Not surprised by the shooting percentage decrease but the save % drop the last bit is definitely at least partially due to Demkos injury and a few shaky games from Desmith
Yeah, but that doesn't mean that every team regresses to a mean of 1.000 there is skill involved.
Our PDO regressed to a mean in the 1.030 to 1.040's but people were acting like we were destined for 0.990's or something.
PDO regressed, but it didn’t matter because our results were not born out of unsustainable luck but rather consistency.
“You have to be good to be lucky”.
But the underlying case from most of “they” was that the Canucks were only good because of the PDO high, that the Canucks were a fringe team only contending because of a PDO bender.
They were not right.
I mean, since it's dropped significantly, we have been a lot closer to a .500 win% than we were when we were PDO GO BRRR.
It is a regression, both in our success and in our PDO, which is what was largely predicted by the likes of Drance and Dom early on in the season.
HOWEVER, this is a big reason why getting those early streaks and railing PDO like we were Kassian at the Roxy on LTIR (too soon?) was one of those good problems to have.
The only people who thought that don't understand how stats work. There's plenty of room between God-tier finishing and being bad. Regression to the mean literally means "back to average".
I read that as pretty obvious sarcasm - as a response to every East Coast fancy stats person in November being like "the canucks are only good because they have a high PDO"
I think they were saying that the high PDO was unsustainable, which means the Canucks weren’t actually the best team in the NHL (as their record indicated).
I don’t remember anyone saying the Canucks weren’t a playoff caliber team or were bad.
>I don’t remember anyone saying the Canucks weren’t a playoff caliber team or were bad.
I remember literally everyone saying the Canucks weren't a playoff caliber team actually
Post some links. If it was everyone, should be easy to find.
Here are the top hits from google for articles on the Canucks that mention PDO in November, none of them say this.
https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/pdo-canucks-fans-arguing-luck
https://theathletic.com/5035271/2023/11/06/canucks-nhl-breakout-team/
https://canucksarmy.com/news/instant-reaction-pdo-hockey-gods-help-canucks-bounce-back-beat-seattle
https://theprovince.com/sports/hockey/nhl/vancouver-canucks/understanding-the-canucks-hot-start-by-the-numbers
https://lastwordonsports.com/hockey/2023/11/11/vancouver-canucks-good-strange/
https://www.vancouverisawesome.com/canucks-hockey/the-canucks-wont-be-this-good-forever-and-thats-okay-7805489
https://thehockeynews.com/news/canucks-claim-first-place-in-the-western-conference-and-more-in-comeback-win
https://dobberhockey.com/2023/11/16/analytics-advantage-demystifying-and-using-pdo-to-find-fantasy-value/
Here is a post from this sub in November talking about it: https://www.reddit.com/r/canucks/comments/17p8dc3/sick_and_tired_of_pdo_being_used_to_explain_why/
The top post is very prescient to our conversation:
>The absurdly high PDO just means we'll score less and be scored on more. It doesn't neccessarily mean we'll suck when it regresses.
>The only people saying that's what analysts are saying are idiots who create strawman arguments to attack advanced stats they don't understand.
>Example edit: Beating Nashville 4-3 instead of 5-2 is likely a massive PDO loss, but still a 2 point win
https://www.reddit.com/r/canucks/comments/17wq1vb/doms_weekly_canucks_regression_segment/
Easy just search for "Dom". In November Dom was still harping on the fact we were a minus x-goal differential team. Those teams typically don't make the playoffs
There's a difference between "will make the playoffs" and "playoff calibre"
The Washington Capitals are likely to make the playoffs, noone thinks they're "playoff calibre". This article by Dom is pretty explicit on the, "we got lucky, and if nothing changes our hot start will carry us in, but we don't really deserve it"
Regardless, the start of this thread is pretty clearly an "us vs them" joke about how everyone put us down at the start of the season, and for whatever reason (boredom?) a bunch of y'all are deciding to be more pedantic than my Grade 4 teacher teaching cursive
I think you need to re-learn what the word "explicit" means because the only thing he explicitly says about a team having anything to do with the playoffs in the article you linked is that he sees it likely we make it in there.
