<p>Another blown third period lead.</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">describe the 2024/25 canucks in one gif: <a href="https://t.co/8aGIjIzwjb">pic.twitter.com/8aGIjIzwjb</a></p>
<p>&mdash; Tommy (@tommykippes2) <a href="https://twitter.com/tommykippes2/status/1881936930176372755?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">January 22, 2025</a></p></blockquote>
<p><script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></p>
<p>The Vancouver Canucks played one period of decent hockey en route to a 3-2 loss against the Buffalo Sabres on Tuesday night. They somehow managed to find themselves in the lead after 40, but it had been earned off the backs of some pretty darn good hockey. But then, that begs the question &#8211; where did all that positive momentum go after the second intermission? Simply put, the Canucks didn&#8217;t play like a team that looked to win. Heck, they didn&#8217;t even play like a team that was good enough to defend a lead.</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-137955" src="https://publish.canucksarmy.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2025/01/20242025-20755-xgdiff-5v5.png" alt="" width="751" height="350" srcset="https://publish.canucksarmy.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2025/01/20242025-20755-xgdiff-5v5.png 751w, https://publish.canucksarmy.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2025/01/20242025-20755-xgdiff-5v5-300x140.png 300w" sizes="(max-width: 751px) 100vw, 751px" /></p>
<p>The first period wasn&#8217;t horrific. While the Sabres had a significant edge in the shares of Corsi and expected goals, the raw amount wasn&#8217;t actually that much and relatively limited the damage that it did to the Canucks. Vancouver could have started better, absolutely, but it wasn&#8217;t like they dug themselves into a massive hole early. The second period showed that the Canucks could actually turn it on. While their CF% was only a slight advantage with a 54.29, Vancouver racked up a 62.78 xGF% with a 1.31 xGF, totalling 6 high-danger chances in the period alone to get themselves in front 2-1. That&#8217;s pretty darn good, and it looked like they had figured out how to play competitive hockey against the Sabres. But that second intermission nipped any of that positivity in the bud &#8211; Buffalo would close out the game posting 62.07 CF%, 77.12 xGF%, 1.35 xGF, 11 scoring chances, and 5 high-danger chances. If you&#8217;re the Canucks trying to close out hockey games and posting those kinds of numbers &#8211; chances are it&#8217;s not going to go very well.</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-137956" src="https://publish.canucksarmy.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2025/01/20242025-20755-5v5.png" alt="" width="803" height="422" srcset="https://publish.canucksarmy.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2025/01/20242025-20755-5v5.png 803w, https://publish.canucksarmy.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2025/01/20242025-20755-5v5-300x158.png 300w, https://publish.canucksarmy.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2025/01/20242025-20755-5v5-768x404.png 768w" sizes="(max-width: 803px) 100vw, 803px" /></p>
<p>The heat map shouldn&#8217;t be a surprise given that the Canucks only had one period where they out-chanced the Sabres. In total, Buffalo had a 26-21 lead in scoring chances at 5v5, with an 11-8 edge in high-danger chances. Naturally, their hot spot in front of the net was darker and a little bit larger, showing that their looks tended to be of higher quality. Neither team managed a single high-danger chance on the powerplay, which could be taken as a positive for the Canucks penalty kill. Still, Vancouver didn&#8217;t post a single high-danger chance in the first period and then got heftily out-chanced in the third when trying to hang onto a one-goal lead. It just wasn&#8217;t good enough.</p>
<h1><span style="text-decoration: underline;"><em><strong>Individual Advanced Stats</strong></em></span></h1>
<p><strong>Corsi Champ: </strong>Vinny Desharnais led the Canucks in Corsi again last night, tallying a 60.00 CF% while playing most of his minutes against Rasmus Dahlin, Bowen Byram, and Peyton Krebs. Not exactly easy competition, which makes this stand out just that little bit more. Desharnais managed to break even with his xGF% sitting at 51.45, which was the 6th-best mark on the team while recording the 5th-best xGF of 0.89. Desharnais also didn&#8217;t see a single high-danger chance against while he was on the ice, with 3 high-danger chances going the way of the Canucks. A pretty good contribution for a depth defenceman.</p>
<p><strong>Corsi Chump:</strong> Conor Garland found himself at the bottom of the Corsi pile with a 28.57 CF%. The numbers were interesting, considering that he along with Pius Suter and JT Miller weren&#8217;t exactly deployed specifically against anyone, playing half of their minutes together against Tage Thompson&#8217;s line, but that was pretty much it. And yet, Garland finished with the 5th-worst xGF% of 29.98, and on ice for 3 high-danger chances against with nothing to show for it offensively. Not the greatest performance from him or his line, who were pretty much ineffective at best.</p>
