Â鶹´«Ã½Ó³»­

The biggest issue with the Canucks this season has been an inability to score goals. Only the New Jersey Devils score fewer goals per game, but they’ve got Cory Schneider putting up Vezina-caliber goaltending to keep them in playoff position.

When we think about goalscoring, we usually think about the forwards. From what I understand, it’s generally their job to score goals. But, while I don’t want to absolve the forwards of all responsibility, I find it hard to blame them all that much. The struggles seem to start at the other end of the ice, with the defence, as the Canucks continually get pinned in their own zone. It’s tough to put the puck over the goal line when you have so much trouble getting it over your own blue line.

So, let’s break out the statistics and aim them at the Canucks' defence to see if we can pinpoint a problem or two.

I’ll be going from largest sample size down to smallest and all of these statistics will be 5-on-5. While the power play and penalty kill are important parts of the game, I honestly feel that advanced statistics have yet to crack the code on special teams when it comes to individual contributions.

Corsi aka. Shot Attempts

Ìý

We’ll start with corsi, because of course we will.

Unsurprisingly, Chris Tanev is at the top of this chart (spoiler warning: get used to that). With the Canucks possession troubles, the Canucks have only allowed 3 more shot attempts than they’ve taken with Tanev on the ice.

It’s a little more surprising to see his defence partner, Alex Edler, fifth on the list, below Dan Hamhuis, Ben Hutton, and Yannick Weber. Part of the reason for that is Edler was paired with Alex Biega when Tanev was injured and the pairing got absolutely crushed in that time.

That can’t explain all of it, however, as he’s minus-93 in shot attempt differential, a shocking difference from Tanev’s minus-3. Edler averages nearly a minute more per game at even-strength than Tanev and the fact he plays on the left side, furthest from the bench for two-thirds of each game, may play a role. Edler would be more likely to get stuck on the ice than Tanev on a bad change.

Let’s leave that aside for a moment, because oh my goodness Matt Bartkowski, Alex Biega, and Luca Sbisa. The Canucks have allowed 153 more shot attempts than they’ve taken with Bartkowski on the ice. Biega and Sbisa would be worse, but they’ve played half as many minutes this season. Let’s not dwell on that too much for the moment, as there are worse things ahead.

Fenwick aka. Unblocked Shot Attempts

Ìý

Here we see the impact of shot blocking for Tanev and Edler, who are first and second in shot blocks on the Canucks, well ahead of all their teammates. Tanev goes from sub-50% in corsi percentage to top-30 among NHL defencemen in fenwick percentagewith at least 500 minutes this season.

Edler and Hamhuis, meanwhile, come just short of breaking even, while Hutton and Weber stay about the same. Sbisa improves slightly; he is third among Canucks’ defencemen in blocks.

The numbers aren’t pretty for Bartkowski and Biega, however. Bartkowski is dead last among Canucks’ defencemen in shot blocks per game, and, as a result, his fenwick is significantly worse than his corsi. His minus-171 fenwick is third worst among NHL defencemen who have played at least 500 minutes this season, better than only Avalanche pairing Nick Holden and Tyson Barrie.

Biega is somehow even worse than that.

I should throw Biega a bone at this point, however, as he’s spent the majority of his season playing with Bartkowski, which makes it a little bit harder to judge him individually. And when he wasn't playing with Bartkowski, he was shoved into a top pairing role alongside Edler, for which he’s clearly not ready.

Shots aka. Just shots, y'know, shots

Ìý

Edler continues to look better as we narrow the sample size, though we are far enough into the season that the smaller sample sizes of shots do bear some predictive weight, so they should not be discounted.

Tanev, of course, continues to take top spot among Canucks defencemen and moves into the top-20 in shots-for-percentage among NHL defencemen with at least 500 minutes played. Here's your in-depth analysis: dude's good.

Bartkowski overtakes Biega for the bottom of the chart, which is where he’ll stay for a while. Unsurprisingly, his awful shot differential is one of the worst in the NHL, fourth worst to be specific. In fact, Bartkowski has the worst shots-against-per-60-minutes of any NHL defencemen with at least 500 minutes. The Canucks just bleed shots on goal when Bartkowski is on the ice.

The most surprising player on this chart is Sbisa, who overtakes Hamhuis for fourth spot behind Hutton in shots-for-percentage. His numbers still aren’t all that good (and it’s disconcerting to see Hamhuis that low) but it’s an interesting result.

Scoring Chances aka. It's complicated

Ìý

Sbisa crashes back down to the bottom of the chart here, though. While he allows slightly fewer shots on goal than Hamhuis or Hutton when he’s on the ice, they’re far more likely to be scoring chances.

None of the Canucks do particularly well by this scoring chance metric, as . The Canucks as a whole give up a ton of shots from in close, which begins to look like it might be systems-related when compared to other shot-based metrics.

Do I need to point out that Bartkowski gives up more scoring chances per 60 minutes than any other defencemen in the NHL or is that just a given at this point?

Goals aka. You get it

Ìý

Finally, let’s get to the goals. And here’s where it gets a little weird. Luca Sbisa, last among Canucks defencemen in corsi percentage, second-last in scoring chances, is first in goal differential. Sbisa is actually fourth on the Canucks in plus/minus behind the top line of Jannik Hansen and the Sedins.

That’s most likely because of his sky-high on-ice save percentage, highest among Canucks defencemen and one of the highest in the entire league among defencemen. Because of that, it’s tempting to write this off as luck, but Sbisa’s on-ice goal differential, while never good, has never been as bad as his underlying possession numbers would suggest it should be. Perhaps there’s something to the statistics that suggest . I wouldn't be laying any bets on Sbisa continuing to carry a positive goal differential, mind you.

Hamhuis’s on-ice save percentage is right behind Sbisa’s, which explains him moving up the chart from his unsightly shot and scoring chance numbers. Weber crashes and burns here, which pretty quickly explains why the Canucks had no issues waiving him.

But then there’s Bartkowski.

Most of the time, when a player struggles as badly in puck possession as Bartkowski, the thing keeping him in the lineup is goal differential. It’s easy to justify keeping a player in the lineup when you’re outscoring your opposition when he’s on the ice, even if the reason is primarily luck.

But not only is Bartkowski on the ice for more shots and scoring chances against than almost any other defencemen in the NHL, the Canucks also get badly outscored whenever he’s on the ice.

At this point, you have to wonder what the Canucks possibly see in Bartkowski to keep him in the lineup game after game. Bartkowski does leads the Canucks defence in one category: games played. He’s missed just one game all season, a healthy scratch against the Red Wings back in October.

It seems like he’s kept in the lineup for just one reason: his speed. But his ability to skate the puck out of trouble () doesn’t make up for all the other things he does so poorly.

Bartkowski, , is good for exactly one thing. This is the closest I can come to complimenting him—Matt Bartkowski: Better Than War.

So, to sum up: Tanev is one of the best defencemen in the league and Edler is a capable partner for him. Hutton is holding his own as a rookie, while Hamhuis is showing his age. Weber hasn’t been particularly good, but not as bad as Biega and nowhere near as bad as Bartkowski.

As for Sbisa, his track record suggests that he’s just as bad as Bartkowski, if not worse, but his shot differential gives me pause. I’d still prefer a more consistently reliable defenceman in his place, especially with his contract, but I’m no longer comfortable with calling him one of the worst defencemen in the NHL.

Ìý

*All statistics from war-on-ice.com, with occasional reference to stats.hockeyanalysis.com
Ìý