike can put their questions to two guys no more qualified to answer than they are. Harrison and Daniel preside:


Greatest Canucks' mustache: Babych or Snepsts? -- @staticotaku

H: Tough first question. I'm gonna go with Snepsts, and for totally subjective reasons. It was a slightly fuller, more unkempt mustache that covered a little more area. And because of its downward curvature, he looks the most like Mr. Johnson, the beleaguered blue Muppet who constantly makes the mistake of eating at Charlie's Restaurant, where Waiter Grover works. I have so much sympathy for Mr. Johnson, as there were clearly no other restaurants in Sesame Street (like the Red Robin in Maple Ridge), I can't help but love Harold Snepsts.

D: I have to disagree. Babych has the classier, more kempt moustache. It was big and bushy, but under control. Snepsts has a classic 'stache, but it's just a little too out-of-control for my tastes. There's a reason Babych is #7 on this list of top ten 'staches in all of sports and Snepsts doesn't even warrant a mention.

H: Because MSN.com has the last word on this, apparently.

Random Oddity: Alex Edler has Taken 2 Faceoffs?

It's remarkably easy to spend an excessive amount of time clicking around NHL.com's stat pages. While it doesn't quite reach the addictive qualities of Wikipedia and is miles away from TV Tropes, a puckhead like me can easily see time disappear faster than every contestant's hopes of winning on Ninja Warrior.

Today, however, I stumbled across something odd: Alex Edler has taken two faceoffs. In fact, he is one of only three defencemen in the NHL to record more than one faceoff this season.

Now, before you all rush to the message boards and declare Alex Edler to be the Canucks new fourth line centre, a couple caveats. First, that's stupid. And second, he apparently lost both faceoffs.

But I'm more interested in knowing how it happened. When a centre is waved out of the faceoff circle (which can happen for a multitude of reasons), he's normally replaced by a winger. There are many reasons for this, but it should suffice simply to say that defencemen just aren't meant to take faceoffs; let's say it's against their nature. If the second player taking the faceoff also commits a faceoff violation, the team gets a 2-minute bench minor for delay of game, so you simply won't see several players waved out until a defenceman is the only one remaining to take the draw.

The only occasion I can think of when a defenceman might be called in is if the team is defending a 5-on-3 powerplay with one forward and two defencemen. Oddly enough, the one record I could find in the Canucks season so far of Edler taking a faceoff it was in their unfortunate 6-2 loss to the Minnesota Wild in October where there were no 5-on-3 powerplays for the Wild. In fact, the faceoff was in the offensive zone. To make things even more confusing, the Canucks were on the powerplay at the time with both Henrik Sedin and Ryan Kesler on the ice.

So is it just a clerical error? Did someone write down #23 instead of #33? Well, yeah, probably. Unfortunately, I couldn't track down the other game that he took a faceoff in to see if it too was a typo or a mistake. Given the vital importance of this stat, I enlist you, the fine Bulies reading this, to track down that faceoff!

Can Ryan Kesler Get Even Better?

With another 3-point night to extend his point-scoring streak to 8 games, Ryan Kesler has suddenly become the subject of speculation: is he the best player in the Western Conference? Twitter was abuzz with the question last night, it was one of the main topics of conversation on the Team 1040 morning show on my drive in to work, and Gordon McIntyre even asks if he's the best player in hockey. The sentiment is nice, but off-base. The argument could be made that he is the hottest player in the Western Conference (in terms of his play on the ice, not his physique), but one hot streak does not make him the best.

Don't get me wrong, I like Ryan Kesler and would argue that he is just as important to the team's success as Luongo and the Sedins, but in a conference with Pavel Datsyuk, Nicklas Lidstrom, and the aforementioned Sedins, it's a little early to anoint him with oil and declare him king. It's especially frustrating to see the Sedins continue to get short shrift despite making their nest among the top five in Western Conference scoring. Of note: 14 of Kesler's 34 points were on the powerplay, where he plays with the Sedins. This is not a coincidence.

He has, however, entered into the conversation, which is impressive in and of itself. And there is one statistic that leads to the question posed in the title of this post: can Ryan Kesler get even better?

Merry Christmas from Pass it to Bulis

It's Christmas Eve and I'm with my wife's family in Redmond, WA. "Die Hard 2" has been watched, stockings have been stuffed, and the cinnamon rolls for tomorrow morning's breakfast are in progress right now. As for me, I'm left to ponder the Canucks Christmas gift to their fans, a marvelous 7-3 victory over the Columbus Blue Jackets that featured arguably the first example of true Sedin dominance this season. What is truly astonishing is that it came in a game where they played just over 15 minutes each.