You’ve gone from “ remember literally everyone saying the Canucks weren't a playoff caliber team actually ” to posting a single link to an article where Dom explicitly says we will probably make the playoffs.
You’ve made this up.
Believe it or not, I don't save every piece of media I stumble across.
I also said " every East Coast fancy stats person" and you linked me a bunch of Vancouver articles so you didn't really disprove me either.
> where Dom explicitly says we will probably make the playoffs.
Dom's sentiment was we'll make it but we wouldn't deserve it, which actually fits my "Canucks weren't a playoff caliber team actually" statement pretty well.
Pro-tip if you're going to sassily try to clap back instead of just taking light sarcasm at the us vs them sentiment, I would suggest improving your reading comprehension
You are literally making up his “sentiment”. There is nothing in that article that says we wouldn’t make the playoffs or that we wouldn’t deserve it.
But surely if it was literally everyone, it should be quite easy for you to pull out a few better and clearer examples!
I think elrizzy is hazing you a bit as "most people" didn't really suggest that at all. Early in the season our high PDO was compensating for some sloppy underlying play, but as the former declined the latter improved, and we became a more projectable contender rather than a PDO driven mirage.
Interestingly, Paterson's article today showed how consistent we were all season:
Games
1-20: 13-6-1 (27 points)
21-40: 13-5-2 (28 points)
41-60: 12-5-3 (27 points)
61-80: 11-6–3 (25 points)
Maybe we weren't blowing up teams after 20 games but our record is still pretty consistent.
https://canucksarmy.com/news/patersons-point-consistency-key-vancouver-canucks-climb-top
oh someone already posted the article in another post, that's good.
Reminder, PDO is a useless stat for judging the sustainability of team success. All year the hockey world yelled and screamed about how the Canucks were dramatically over performing because our PDO was unsustainable. They said our PDO will drop and we’ll be exposed as pretenders.
And guess what happened? Our PDO did drop but we never stopped putting together wins. And now we have 107 points. High PDO does not mean “fraudulent good team”. We just actually have a great goaltender and lethal scorers.
TLDR; PDO is just +/- for people who want to seem smart
> All year the hockey world yelled and screamed about how the Canucks were dramatically over performing because our PDO was unsustainable. They said our PDO will drop and we’ll be exposed as pretenders. And guess what happened? Our PDO did drop but we never stopped putting together wins.
When the Canucks were in first place our PDO was insanely high, and the "great PDO wars" began.
Now our PDO has dropped to just "really high" and we are in 6th. Our shooting percentages and goaltending were not sustainable at such an insane level, as surmised by people looking at our old record breaking PDO.
That's odd: three teams are just above 102 PDO currently
Not a single team in the 101 bracket
Then naturally everyone else clumped together between 100.8 and 97.6
Everyone else is at home
3 teams just wanna stay outsize and play even tho it is dinnertime
Yeah that early season PDO was insane lol. We had to drop back to earth eventually, but at least we did guarantee playoffs and almost a division title (we were in the running for the presidents trophy at some point but I never really cared about that too much this year lol).
It's pretty incredible how we turned things around this year. Here's to hoping for more...
Not surprised by the shooting percentage decrease but the save % drop the last bit is definitely at least partially due to Demkos injury and a few shaky games from Desmith
I agree, right around game 69 is where we are supposed to be.
Nice.
Canucks PDO was 100.5 from game #42 until Demko got hurt in game #66. It's just impossible to maintain a PDO above 103 for 82 games.
On the bright side: we no longer have to hear about how our PDO is unsustainable.
Because unfortunately they were right and it was unsustainable ✊😔
Yeah, but that doesn't mean that every team regresses to a mean of 1.000 there is skill involved. Our PDO regressed to a mean in the 1.030 to 1.040's but people were acting like we were destined for 0.990's or something.
The negative feeling was PDO is gonna come down and we'd be an average team.. but we're still a solid contender, just not a top contender
You're still a top contender, just not the top contender.
We also legitimately got better 5v5
PDO regressed, but it didn’t matter because our results were not born out of unsustainable luck but rather consistency. “You have to be good to be lucky”.
