<p>What the heck?</p>
<div class="bam-inline-promotion-block" data-max-length="2" data-placement-id="2111" data-context="web-content-promocard" data-property-id="329"></div>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="550" data-dnt="true">
<p lang="en" dir="ltr">Rick Tocchet to the refs after the penalties late in the 1st, according to my amateur lip-reading:</p>
<p>&quot;Stay out of it! Stay the **** out of it!&quot;</p>
<p>&quot;That&#39;s why you won&#39;t get the ****ing playoffs! Yeah, that&#39;s true! That&#39;s a stupid ****ing call! That&#39;s ****ing stupid!&quot;<a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/Canucks?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#Canucks</a> <a href="https://t.co/x00Eye2W23">pic.twitter.com/x00Eye2W23</a></p>
<p>&mdash; Daniel Wagner (@passittobulis) <a href="https://twitter.com/passittobulis/status/1898915352446476688?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">March 10, 2025</a></p></blockquote>
<p><script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></p>
<p>The <a href="https://canucksarmy.com/combinations">Vancouver Canucks</a> lost <a href="https://canucksarmy.com/news/instant-reaction-vancouver-canucks-stars-nowhere-found-4-1-loss-dallas-stars">4-1 against the Dallas Stars</a> at home. However, instead of getting soundly outplayed like many would think from the scoreline, the Canucks were probably the better team in this one. Perhaps it was comeuppance for getting away with wins they had no business stealing, but Vancouver played well. They pushed hard, especially in the third, to try and secure the result, but it just wasn&#8217;t meant to be. And that&#8217;s alright – these games happen. The positives are that this team can actually still play well against good opposition. The big things missing are their stars.</p>
<p>Here&#8217;s the loss, by the numbers.</p>
<p>As always, you can find <a class="text-accent" href="https://canucksarmy.com/news/official-glossary-guide-canucksarmy-analytics-post-game-statsies" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">our glossary guide of advanced stats here</a>.</p>
<h1><span style="text-decoration: underline;"><em><strong>Game Flow</strong></em></span></h1>
<p><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" class="alignnone size-full wp-image-140960" src="https://publish.canucksarmy.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2025/03/20242025-21019-xgdiff-5v5.png" alt="" width="751" height="350" srcset="https://publish.canucksarmy.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2025/03/20242025-21019-xgdiff-5v5.png 751w, https://publish.canucksarmy.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2025/03/20242025-21019-xgdiff-5v5-300x140.png 300w" sizes="(max-width: 751px) 100vw, 751px" /></p>
<p>The first period was mostly in flux, with the Canucks holding a slight 59.26 CF% advantage but splitting the expected goals near evenly with the Stars. It was in the second period where things really began to pick up, as Dallas would record the CF% advantage. Vancouver would post a 59.26 xGF% share lead, despite trailing 2-1. That advantage was only further pressed in the final frame, where the Canucks cranked it up to a new gear. Posting an 80.00 CF% and 87.63 xGF%, the Canucks accumulated 1.63 xGF in the frame – more than the 1.06 the Stars generated all game. They had 10 high-danger chances to the two that Dallas managed, but unfortunately, just weren&#8217;t able to capitalize on them.</p>
<h1><span style="text-decoration: underline;"><em><strong>Heat Map</strong></em></span></h1>
<p><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" class="alignnone size-full wp-image-140962" src="https://publish.canucksarmy.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2025/03/20242025-21019-5v5.png" alt="" width="803" height="422" srcset="https://publish.canucksarmy.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2025/03/20242025-21019-5v5.png 803w, https://publish.canucksarmy.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2025/03/20242025-21019-5v5-300x158.png 300w, https://publish.canucksarmy.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2025/03/20242025-21019-5v5-768x404.png 768w" sizes="(max-width: 803px) 100vw, 803px" /></p>
<p>The heat map also shows just how big a disparity in scoring chances it was last night. Vancouver finished with a massive 24-7 edge in scoring chances at 5v5, with a 14-5 high-danger chance edge, too. One might be able to say that the Stars got better quality for what they were able to get, but the point remains that the Canucks simply had the raw volume compared to them. However, it&#8217;s pretty glaring that they weren&#8217;t able to convert on them, which is probably what cost them the win in the end.</p>
<h1><span style="text-decoration: underline;"><em><strong>Individual Advanced Stats</strong></em></span></h1>
<p><strong>Corsi Champ: </strong>Teddy Blueger was a man possessed last night. The Latvian recorded an absurd 83.33 CF% to lead the Canucks while playing against Mikko Rantanen and Wyatt Johnson primarily. Those aren&#8217;t slouches when it comes to competition, and yet it was Blueger who was having the puck on a rope, helping the Canucks dominate the minutes that they had against the newest big gun that Dallas picked up.</p>
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="550" data-dnt="true">
<p lang="en" dir="ltr">Teddy Blueger makes a perfect pass to find Dakota Joshua but he can&#39;t beat Casey DeSmith. </p>
<p>🎥: Sportsnet | NHL<a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/Canucks?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#Canucks</a> | <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/TexasHockey?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#TexasHockey</a> <a href="https://t.co/Geyxo9sBaz">pic.twitter.com/Geyxo9sBaz</a></p>