With that performance, the Sedins put themselves fourth in the league with 43 points each. Henrik is first in the league in assists with 35 and Daniel is fourth in the league in goals with 18. Against all odds, the Sedins have been able to continue the elite level of play they established last season.

On top of that, Ryan Kesler is immediately behind Daniel in goals, with 17. Kesler is playing some of the best hockey of his life going into the Christmas break with 13 points in his last 8 games and is seventh in the league in faceoff percentage at 59 percent. The only Canuck ahead of Kesler in faceoff percentage is Manny Malhotra, who sits at second in the league at 62.8%. Even Henrik Sedin is in the top 30 at 53.9%.

As a team, the Canucks are leading the NHL in faceoff percentage by a wide margin. They're at 57.2%, with the second-place Sharks at 53.6%. Sometimes those percentages don't always illustrate the Canucks' dominance effectively. To put it another way, the Canucks have won 1141 faceoffs and lost 854. On a game-to-game basis, that comes out to 35 wins to 26 losses, 9 more faceoff wins per game. That's huge.

The Canucks have lost only one game in regulation out of the last 13, with a record of 10-1-2. They lead the Western Conference in goal differential at +26. A big reason for that is their special teams: the powerplay is back to first in the league at 24.4% and the penalty kill is fifth at 85.5%. And after a rough start this season at even-strength, the Canucks are tied for 6th with Detroit for team +/-. Every single aspect of the Canucks' game is clicking and the Canucks have firmly established themselves as one of the elite teams in the NHL, with a 20-8-5 record. They lead the Western Conference in point percentage, getting 45 points out of a possible 66.

Basically, it's a good time to be a Canucks fan. Merry Christmas, Canucks fans. And while all the wonderful statistics above are surely present enough for our wonderful Bulies, make sure to read these two Christmas-themed posts if you missed them:

Holiday Gift Ideas for the Vancouver Canucks on Your List

Daniel's Worst Christmas - An Original Holiday Tale

Winning the Games They're Supposed to Win

Tony Gallagher wrote an article after the Canucks downed the Maple Leafs 4-1 on Saturday criticizing the effort from the Canucks and wondering how much longer they could play lackadaisical hockey and expect to win. He came just short of accusing the Canucks of playing with the Maple Leafs like a cat with a mouse. There's an inherent expectation in Gallagher's article that the Canucks need to build proper habits now in the regular season so that the habits are properly ingrained come playoff time. Never mind that it's only December, the Canucks should be playing with playoff intensity now.

I'm used to hearing the opposite from Canucks fans and media. I'm used to hearing after every loss to a supposed "inferior" team, The Canucks should be able to beat these guys! or These are the games you have to win! and my favorite Good teams don't lose to bad teams!

The fact is that good teams do lose to bad teams: even the worst team in the league wins a few games and by definition that means they beat "superior" teams. But the complaint has been especially acute amongst Canucks fans. The theory is that the Canucks continually play down to their opponent's level and lose games they should win. Witness the 2005-06 Canucks, who lost all 4 of their meetings with the last-place St. Louis Blues, finishing 3 points out of a playoff spot. Their inability to beat the worst team in the league became the story of that season.

I've even heard the complaint in reference to last season, as some of my more cynical friends pointed to 2 losses against the Edmonton Oilers, the team that finished 12 points behind Toronto for last in the NHL. So is this the case? Did the Canucks play worse against lesser opponents, squandering points that might have put them in a better position in the playoffs?

Keeping Track of Puck Battles: Can Puck-Strength Be Quantified?

I think Jannik Hansen wins puck battles, but I don't know if I can prove it.

Tuesday morning on the Team 1040, Scotty Rintoul and Ray Ferraro held their regular weekly interview with Mike Gillis. These interviews tend to range in their entertainment value, depending on whether Gillis feels like needling Scotty for the inanity of his questions or not, but there was one particularly interesting moment. Because Gillis attended the Moose/Heat game on Saturday, he was asked about what he looks for in a young prospect in terms of bringing them up to the NHL. He didn't hesitate to answer¹: "the one most telling test is their puck-strength and their ability to win puck battles...that's what really separates guys from the American League and the NHL." He talked about strength in protecting the puck and winning puck battles as being the number one thing he looks for on the ice. Not skating, not shooting, not defensive positioning, not stickhandling - puck-strength.