<p><strong>xGF: </strong>Quinn Hughes is the engine of this team. He has been excellent for nearly every game he&#8217;s been in the lineup. Against the Sabres, Hughes posted a team-best 1.25 xGF and 53.43 xGF%, splitting a 12-12 scoring chance battle while losing out every so slightly in a 5-6 high-danger chance margin. But considering his numbers, it shows that the raw quality metrics helped outweigh the quantity of chances that Hughes faced last night, as he did his very best to try and drag the Canucks to victory. Unfortunately, there&#8217;s only so much a single player can do when it comes to winning games.</p>
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="550" data-dnt="true">
<p lang="en" dir="ltr">Another HOT start to the season for Quinn Hughes 🔥 <a href="https://t.co/jeLablbD7F">pic.twitter.com/jeLablbD7F</a></p>
<p>&mdash; Sportsnet (@Sportsnet) <a href="https://twitter.com/Sportsnet/status/1881847344599298132?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">January 21, 2025</a></p></blockquote>
<p><script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></p>
<p><strong>GSAx: </strong>Thatcher Demko didn&#8217;t do enough to steal the game for the Canucks, but he also wasn&#8217;t the entire reason why they lost. With Buffalo posting a 2.88 xGF on the night, Demko finished with a -0.12 GSAx, ever so slightly in the negatives. But that&#8217;s splitting hairs, and should be viewed as Demko giving the Canucks solid enough goaltending to try and win this game. The three goals were evenly distributed between high, middle, and low-danger, which probably also went and impacted the goals against numbers that he faced.</p>
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="550" data-dnt="true">
<p lang="en" dir="ltr">&quot;Been a challenging year dating back to the summer&#8230;it&#39;s been a lot of soul-searching for me over the last few months,&quot; says <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/Canucks?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#Canucks</a> Demko. </p>
<p>&quot;I don&#39;t know how else to put it: I just haven&#39;t been good enough so far.&quot;</p>
<p>Hard not to feel for the goalie as he&#39;s been through a lot. <a href="https://t.co/pOhKHhWnzs">pic.twitter.com/pOhKHhWnzs</a></p>
<p>&mdash; Noah Strang (@noahstrang_) <a href="https://twitter.com/noahstrang_/status/1881954274822983860?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">January 22, 2025</a></p></blockquote>
<p><script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></p>
<h1><span style="text-decoration: underline;"><em><strong>Statistical Musings</strong></em></span></h1>
<p><strong>One line to rule them all: </strong>Okay, maybe not that dramatic, but from the metrics it was pretty clear cut that the Jake DeBrusk &#8211; Elias Pettersson &#8211; Brock Boeser line was getting nearly all the offence at 5v5 going. Not often in the history of writing these articles has a line put up over 1 expected goals, and this line racked up a full 1.2 on the night. That tends to happen when a line puts together 10 scoring chances and a 6-1 high-danger chance advantage. For the Canucks, it was a sizeable contribution, especially since the next-best line was a 0.29.</p>
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="550" data-dnt="true">
<p lang="en" dir="ltr">Absolute domination in the offensive zone from the Canucks on their second goal, finished off by Elias Pettersson: <a href="https://t.co/Q4LOf9Yc7m">pic.twitter.com/Q4LOf9Yc7m</a></p>
<p>&mdash; Wyatt Arndt (@TheStanchion) <a href="https://twitter.com/TheStanchion/status/1881920746051801099?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">January 22, 2025</a></p></blockquote>
<p><script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></p>
<p><strong>New look pairings: </strong>One of the things that carried over from practice was two new pairings in the top 4. Quinn Hughes played with Mark Friedman for the majority of the night, while Carson Soucy featured with Filip Hronek. The results were decidedly mixed &#8211; Hughes-Friedman recorded a 33.33 CF% and 32.11 xGF% while being on ice for a goal against. As for Soucy-Hronek, they posted a 30.77 CF% and 37.10 xGF% while being on ice for a goal for. Neither really stood out in a truly positive way, and Hughes-Hronek ended up being put back together for the third period when the Canucks were trying to close out the game.</p>
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="550" data-dnt="true">
<p lang="en" dir="ltr">That is a defensive disaster from the Canucks. I guess Friedman was so locked in on Thompson that he forgot about everyone else. <a href="https://t.co/iSZa5ekDFT">https://t.co/iSZa5ekDFT</a></p>
<p>&mdash; Jason Brough 🙁 (@SadClubCommish) <a href="https://twitter.com/SadClubCommish/status/1881937182644171036?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">January 22, 2025</a></p></blockquote>
<p><script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></p>
<h1><span style="text-decoration: underline;"><em><strong>As a team</strong></em></span></h1>
<p><strong class="text-lg font-bold">CF% – 49.54% HDCF% – 52.17% xGF% – 51.81%</strong></p>
<p>The Canucks simply couldn&#8217;t close out this game. For whatever reason, they weren&#8217;t able to keep up with the Sabres at 5v5 in the third, and let the momentum of the game slip away from them. It&#8217;s unfortunate, especially given that they put together a really solid performance in the middle frame, but when this team only shows up for 20 minutes, losses like these happen. And unfortunately, that seems to be the pattern this year where this team literally can&#8217;t manage to get victories across the finish line.</p>
<p>Vancouver heads into Edmonton for a rematch against the McDavid-less Oilers tomorrow night.</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>