<p>&mdash; CanucksArmy (@CanucksArmy) <a href="https://twitter.com/CanucksArmy/status/1898935913193046192?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">March 10, 2025</a></p></blockquote>
<p><script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></p>
<p><strong>Corsi Chump: </strong>On the other hand, <a href="https://canucksarmy.com/news/vancouver-canucks-sign-jake-debrusk-seven-year-deal-5-5-million-aav">Jake DeBrusk</a> brought up the rear in terms of CF% with his 33.33, which stood at an astounding -32.80 CF% rel to team average. It isn&#8217;t a surprise that his ice time was cut way down in the third, managing only 0.41 xGF for the fourth-worst tally in that category and posting a 66.76 xGF%. That would be fine in most games, but considering Vancouver&#8217;s statistical advantage, DeBrusk was -6.25 xGF% rel. Being one of the top six players on the team and only managing two high-danger chances in a game where your team got 14 is not good.</p>
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="550" data-dnt="true">
<p lang="en" dir="ltr">Jake DeBrusk with the lowest ice time (07:45) among all <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/Canucks?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#Canucks</a> players through two periods</p>
<p>&mdash; Rob Williams (@RobTheHockeyGuy) <a href="https://twitter.com/RobTheHockeyGuy/status/1898928714928545998?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">March 10, 2025</a></p></blockquote>
<p><script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></p>
<p><strong>xGF: </strong>It was the former Minnesota State Maverick that led the Canucks in xGF% as well, with Blueger getting a massive 92.50 on the night. That came with a team-high 1.28 xGF, team-best 0.1 xGA, a 10-1 scoring chance differential and 7-0 high-danger chance advantage. Again, keep in mind who Blueger was playing against all of last night, and these numbers leap off the page all that much more. He didn&#8217;t find the score sheet in this one, but there shouldn&#8217;t be any question about the kind of effort that Blueger turned in.</p>
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="550" data-dnt="true">
<p lang="en" dir="ltr">Have to keep Joshua-Blueger-Garland together. Probably should have never been separated in the first place</p>
<p>&mdash; Jimothy Timothy Miller (@Conditional1st) <a href="https://twitter.com/Conditional1st/status/1898935744376520831?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">March 10, 2025</a></p></blockquote>
<p><script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></p>
<p><strong>GSAx: </strong>After stealing the win against Minnesota, Kevin Lankinen unfortunately turned in a subpar performance. Only facing 1.60 xGF, the Finn conceded two high-danger goals and one low-danger goal to finish with a -1.40 GSAx against the Stars. It isn&#8217;t ideal, but the Canucks also probably should&#8217;ve done better in front of him as well. The loss can&#8217;t be pinned solely on Lankinen&#8217;s shoulders, but he wasn&#8217;t a big contributor to getting them the right result.</p>
<h1><span style="text-decoration: underline;"><em><strong>Statistical Musings</strong></em></span></h1>
<p><strong>Please figure it out:</strong> Elias Pettersson went from a clap bomb against Minnesota to bringing up the rear in xGF%. The numbers were not kind to the Swedish centre – third worst CF% of 38.89, tying DeBrusk for fourth-worst xGF of 0.41, team-worst 0.54 xGA, team-worst 32.55 xGF%. Heck, his xGF% relative to the team average was -50.07 and was on ice for a 2-3 high-danger chance deficit. Pettersson was the only Canuck to be in a hole in that regard, and when the team has as significant of an edge in high-danger chances as Vancouver did last night, it&#8217;s not a good sign at all.</p>
<p><strong>Where the depth did the lifting: </strong>When Tocchet benched the big guns, that meant the bottom six would have to step up their game. While they didn&#8217;t manage to convert anything into goals, they were definitely doing good work building momentum throughout the third. DOC-Chytil-Lekkerimaki, Hoglander-Blueger-Sherwood, and Joshua-Blueger-Garland were running some incredible numbers, all of them above 73.00 CF% and 79.00 xGF%. The Joshua-Blueger-Garland line racked up an impressive 0.87 xGF, while the DOC-Chytil-Lekkerimaki line was a close second with 0.52 xGF. Again, there were no goals that translated from their efforts, but the numbers suggest that their performance probably deserved some points.</p>
<h1><span style="text-decoration: underline;"><em><strong>As a team</strong></em></span></h1>
<p><strong class="text-lg font-bold">CF% – 57.29% HDCF% – 69.57% xGF% – 61.54%</strong></p>
<p>It&#8217;s been a while since the Canucks had a statistical advantage like the one that they had last night, so perhaps it was unfamiliar territory that buckled the team slightly. The depth forwards played well, and the team looked generally good. Unforunately, the stars were benched and didn&#8217;t play at their best when they were on the ice, hindering the Canucks from really capitalizing on all the good things they were doing. Sure, there was plenty of pressure, but perhaps that little extra bit of talent and finishing ability would&#8217;ve done the trick for them last night.</p>
<p>Vancouver hosts the Montreal Canadiens tomorrow for their next contest.</p>
<p><em class="text-lg italic">Stats provided by naturalstattrick.com</em></p>
<p><strong>Sponsored by bet365</strong></p>
<div class="bam-inline-promotion" data-property-id="329" data-promotion-id="19111" data-context="web-content-promocard"></div>
<p>&nbsp;</p>