I was intrigued by this, as puck-strength is one of those qualities of a player that seems to defy quantification: there are no statistics that track how strong a player is on a puck, yet it is one of the foundational abilities that leads to success at the NHL level. It's also one of the most easily discernible differences between a rookie and a veteran in the NHL: rookies tend to be knocked off the puck easily and lose puck battles along the boards, while veterans do not. They've got old-man strength. I'd like to look at the one particular area of puck-strength that Mike Gillis mentioned: winning puck battles.

What's the Story With Mason Raymond?

Canucks fans rejoiced this summer when Mike Gillis avoided arbitration with Mason Raymond, the speedy winger that had broken out with a career-high 25 goals. Optimists said that Raymond was a future 30-goal scorer and that he would reach the next level this season.

His renovated ceiling and a new echelon of comparable players led to offseason chatter (or, at the very least, rumours mongered by superagent J.P. Barry) that Raymond was looking for somewhere north of 3.5 million dollars in arbitration. On the steps of the courthouse, however, the Canucks and Raymond agreed to a deal worth 2.5 million for two years. Here's what I said at the time:

I love [this signing]. Gillis gets Raymond at a reasonable cap hit for two years. This is brilliant, because if he turns out to be a one-season wonder as a genuine top-six forward, he's still got a ton of value as a speedy checker. Even if his scoring numbers dip a little bit, Raymond is worth 2.5.

It was and is a reasonable contract, which might be the only reason he's yet to be seriously called out for his slow start to the season. He isn't overpaid, and in a cap world, that seems to be all that matters to people. Furthermore, he's still contributing as a checker (fore- and back-); he doesn't take penalties (only 1 minor all season); he's an important part of Canucks special teams; and his speed backs off defenders 5-on-5, giving his linemates space and time to work. He's got 9 assists for his efforts, only one point back of his point totals through 22 games last year.

But he's not scoring. It's problematic, and it's tough to know what the problem is. Through 22 games, he has 4 goals. The season is still young, but last year, through 22 games, he had 8. A year after scoring 25, Raymond is on pace for nearly half that, at 14. So what's the problem? It's hard to say. He could simply be a one-season wonder. He could also be playing hurt. Was that last year an anomaly or is there something else wrong?

Scoring from the Back-End

Hey guys, remember when this blog was about hockey?

I promise, that's not a euphemism. Instead, I want to talk about our defencemen and the lack of scoring we've seen from them so far this season. It seems like an odd time to bring this up, considering Alex Edler is tied for 8th in scoring amongst defensemen with 13 points in 17 games, a 62-point pace. The Kurtenblog wrote a piece today praising Edler for his play thus far, and rightly so. Christian Ehrhoff is not far behind, with 10 points so far this season. But what I want to talk about is goal scoring.

Through 17 games, the Canucks defense has scored a grand total of 6 goals. This puts them on pace for 28.7 goals in 82 games. Last season, the Canucks defense scored 42 goals, 14 of them from Christian Ehrhoff. After 2 goals in the first 3 games of the season, Ehrhoff hasn't scored since. The second-leading goalscorer from the blueline, Sami Salo, may not even play this season. Those 42 goals were a big chunk of the Canucks' Western Conference leading 268 goals-for.

Fortunately for the defense, the forwards have stepped up in a big way to pick up the slack. Indeed, despite the lack of goalscoring from the defense, the Canucks are still on pace for 261 goals-for this season, with Daniel Sedin leading the way. His 12 goals in 17 games puts him on pace for 58 goals this season, which would shatter his career high of 36. Last season, Steven Stamkos and Sidney Crosby shared the Rocket Richard trophy with 51 goals.

Still, this lack of goalscoring from the defense is a concern. As much as we hope that Daniel Sedin will continue his goal-scoring prowess and that the Canucks' leading goal-scorer last season, Alex Burrows, will round into form as he gets settled into the season, the Canucks need scoring from the defense in order to remain a well-rounded team that is difficult to shutdown.

So why hasn't the defense been scoring? Ehrhoff's stall at the beginning of this season and the lack of Sami Salo are definitely the main contributors, but neither Dan Hamhuis nor Keith Ballard have been able to improve their offensive game upon coming into Vancouver and have been hampered by injuries. Kevin Bieksa has clearly been told to focus on his defensive abilities rather than scoring and was only able to score 3 goals last season in any case. Quite frankly, the defense has been a bit of a mess over the last couple weeks. I am confident that this will change. This is why I'm not too worried yet, even though they're on pace for 13 fewer goals than last season.

