Micah Blake McCurdy avec un graphique sur les différences entre le déploiement des joueurs de Boudreau et de Green
Looking at Vancouver coaches last season and noticed something curious. Green used an "offensive guys / defensive guys" split for leverage deployment. Boudreau uses a "better players play more important minutes / worse play fewer" style division. pic.twitter.com/8c3dtOhAOB
— Micah Blake McCurdy (@IneffectiveMath) September 19, 2022
—
elrizzy
11 Comments
I made a [bunch of longwinded comments](https://www.reddit.com/r/canucks/comments/rfhmpj/meeting_of_the_pod_hurricanes_canucks_12122021/hoekv0k/) on this last season but someone much smarter and better at pictures has actually shown it visually and explained it more succinctly.
Interesting graph… I think that the author wants us to see that under Green most of the players were deployed based on roles, hence more of a grouping that forms a line/blob going diagonally and almost perpendicular to Bruce’s deployment line/blob.
I think the late ties quadrant could be labeled differently. The players that end up there are just better. I guess playing a style where all players are engaged instead of splitting up the responsibilities makes a team stronger it seems
Travis green fucked this team over last year, change my mind
When most of your players are role players then they are likely deployed to play their roles.
When you have more good players you can play more good players more often in different roles.
Can’t remember half the garbage we had playing under Green but no one was ever going to mistake most of the Canucks for good players.
We actually have more good players than plodders now. Easier to deploy the good players more often simply because there’s more of them.
That will be even more apparent this season as you have Miller, Pettersson, Horvat, Boeser, Pod, Hog, Miky, Garland and Kuz you can send out there and all of them are pretty competent to get it done.
D is still a bit iffy, so figure the good guys get lots of minutes and the rest are deployed in particular roles.
This is not a defence of Green, but the reality of what happens when you have a shitty team versus a good team.
One day we may have a great team!
A lot of analytics end up boiling down to « play your good players a lot ». Good players do things…goodly and bad players don’t. When your good players are on the ice you control play, when your bad players are on the ice you are in survival mode. In most cases it’s much more likely for your top line to extend a lead than lose it.
It’s just weird so many coaches refuse to do it, ie Marner and Matthews getting 3rd line icetime in an Game 7 under Babcock.
This kind of backs the theory that Green was playing more not to lose than he was to win given that there’s such a high usage of « hold the lead » deployment, no?
I am calling it if Sutter steps down as coach he will hire Green as the new head coach
What does it mean and how its Pearson that becomes the outlier,
not too sure how to read the graph but pearson did went through a decent point streak when Boudreau started last szn
I’m usually quite good at interpreting charts and graphs but I have zero idea how these axes are being calculated or what I’m supposed to be inferring. How does points gained by scoring granularly relate to minutes deployed?
If anyone wants to enlighten me…
Doesn’t this just mostly suggest that BB’s team played with the lead more than Green’s?