What the heck?
<div class="bam-inline-promotion-block" data-max-length="2" data-placement-id="2111" data-context="web-content-promocard" data-property-id="329"></div>
&nbsp;

https://twitter.com/passittobulis/status/1898915352446476688

The <a href="https://canucksarmy.com/combinations">Vancouver Canucks</a> lost <a href="https://canucksarmy.com/news/instant-reaction-vancouver-canucks-stars-nowhere-found-4-1-loss-dallas-stars">4-1 against the Dallas Stars</a> at home. However, instead of getting soundly outplayed like many would think from the scoreline, the Canucks were probably the better team in this one. Perhaps it was comeuppance for getting away with wins they had no business stealing, but Vancouver played well. They pushed hard, especially in the third, to try and secure the result, but it just wasn't meant to be. And that's alright – these games happen. The positives are that this team can actually still play well against good opposition. The big things missing are their stars.

Here's the loss, by the numbers.

As always, you can find <a class="text-accent" href="https://canucksarmy.com/news/official-glossary-guide-canucksarmy-analytics-post-game-statsies" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">our glossary guide of advanced stats here</a>.
<h1><span style="text-decoration: underline;"><em><strong>Game Flow</strong></em></span></h1>
<img class="alignnone size-full wp-image-140960" src="https://publish.canucksarmy.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2025/03/20242025-21019-xgdiff-5v5.png" alt="" width="751" height="350" />

The first period was mostly in flux, with the Canucks holding a slight 59.26 CF% advantage but splitting the expected goals near evenly with the Stars. It was in the second period where things really began to pick up, as Dallas would record the CF% advantage. Vancouver would post a 59.26 xGF% share lead, despite trailing 2-1. That advantage was only further pressed in the final frame, where the Canucks cranked it up to a new gear. Posting an 80.00 CF% and 87.63 xGF%, the Canucks accumulated 1.63 xGF in the frame – more than the 1.06 the Stars generated all game. They had 10 high-danger chances to the two that Dallas managed, but unfortunately, just weren't able to capitalize on them.
<h1><span style="text-decoration: underline;"><em><strong>Heat Map</strong></em></span></h1>
<img class="alignnone size-full wp-image-140962" src="https://publish.canucksarmy.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2025/03/20242025-21019-5v5.png" alt="" width="803" height="422" />

The heat map also shows just how big a disparity in scoring chances it was last night. Vancouver finished with a massive 24-7 edge in scoring chances at 5v5, with a 14-5 high-danger chance edge, too. One might be able to say that the Stars got better quality for what they were able to get, but the point remains that the Canucks simply had the raw volume compared to them. However, it's pretty glaring that they weren't able to convert on them, which is probably what cost them the win in the end.
<h1><span style="text-decoration: underline;"><em><strong>Individual Advanced Stats</strong></em></span></h1>
<strong>Corsi Champ: </strong>Teddy Blueger was a man possessed last night. The Latvian recorded an absurd 83.33 CF% to lead the Canucks while playing against Mikko Rantanen and Wyatt Johnson primarily. Those aren't slouches when it comes to competition, and yet it was Blueger who was having the puck on a rope, helping the Canucks dominate the minutes that they had against the newest big gun that Dallas picked up.