Another blown third period lead.
<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/tommykippes2/status/1881936930176372755

The Vancouver Canucks played one period of decent hockey en route to a 3-2 loss against the Buffalo Sabres on Tuesday night. They somehow managed to find themselves in the lead after 40, but it had been earned off the backs of some pretty darn good hockey. But then, that begs the question - where did all that positive momentum go after the second intermission? Simply put, the Canucks didn't play like a team that looked to win. Heck, they didn't even play like a team that was good enough to defend a lead.

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-137955" src="https://publish.canucksarmy.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2025/01/20242025-20755-xgdiff-5v5.png" alt="" width="751" height="350" />

The first period wasn't horrific. While the Sabres had a significant edge in the shares of Corsi and expected goals, the raw amount wasn't actually that much and relatively limited the damage that it did to the Canucks. Vancouver could have started better, absolutely, but it wasn't like they dug themselves into a massive hole early. The second period showed that the Canucks could actually turn it on. While their CF% was only a slight advantage with a 54.29, Vancouver racked up a 62.78 xGF% with a 1.31 xGF, totalling 6 high-danger chances in the period alone to get themselves in front 2-1. That's pretty darn good, and it looked like they had figured out how to play competitive hockey against the Sabres. But that second intermission nipped any of that positivity in the bud - Buffalo would close out the game posting 62.07 CF%, 77.12 xGF%, 1.35 xGF, 11 scoring chances, and 5 high-danger chances. If you're the Canucks trying to close out hockey games and posting those kinds of numbers - chances are it's not going to go very well.
<h1><span style="text-decoration: underline;"><em><strong>Heat Map</strong></em></span></h1>
<img class="alignnone size-full wp-image-137956" src="https://publish.canucksarmy.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2025/01/20242025-20755-5v5.png" alt="" width="803" height="422" />

The heat map shouldn't be a surprise given that the Canucks only had one period where they out-chanced the Sabres. In total, Buffalo had a 26-21 lead in scoring chances at 5v5, with an 11-8 edge in high-danger chances. Naturally, their hot spot in front of the net was darker and a little bit larger, showing that their looks tended to be of higher quality. Neither team managed a single high-danger chance on the powerplay, which could be taken as a positive for the Canucks penalty kill. Still, Vancouver didn't post a single high-danger chance in the first period and then got heftily out-chanced in the third when trying to hang onto a one-goal lead. It just wasn't good enough.
<h1><span style="text-decoration: underline;"><em><strong>Individual Advanced Stats</strong></em></span></h1>
<strong>Corsi Champ: </strong>Vinny Desharnais led the Canucks in Corsi again last night, tallying a 60.00 CF% while playing most of his minutes against Rasmus Dahlin, Bowen Byram, and Peyton Krebs. Not exactly easy competition, which makes this stand out just that little bit more. Desharnais managed to break even with his xGF% sitting at 51.45, which was the 6th-best mark on the team while recording the 5th-best xGF of 0.89. Desharnais also didn't see a single high-danger chance against while he was on the ice, with 3 high-danger chances going the way of the Canucks. A pretty good contribution for a depth defenceman.

