Canucks News: Lack of Grit, Physicality Not an Issue

The Vancouver Canucks don’t play a punishing style. But is that really a problem? Probably not.

The 2016-17 Vancouver Canucks are one of the worst NHL teams in just about every category. Goals, goals against, shots for, shots against… hits. But does the latter really matter?

Ben Kuzma of The Province thinks it does — and he is not alone. It seems like there are two camps now: the analytics community and traditional hockey fans. The former like to say hits do not correlate with wins and are therefore not an important part of hockey. The latter, on the other hand, argue physical play, grit and other intangibles can make or break a season.

Here is what I think.

‘Too Easy to Play Against’

Ben Kuzma (The Province) — Canucks have another problem: they’re too easy to play against

Derek Dorsett and Erik Gudbranson have never looked so good.(…)When the Anaheim Ducks imposed their will on the transitioning and tentative Vancouver Canucks, it placed one of many problems for a troubled NHL team back on the front-burner. Simply put, the Canucks are too easy to play against.

I’m not much of an analytics guy, but this assessment is just so wrong on every level. You don’t need 6-foot-5 defencemen who destroy opponents with booming hits. You don’t need guys who drop the gloves at least once per game. And most importantly, injuries to Erik Gudbranson and Derek Dorsett are in no way the reason why Vancouver missed the playoffs.

First of all, the Canucks have issues on every position. They are lacking scoring forwards who can create offence, they are lacking defencemen (and forwards) who can get the puck out of the D-zone and create offence, and they are lacking a goaltender who can be a reliable starter for the next few years.

More from The Canuck Way

• Which team won the Bo Horvat trade?
• What to expect from newcomers Anthony Beauvillier, Aatu Räty
• Back to the future: How the skate uniforms became a regular Canucks’ feature night
• Canucks kick off 2023 with disappointing 6-2 loss to Islanders
• 2nd period penalty trouble sinks Canucks in 4-2 loss against Winnipeg

I purposely limited the above to offensive categories because, whether you are an analytics person or not, that’s basically all hockey is about. Whether it’s quantified in shot rates, goals or nothing at all, the basic assumption is clear: as long as you are creating offence, your opponents can’t.

But let’s dive into defensive play anyway, because that’s what Kuzma’s article is about, and it is an area the Canucks need to improve in. What’s important to note here, however, is that the way defence is played in hockey has changed a lot over the past years. Long gone are the times where a D-man’s main purpose was to hit and fight and dump the puck out.

Defencemen don’t need to be good hitters. What’s much more important, whether you look at it from an analytics standpoint or simply using the ‘eye test’, is skating, hockey sense and stick work.

If you can skate, control the gap, poke check, understand the concept of angling and be aware of the ongoings in the defensive zone while being able to handle the puck, you can be a highly effective defenceman. Just ask Chris Tanev, who is one of the strongest defensive players in the league despite being someone who rarely throws a hit.

Sure, physical teams are often fun and can be effective — but only if they are also good at hockey. Milan Lucic is great, Derek Dorsett is not. Shea Weber is great, Erik Gudbranson is not.

Next: Gudbranson Decision Will Make or Break Benning's Summer

It’s nice to know a good player can hit, but it certainly isn’t essential.

The Canucks have many issues but physicality ain’t one.