https://twitter.com/CanucksArmy/status/1898935913193046192

<strong>Corsi Chump: </strong>On the other hand, <a href="https://canucksarmy.com/news/vancouver-canucks-sign-jake-debrusk-seven-year-deal-5-5-million-aav">Jake DeBrusk</a> brought up the rear in terms of CF% with his 33.33, which stood at an astounding -32.80 CF% rel to team average. It isn't a surprise that his ice time was cut way down in the third, managing only 0.41 xGF for the fourth-worst tally in that category and posting a 66.76 xGF%. That would be fine in most games, but considering Vancouver's statistical advantage, DeBrusk was -6.25 xGF% rel. Being one of the top six players on the team and only managing two high-danger chances in a game where your team got 14 is not good.

https://twitter.com/RobTheHockeyGuy/status/1898928714928545998

<strong>xGF: </strong>It was the former Minnesota State Maverick that led the Canucks in xGF% as well, with Blueger getting a massive 92.50 on the night. That came with a team-high 1.28 xGF, team-best 0.1 xGA, a 10-1 scoring chance differential and 7-0 high-danger chance advantage. Again, keep in mind who Blueger was playing against all of last night, and these numbers leap off the page all that much more. He didn't find the score sheet in this one, but there shouldn't be any question about the kind of effort that Blueger turned in.

https://twitter.com/Conditional1st/status/1898935744376520831

<strong>GSAx: </strong>After stealing the win against Minnesota, Kevin Lankinen unfortunately turned in a subpar performance. Only facing 1.60 xGF, the Finn conceded two high-danger goals and one low-danger goal to finish with a -1.40 GSAx against the Stars. It isn't ideal, but the Canucks also probably should've done better in front of him as well. The loss can't be pinned solely on Lankinen's shoulders, but he wasn't a big contributor to getting them the right result.
<h1><span style="text-decoration: underline;"><em><strong>Statistical Musings</strong></em></span></h1>
<strong>Please figure it out:</strong> Elias Pettersson went from a clap bomb against Minnesota to bringing up the rear in xGF%. The numbers were not kind to the Swedish centre – third worst CF% of 38.89, tying DeBrusk for fourth-worst xGF of 0.41, team-worst 0.54 xGA, team-worst 32.55 xGF%. Heck, his xGF% relative to the team average was -50.07 and was on ice for a 2-3 high-danger chance deficit. Pettersson was the only Canuck to be in a hole in that regard, and when the team has as significant of an edge in high-danger chances as Vancouver did last night, it's not a good sign at all.

<strong>Where the depth did the lifting: </strong>When Tocchet benched the big guns, that meant the bottom six would have to step up their game. While they didn't manage to convert anything into goals, they were definitely doing good work building momentum throughout the third. DOC-Chytil-Lekkerimaki, Hoglander-Blueger-Sherwood, and Joshua-Blueger-Garland were running some incredible numbers, all of them above 73.00 CF% and 79.00 xGF%. The Joshua-Blueger-Garland line racked up an impressive 0.87 xGF, while the DOC-Chytil-Lekkerimaki line was a close second with 0.52 xGF. Again, there were no goals that translated from their efforts, but the numbers suggest that their performance probably deserved some points.
<h1><span style="text-decoration: underline;"><em><strong>As a team</strong></em></span></h1>
<strong class="text-lg font-bold">CF% – 57.29% HDCF% – 69.57% xGF% – 61.54%</strong>

It's been a while since the Canucks had a statistical advantage like the one that they had last night, so perhaps it was unfamiliar territory that buckled the team slightly. The depth forwards played well, and the team looked generally good. Unforunately, the stars were benched and didn't play at their best when they were on the ice, hindering the Canucks from really capitalizing on all the good things they were doing. Sure, there was plenty of pressure, but perhaps that little extra bit of talent and finishing ability would've done the trick for them last night.

Vancouver hosts the Montreal Canadiens tomorrow for their next contest.

<em class="text-lg italic">Stats provided by naturalstattrick.com</em>

<strong>Sponsored by bet365</strong>
<div class="bam-inline-promotion" data-property-id="329" data-promotion-id="19111" data-context="web-content-promocard"></div>
&nbsp;

Recent articles from Michael Liu

Breaking News