Ehrhoff is capable of being better, Edler is showing steady improvement while playing 25 minutes per game, and Hamhuis and Ballard can only improve as they complete their recovery from injuries and, in Ballard's case, off-season surgery. With more steadiness surrounding him, Bieksa will have room to open up his offensive game and, while I doubt he will return to 40 points, could certainly score a few more than the 3 goals he managed last year.

As always, I am optimistic about the Canucks and their abilities, but I do not want to be blindly optimistic. The Canucks defense has been shaky defensively on this road trip, but they also have been questionable offensively. I am confident the goals will come (Edler and Ehrhoff are in the top-15 in the league in shots), but if the trend continues throughout the season, it will be troubling come playoff time. A team that relies too heavily on scoring from forwards is more easily shutdown.

Big Numbers: 3 Things That Are, Like, Whaaaaat?

Hi there! Do you like stats? Here are a few stat-things to help get you through Monday, a generally unliked day, according to cats and Boomtown Rats. (You'll notice that Monday doesn't have a Facebook fan page. That's because nobody likes it.) Well, it's possible these stat-things will make you say "Whaaaaaat?", and therefore inject some life into your Monday.

Thing 1: Canucks are Good at Faceoffs

The Canucks are the best faceoff team in the NHL at 55.6%. Granted, their lead over the next closest team--San Jose--is only 0.1% (the Sharks have a 55.5% success rate), but these are still impressive numbers. Last year, the Canucks finished 7th in the NHL in faceoffs, and they've done well to improve on that so far.

It's not just Manny Malhotra either. Granted, his 62.3% success rate is a large part of this stat, and he's certainly got more than a few tricks to teach the other drawmen, such as using the glove. I pointed out earlier this season that Malhotra wins a lot of defensive draws by getting low enough to sweep the puck back with his glove if the stick is tied up. Did you notice Kesler winning the opening draw of the Maple Leafs game the same way? Granted, it's a glove pass if you're not in the defensive zone, but let's not quibble over small details. Kesler's success rate has jumped from 55.1% to 57.4%. It may not look like much, but it's definitely something. And if you're starving for a larger statistical jump, take a look at Henrik Sedin, who finished last year at 49.5%: so far this season, he's winning draws at a 51.4% success rate.

Thing 2: Canucks Win When Outshot

Vancouver's record when being outshot by the opposition: 5-0-1. That's correct: they have not lost in regulation when they've been outshot. Only the Washington Capitals have the same success in these circumstances .

How do you account for this? Two things. First, good goaltending. While Canuck nation tears Roberto Luongo apart any time he lets in more than one goal, it's hard to be too critical when he keeps the Canucks in games where they don't have the run of play. Second, the Canucks apparently don't need to pepper the opposition goaltender to score. They're 5th in the NHL, averaging 3.19 goals per game, but only 10th in the NHL in shots per game, at 31.5.

Also interesting: most of their goals are coming in the third period. In fact, only Washington has scored more after forty minutes. And if you love weird negative anomalies, consider this: Vancouver has only scored 10 goals in 2nd periods. That is the lowest total in the NHL.

Thing 3: Canucks Tend to Score When They Have More Guys on the Ice Than the Other Team

The Canucks have the 2nd best power play in the NHL, behind only the Minnesota Wild. On the road, however, it's the best powerplay in the league. Last year, the Canucks powerplay was 11th on the road (6th overall). These improvements bode well for new powerplay coach Newell Brown, who has given some new looks and structures to the Canucks' special teams.

I initially thought it was a crazy idea to put Ryan Kesler on the Canucks' first unit, but he's got 4 power play goals this season, second only to Daniel Sedin's 5. Kesler has busted out of an early-season scoring slump and is making Newell Brown look like he knows more than casual fans. I refuse to believe this is the case.

In Defense of Bieksa's Defense

Kevin Bieksa did not end last season well. His infamous double slide (what does it mean?) in the playoffs against the Blackhawks gave those who dislike Bieksa plenty of ammunition throughout the summer to criticize the beleaguered blueliner and demand him to be traded. In fact, with the acquisition of Ballard and Hamhuis, it seemed a foregone conclusion that Bieksa was on his way out of town, given his $3.75 million contract does not include a no trade clause.