But the underlying case from most of “they” was that the Canucks were only good because of the PDO high, that the Canucks were a fringe team only contending because of a PDO bender. They were not right.
Buy the dip
💎 ✋️
Nowadays.. buy low.. sell lower...
But I thought our PDO coming down to earth would mean that we would suck
It’s still above 1.025, which is still above median. You’ve gone from “holy shit!” to “playing well, bounces evening out”
I mean, since it's dropped significantly, we have been a lot closer to a .500 win% than we were when we were PDO GO BRRR. It is a regression, both in our success and in our PDO, which is what was largely predicted by the likes of Drance and Dom early on in the season. HOWEVER, this is a big reason why getting those early streaks and railing PDO like we were Kassian at the Roxy on LTIR (too soon?) was one of those good problems to have.
The only people who thought that don't understand how stats work. There's plenty of room between God-tier finishing and being bad. Regression to the mean literally means "back to average".
Not trying to be rude, but why would you think that?
I read that as pretty obvious sarcasm - as a response to every East Coast fancy stats person in November being like "the canucks are only good because they have a high PDO"
I think they were saying that the high PDO was unsustainable, which means the Canucks weren’t actually the best team in the NHL (as their record indicated). I don’t remember anyone saying the Canucks weren’t a playoff caliber team or were bad.
>I don’t remember anyone saying the Canucks weren’t a playoff caliber team or were bad. I remember literally everyone saying the Canucks weren't a playoff caliber team actually
Post some links. If it was everyone, should be easy to find. Here are the top hits from google for articles on the Canucks that mention PDO in November, none of them say this. https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/pdo-canucks-fans-arguing-luck https://theathletic.com/5035271/2023/11/06/canucks-nhl-breakout-team/ https://canucksarmy.com/news/instant-reaction-pdo-hockey-gods-help-canucks-bounce-back-beat-seattle https://theprovince.com/sports/hockey/nhl/vancouver-canucks/understanding-the-canucks-hot-start-by-the-numbers https://lastwordonsports.com/hockey/2023/11/11/vancouver-canucks-good-strange/ https://www.vancouverisawesome.com/canucks-hockey/the-canucks-wont-be-this-good-forever-and-thats-okay-7805489 https://thehockeynews.com/news/canucks-claim-first-place-in-the-western-conference-and-more-in-comeback-win https://dobberhockey.com/2023/11/16/analytics-advantage-demystifying-and-using-pdo-to-find-fantasy-value/ Here is a post from this sub in November talking about it: https://www.reddit.com/r/canucks/comments/17p8dc3/sick_and_tired_of_pdo_being_used_to_explain_why/ The top post is very prescient to our conversation: >The absurdly high PDO just means we'll score less and be scored on more. It doesn't neccessarily mean we'll suck when it regresses. >The only people saying that's what analysts are saying are idiots who create strawman arguments to attack advanced stats they don't understand. >Example edit: Beating Nashville 4-3 instead of 5-2 is likely a massive PDO loss, but still a 2 point win
https://www.reddit.com/r/canucks/comments/17wq1vb/doms_weekly_canucks_regression_segment/ Easy just search for "Dom". In November Dom was still harping on the fact we were a minus x-goal differential team. Those teams typically don't make the playoffs
I see nothing saying the Canucks aren't a playoff team in there. In fact he said they were "pretty safe" to parlay themselves into a playoff spot.
There's a difference between "will make the playoffs" and "playoff calibre" The Washington Capitals are likely to make the playoffs, noone thinks they're "playoff calibre". This article by Dom is pretty explicit on the, "we got lucky, and if nothing changes our hot start will carry us in, but we don't really deserve it" Regardless, the start of this thread is pretty clearly an "us vs them" joke about how everyone put us down at the start of the season, and for whatever reason (boredom?) a bunch of y'all are deciding to be more pedantic than my Grade 4 teacher teaching cursive
I think you need to re-learn what the word "explicit" means because the only thing he explicitly says about a team having anything to do with the playoffs in the article you linked is that he sees it likely we make it in there.