<strong>Corsi Chump:</strong> Conor Garland found himself at the bottom of the Corsi pile with a 28.57 CF%. The numbers were interesting, considering that he along with Pius Suter and JT Miller weren't exactly deployed specifically against anyone, playing half of their minutes together against Tage Thompson's line, but that was pretty much it. And yet, Garland finished with the 5th-worst xGF% of 29.98, and on ice for 3 high-danger chances against with nothing to show for it offensively. Not the greatest performance from him or his line, who were pretty much ineffective at best.

<strong>xGF: </strong>Quinn Hughes is the engine of this team. He has been excellent for nearly every game he's been in the lineup. Against the Sabres, Hughes posted a team-best 1.25 xGF and 53.43 xGF%, splitting a 12-12 scoring chance battle while losing out every so slightly in a 5-6 high-danger chance margin. But considering his numbers, it shows that the raw quality metrics helped outweigh the quantity of chances that Hughes faced last night, as he did his very best to try and drag the Canucks to victory. Unfortunately, there's only so much a single player can do when it comes to winning games.

https://twitter.com/Sportsnet/status/1881847344599298132

<strong>GSAx: </strong>Thatcher Demko didn't do enough to steal the game for the Canucks, but he also wasn't the entire reason why they lost. With Buffalo posting a 2.88 xGF on the night, Demko finished with a -0.12 GSAx, ever so slightly in the negatives. But that's splitting hairs, and should be viewed as Demko giving the Canucks solid enough goaltending to try and win this game. The three goals were evenly distributed between high, middle, and low-danger, which probably also went and impacted the goals against numbers that he faced.

https://twitter.com/noahstrang_/status/1881954274822983860
<h1><span style="text-decoration: underline;"><em><strong>Statistical Musings</strong></em></span></h1>
<strong>One line to rule them all: </strong>Okay, maybe not that dramatic, but from the metrics it was pretty clear cut that the Jake DeBrusk - Elias Pettersson - Brock Boeser line was getting nearly all the offence at 5v5 going. Not often in the history of writing these articles has a line put up over 1 expected goals, and this line racked up a full 1.2 on the night. That tends to happen when a line puts together 10 scoring chances and a 6-1 high-danger chance advantage. For the Canucks, it was a sizeable contribution, especially since the next-best line was a 0.29.

https://twitter.com/TheStanchion/status/1881920746051801099

<strong>New look pairings: </strong>One of the things that carried over from practice was two new pairings in the top 4. Quinn Hughes played with Mark Friedman for the majority of the night, while Carson Soucy featured with Filip Hronek. The results were decidedly mixed - Hughes-Friedman recorded a 33.33 CF% and 32.11 xGF% while being on ice for a goal against. As for Soucy-Hronek, they posted a 30.77 CF% and 37.10 xGF% while being on ice for a goal for. Neither really stood out in a truly positive way, and Hughes-Hronek ended up being put back together for the third period when the Canucks were trying to close out the game.

https://twitter.com/SadClubCommish/status/1881937182644171036
<h1><span style="text-decoration: underline;"><em><strong>As a team</strong></em></span></h1>
<strong class="text-lg font-bold">CF% – 49.54% HDCF% – 52.17% xGF% – 51.81%</strong>

The Canucks simply couldn't close out this game. For whatever reason, they weren't able to keep up with the Sabres at 5v5 in the third, and let the momentum of the game slip away from them. It's unfortunate, especially given that they put together a really solid performance in the middle frame, but when this team only shows up for 20 minutes, losses like these happen. And unfortunately, that seems to be the pattern this year where this team literally can't manage to get victories across the finish line.

Vancouver heads into Edmonton for a rematch against the McDavid-less Oilers tomorrow night.

<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;

The Statsies: Canucks give up over 1 expected goal against in the third in loss to Sabres

Recent articles from Michael Liu

Breaking News