The trade rumours did make sense: after all, Bieksa has put up two 40+ point seasons, intriguing numbers for any GM wanting to add an offensive weapon to their blueline. Meanwhile, a large portion of Canucks fans have become disillusioned with Bieksa, discounting his offensive contributions because of his defensive deficiencies. Many hoped that opposition GMs would perk up at the sight of a 40-point defeseman and conveniently ignore his career -18 rating and boneheaded mistakes.

Then, Sami Salo shockingly got injured playing floor ball. Shane O'Brien failed to make the starting roster. Ballard and Hamhuis, models of health prior to joining the Canucks, fell victim to injuries just a few games into the season. And suddenly, Kevin Bieksa is a key defensive cog in the Canucks machine.

Kevin Bieksa's detractors are quite vocal (I should know, I frequently watch Canucks games with one), but I think their distaste is misguided. I won't deny what their eyes are telling them: Bieksa does make mistakes. Those mistakes, however, are rarely as egregious as they may seem, not as plentiful as imagined, and not as detrimental to his overall defensive play as generally posited. In fact, 12 games into the Canucks season, Bieksa has been a defensive stalwart. Instead, as mentioned in a Houses of the Hockey's blog post, Bieksa's detractors are suffering from confirmation bias: due to a few plays like the double-slide mentioned above, every mistake Bieksa makes is magnified and held up as confirmation of his awful defensive play. Meanwhile, every great defensive play is ignored as being inconsequential or simply, "Every defenseman should make that play." The statistics paint a different picture.

I'm going to make a radical suggestion here: the coaching staff often know what they're doing. This isn't a popular suggestion amongst Canucks fans who always know better than those inside the organization, but there is a reason Alain Vigneault is a professional NHL coach who has led the Canucks to 1st in the Northwest three of the last four seasons. Even though his decisions sometimes confuse and infuriate me, he has also been phenomenally successful as the head coach of the Canucks. Sometimes, but only sometimes, I know better than Alain Vigneault, but it's fair to give him the benefit of the doubt.

And the way Alain Vigneault has been using Kevin Bieksa in the absence of Dan Hamhuis is illuminating. Bieksa has faced the highest Quality of Competition (QoC) on the Canucks this season. He and Alberts have consistently been sent out against the top competition, with Bieksa seeing significantly more ice time per game than Alberts. Meanwhile, Alexander Edler and Christian Ehrhoff, while leading the Canucks in ice-time, have been playing very sheltered minutes, with Edler facing the lowest QoC of any defenseman not named Keith Ballard.

So, Bieksa faces the toughest competition night in and night out while playing an average of 22 minutes a night. The composition of those 22 minutes is also enlightening. In the absence of Dan Hamhuis, Bieksa leads all Canucks defensemen in shorthanded time-on-ice. He is consistently relied upon to kill penalties and is only exceeded in total minutes shorthanded by Manny Malhotra, who never seems to leave the ice on the penalty kill.

Now, all of this time spent on the ice would be detrimental to the Canucks success if Kevin Bieksa was the defensive liability he is purported to be. And yet, while he has only managed to put up 3 points this season (with 1 on the powerplay and therefore not contributing to his +/-), Bieksa is still +4.

Now I hear the stat-heads shouting already, "Small sample size!" so let's open things up from just goals scored at even-strength (which plus-minus tracks) to shot-differential at even-strength (which the Corsi statistic tracks). In a nutshell, Corsi is meant to be a measure of puck possession, using the metric of shots, including missed shots and blocked shots. Bieksa, despite being used against the opponent's best players, ranks just behind Christian Ehrhoff for his on-ice Corsi numbers with a 10.09 rating. Simply put, Bieksa moves the puck in the right direction: when he is on the ice, more pucks are directed at the opponent's net than his own.

So how do we explain this, when the story we've been given is that Kevin Bieksa is an offensive defenceman who is a liability in his own end? How do we explain Alain Vigneault consistently using him against the top players from the opposition? How do we explain his shorthanded time-on-ice? How do we explain his Corsi numbers? We've seen the mistakes with our own eyes, we decry every error he makes during each game, but the statistics for this season indicate that those mistakes either aren't as egregious as they seem or are made up for by the rest of his game. Bieksa is strong on the boards and smart with his stick, currently leading all Canucks defencemen in takeaways. He gets into shooting lanes and is third on the team in blocked shots. And he's a solid passer, getting the puck out of the defensive zone safely and still in Canuck possession.