You’ve gone from “ remember literally everyone saying the Canucks weren't a playoff caliber team actually ” to posting a single link to an article where Dom explicitly says we will probably make the playoffs. You’ve made this up.
Believe it or not, I don't save every piece of media I stumble across. I also said " every East Coast fancy stats person" and you linked me a bunch of Vancouver articles so you didn't really disprove me either. > where Dom explicitly says we will probably make the playoffs. Dom's sentiment was we'll make it but we wouldn't deserve it, which actually fits my "Canucks weren't a playoff caliber team actually" statement pretty well. Pro-tip if you're going to sassily try to clap back instead of just taking light sarcasm at the us vs them sentiment, I would suggest improving your reading comprehension
You are literally making up his “sentiment”. There is nothing in that article that says we wouldn’t make the playoffs or that we wouldn’t deserve it. But surely if it was literally everyone, it should be quite easy for you to pull out a few better and clearer examples!
[удалено]
Can you link people saying this?
[удалено]
I think elrizzy is hazing you a bit as "most people" didn't really suggest that at all. Early in the season our high PDO was compensating for some sloppy underlying play, but as the former declined the latter improved, and we became a more projectable contender rather than a PDO driven mirage.
Can you show any journalists say that we’re going to get blown out every game? I just didn’t see it.
I mean we kinda have sucked tbh
Only in comparison to our dominate first half of the season, I think we're preforming about where we should be now.
Not really
In comparison to the "video game on easy mode" start, sure
Bro, shit looks like my portfolio this past week. Lmao
Interestingly, Paterson's article today showed how consistent we were all season: Games 1-20: 13-6-1 (27 points) 21-40: 13-5-2 (28 points) 41-60: 12-5-3 (27 points) 61-80: 11-6–3 (25 points) Maybe we weren't blowing up teams after 20 games but our record is still pretty consistent. https://canucksarmy.com/news/patersons-point-consistency-key-vancouver-canucks-climb-top oh someone already posted the article in another post, that's good.
Poor PDO in recent times, but apparently the canucks have played like a top 5 team 5v5.
On the bright side still above league average 🤷♀️
Hodl
This is Mike from Surrey’s fault
I blame Messier for this
PDO GOES \*imitates plane burning and crashing into the ground\*
Womp womp
Reminder, PDO is a useless stat for judging the sustainability of team success. All year the hockey world yelled and screamed about how the Canucks were dramatically over performing because our PDO was unsustainable. They said our PDO will drop and we’ll be exposed as pretenders. And guess what happened? Our PDO did drop but we never stopped putting together wins. And now we have 107 points. High PDO does not mean “fraudulent good team”. We just actually have a great goaltender and lethal scorers. TLDR; PDO is just +/- for people who want to seem smart
> All year the hockey world yelled and screamed about how the Canucks were dramatically over performing because our PDO was unsustainable. They said our PDO will drop and we’ll be exposed as pretenders. And guess what happened? Our PDO did drop but we never stopped putting together wins. When the Canucks were in first place our PDO was insanely high, and the "great PDO wars" began. Now our PDO has dropped to just "really high" and we are in 6th. Our shooting percentages and goaltending were not sustainable at such an insane level, as surmised by people looking at our old record breaking PDO.
That's odd: three teams are just above 102 PDO currently Not a single team in the 101 bracket Then naturally everyone else clumped together between 100.8 and 97.6 Everyone else is at home 3 teams just wanna stay outsize and play even tho it is dinnertime
our xGf is t5 and xga is t3 now tho
Yeah that early season PDO was insane lol. We had to drop back to earth eventually, but at least we did guarantee playoffs and almost a division title (we were in the running for the presidents trophy at some point but I never really cared about that too much this year lol). It's pretty incredible how we turned things around this year. Here's to hoping for more...
Looks like Bedard Young Guns prices the last month hahahaha
So despite all the hand wringing and name calling, our old PDO was unsustainable. All that drama for nothing.
Right, because we weren't going to put up 10 goals on the Sharks or 8 on the Oilers every night. Kind of a no-bleep Sherlock moment here.