But my theory is that one of the main reasons for his solid defensive statistics is due to what is likely the strongest area of his game: pinching down the boards in the offensive zone. Bieksa is extremely aggressive in the offensive zone, pinching all the way down past the goal line at times. With his strength along the boards, he frequently is able to keep the puck deep in the offensive zone, where the Sedins can cycle, the Kesler line can skate with the puck, and the third line can grind down the opponent's defense. And every successful pinch by Bieksa is a failed attempt to clear the zone for the other team, negating their ability to create offense. Sometimes, this tendency leads to odd-man rushes the other way, but Bieksa has shown excellent awareness thus far this season, limiting those opportunities and using his strong skating to get back into position quickly.

I mentioned confirmation bias earlier, and I admit that I am susceptible to this issue myself, as I like Bieksa and feel he has been unfairly maligned. I confess, I find myself frequently watching Canucks games keeping a close eye on positive contributions by Bieksa and risk letting those confirm my bias towards him, but I feel that the statistics strongly indicate that he is much stronger defensively than his reputation would indicate. He's not Willie Mitchell and I doubt he'll shake the reputation as offense-first, but he deserves praise for his play in the absence of Dan Hamhuis and I sincerely hope he continues his strong defensive play throughout the season.

Big Numbers: Interesting Stats, Eight Games In

Below you will find a compendium of interesting stats. Take from them what you will. Or, if you're feeling particularly sluggish this morning, take from them what I have taken from them. Yes, feel free to plagiarize my thoughts, like the government does through the microchip they've implanted in my utricle. I long ago lost the will to fight it.

1. Through the first eight games, Henrik Sedin and Ryan Kesler are six seconds apart in total time on ice at 159:20 in 196 shifts and 159:14 in 197, respectively. The difference between their TOI per game is one second. In short, their time on ice has been basically identical through eight games. Interestingly, it's not even close to the same type of ice time. Henrik has nearly twenty total minutes more time at even-strength, and Kesler spends far more time on special teams time on both sides of the man advantage. He's got seventeen more minutes of PK time, and two more minutes of power play time. Huh?
   
   
2. Kesler really shouldn't have more total power play time. He not only leads the team in missed shots with 17--he's first among forwards and second overall in the NHL. Who's in front of him? Duncan Keith. That's a double-edged sword for the Blackhawks. Keith's missed shots numbers are going to be inflated because he's a defenseman and he plays so many minutes a game. But he's only got three assists for a guy who plays nearly half of every Blackhawks game. Both Kesler and Keith are offensive catalysts for their team, hence the frequency with which they shoot. This stat is a large part of the slow start in both Vancouver and Chicago. Both of these guys needs to start hitting the net. Note: Keith also leads the league in giveaways. Don't get me wrong--he's still an incredible player, but he's not playing as well as they're saying. He's just playing a lot.
   
   
3. Before we move on, you should also know the Canucks are 2nd in the NHL in the team missed shots category, behind only Pittsburgh. Not too surprising, as Alain Vigneault once said that Pittsburgh plays the exact same style as the Canucks. There are, as a result, other statistical similarities, like the one below:
   
   
4. Vancouver is second in the league in total hits with 216, behind only Pittsburgh's 240. And not that it's paying off, but the Canucks lead the NHL in hits on the road, with 120. They are 10th in hitting at home. Strangely, Pittsburgh has the inversion of this stat, leading the league in hits at home and sitting 11th on the road. Here's the weird part: Pittsburgh is below .500 at home and 3-0-1 on the road; The Canucks are winless on the road and 3-0-1 at home. Why do these teams win less when they hit more? I couldn't say for certain. My guess is that, while they're already very hitty teams, they hit more when trying to come from behind.
   
   
5. The Canucks are 2nd in the NHL in total faceoff percentage, at 56.6%. All three of the Canucks top faceoff men are over 50% at the dot, with Manny Malhotra leading the league at an ungodly 66.9% over 139 faceoffs. That is a very large sample size at which to win two-thirds of your draws. Ryan Kesler is 14th in the NHL at an impressive 57.6%, and Henrik Sedin is 40th with 51.6%. How's about that fourth line? Well, interestingly enough, only the three guys mentioned above have even taken enough faceoffs to merit statistical consideration. 11 other guys have taken draws, and only Peter Schaefer has taken more than ten. Of note: Rick Rypien has nine; he's won six of them.
   
   
6. Considering Malhotra and Kesler are defensive centers with excellent faceoff percentages, it's probably no surprise they lead the team in shorthanded time on ice among forwards. Who is the highest clocking winger? Peter Schaefer, to nobody's surprise. He has been an excellent defensive player. Following him, it's Jannik Hansen.
   
   
7. Do you hear that? It's the sound of nobody missing Shane O'Brien. Andrew Alberts, who won his job in the preseason, shares the team lead for hits with Jannik Hansen at 23 apiece. Alberts is also second in blocked shots, with 13. Who leads the team? Alex Edler, with 15. Interestingly, Ryan Kesler also has 13, and the next best shot-blocking forward only has 5. It's Peter Schaefer. Keith Ballard had 8 blocked shots in two games before he was knocked out with the concussion. He would likely be leading the team right now.
   
   
8. Speaking of Jannik Hansen, let us say something about his 23 hits. While he might not hit as hard as Alberts, he's hitting with frequency and efficiency. Hansen has the ability and multi-dimensionality to be this team's Kris Versteeg--a gritty guy with enough skill to occasionally surprise. Last game was a nice start, but he needs to do that more often. Here's hoping the chemistry he appears to have with Malhotra is for real.
   
   
9. Kevin Bieksa leads the team in giveaways, as he has since the first game of the season. He has nine now, widening the gap since the last time I brought this up. Bieksa just might run away with this dubious category. Christian Ehrhoff is second on the team with six, but I don't remember each one of his nearly as vividly. You probably know exactly how I feel about Kevin Bieksa, so I'll just move on.
   
   
10. Mason Raymond leads the team in takeaways with 8. He doesn't get nearly enough talk about his defensive play. The Sedins are up there as well, with 7 apiece. They don't just hold onto the puck spectacularly; they regularly take the puck.
    
    
11. Canuck forwards without a goal are Tanner Glass, Guillaume Desbiens, Peter Schaefer, Jannik Hansen, Rick Rypien... and Henrik Sedin. It doesn't mean anything, especially considering he plays on the one of the most productive lines in hockey and he leads the league in assists, but the less time he spends on a line--even a stat line--with Tanner Glass the better.
    
    
12. And finally, penalty minutes. Here's an interesting stat: through eight games, there isn't a single Canuck with more than one major penalty. Torres, Rypien, Alberts, and Desbiens have all fought one time and only one time. In total penalty minutes, Raffi Torres leads the team, but don't start ripping on him just yet. There are four guys with more minor penalties: Jannik Hansen, Mikael Samuelsson, Andrew Alberts, and Kevin Bieksa all have four. Do you know who shouldn't have four? Mikael Samuelsson. His temper doesn't get a lot of play, but it should. Ask Sweden: he can muster a boatloads of antipathy in a very short time. Most of his penalties are acts of aggression directed towards somebody who has pissed him off. He's a heady veteran who should know better than to take so many retaliatory penalties.

Big Numbers: Playoff Stats Of Which You Might Not Be Aware

There's more game day Canucks coverage to come today on Pass it to Bulis!, but I thought I might start off your morning with some statistics that might fill you with joy, bookended with stats about our boy Ryan Kesler, who is quietly having an incredible playoffs.

1. Ryan Kesler has eight points in seven games. That's a point-a-game pace for the second line center, who leads Canucks forwards in ice time with 21.49 a game. Give Alain Vigneault credit for sticking with the same ice time model he used during the regular season: Ryan Kesler gets more ice time per game than the Sedins. It's beyond intelligent. First, Kesler is no slouch on offense, as his point a game pace suggests, so the Canucks don't lapse into a solely defensive shell when he's on the ice. Furthermore, AV's best players don't need to monopolize ice time to monopolize the box score, so he doesn't make them. It means the Sedins are far better rested than the top line defenseman defending them going into the third period. Speaking of which:

2. Daniel Sedin had six points in six third periods during the Los Angeles series. That's right. In the LAK series, he was a point a game player in third periods alone. This might explain why the Canucks have won every game in which they've been trailing after the first period. It's only happened twice, but, come on, what a confidence boost. We already discussed this stat a little during the first point, so as for an explanation, I think it's probably in the expert allocation of minutes from the coaching staff. We can also see this in defensive ice time. Take a look.

3. The Canucks are the only team without a single defenseman averaging over 25 minutes a game, and this speaks to defensive depth. (According to the stat sheet, MTL's Markov is only averaging twenty-three minutes, but his stats are heavily skewed by leaving early in the first period of the series opener with Pittsburgh. That game aside, he's averaging nearly 28.) Now, The Canucks d-core has been much-maligned since the loss of Mitchell and the acquisition of Alberts, but AV has trusted all six players to carry the weight, and the Canucks have done well. In case you're wondering, Alex Edler is leading the team, at 24.09 per game, with Christian Ehrhoff only five seconds behind. All of the Canucks' top four--Edler, Ehrhoff, Salo, Bieksa--are averaging over twenty minutes a game, but, again, none more than twenty-five. I submit that, while the Canucks lack a top-pairing defenseman of the high order some other teams have, they have among the most balanced top four in the league, which each player capable of making a strong breakout pass, playing the point on the power play and jumping into the rush. Keep in mind that, while they're not overly tough, the Canucks' coaching staff doesn't really want them to be. Hits tend to take a player out of position for a quick transition, and that seems to be the Canucks' bread and butter this year. The genius of the bottom-two (O'Brien, Alberts) is that they may not be as capable of the offensive side, but they both cover the missing aspects of the Canucks' d-core, with the potential to bruise and move bodies away from the net on the power play.

4. Each of the Canucks top three centers (Sedin, Kesler, Wellwood) is over 50% in faceoffs. Among players on teams not yet eliminated, Henrik Sedin and Kyle Wellwood are third and fourth in percentage with 58.9 and 57.1 ratings, respectively, and Sedin is second only to Sidney Crosby in faceoffs won with 96. He's taken nine less. In the absence of Ryan Johnson, Sedin and Kesler are also taking the majority of short-handed faceoffs, and they're both over 50% there as well. The stat is also a big deal for Wellwood, who has proven a lot of people wrong for doubting him as a third-line center. Gord MacIntyre agrees. He's dependable at both ends of the ice, works hard, and makes sure his line has the puck for most of their shift.

5. The Canucks are averaging 4.29 goals per game, best in the league. Pittsburgh sits second at 3.88, and the Chicago Blackhawks are the worst of the eight remaining at 2.57. This is a testament to the Canucks' offensive prowess, which is far and away the best in the league, judging by playoff stats alone. The Canucks have goals by 14 different players, the most of any team (although three other teams have 13). It gets even better if you just look at even-strength scoring.

6. The Canucks 5-on-5 goals for to goals against ratio is a 3.00, which is mind-blowing. The next closest team is Detroit at 1.33. In essence, the Canucks are the best team in the NHL playoffs five-on-five. This shouldn't come as a total surprise, mind you: they were second only to Washington in this stat during the regular season. Washington was at 1.57. The Canucks' current 3.00 is absolutely incredible, and it's probably the explanation for the next stat.

7. Of players still in the playoffs, the Canucks have four players in the top five for plus/minus. Edler, Samuelsson, Henrik and Daniel are first, second, third, and fifth, respectively, with Conn Smyth front-runner Joe Pavelski sitting in fourth. Edler and Samuelsson are tied for first at +9. If we expand the count to the top ten, Christian Ehrhoff and Ryan Kesler jump in at ninth and tenth, respectively.

8. The Canucks don't have a single player in the top thirty in hits. I'm serious. Alex Burrows leads the team in hits with 20, good for 35th. Steve Bernier, Alex Edler (seriously), and Shane O'Brien all come in around 5oth, with 17 apiece. Don't panic, however. This doesn't mean the Canucks are weak or small. They just haven't had to play tough in order to win. Yet. This trend can't possibly continue. Expect the Blackhawks to challenge them here as early as today.

9. Ryan Kesler is second in the league in takeaways, behind only Pavel Datsyuk. Kesler has one less giveaway, however. Keep in mind as well that Datsyuk has played two more games at this point, and that's a pretty big deal considering we're talking about nine games instead of seven. Its worth noting that all three Selke nominees are still playing in the playoffs (surprised? defense wins championships). It's hard to say he's been the best second-line center, considering what Joe Pavelski's done in San Jose, but, considering that Pavelski's scoring has made up for the lack of scoring from the big line, Kesler's just seems like some sort of super bonus.


Not too shabby, eh? Now let's be clear. As awesome as these stats are, it's over a six game sample. If the Canucks can keep it up, then we're really getting somewhere, but two or three bad games and it won't do us any good at all to cherry-pick stats, will it? Fingers crossed on a great game tonight.