For this week’s analytics breakdown, we will be discussing the wins against the Bruins and the Golden Knights, and the loss versus the Senators, and diving into how the team has played over this 3 game stretch in comparison to the lull that they seemed to be in.

With this now incorporating three games, I am going to primarily focus on the 5v5 play and just mention special teams if there is something noteworthy.

As usual, though, we are going to start with a bit!

Song of the Week

For this week’s song, I went with a band that is from Boston, per Google, in Four Years Strong, and the title of this song is very apt for where the Ducks seemed to be this week. The offense has dried up from the torrid start to the season, and the Ducks have been searching to find their way back to the level of offensive success they had early on, all while maintaining the improved defensive play that we had seen from them last week.

vs Boston

The first game of the week that I am covering was the game is the game where the Ducks found a late winner from Ian Moore to take all 2 points in the game without needing to go into overtime.

This was a game, though, that the Ducks had to heavily rely on Lukas Dostal, who had yet another stellar performance. The Ducks got off to a solid enough start with them getting two early goals from Harkins and Gudas, with the Harkins goal coming from some really nice forechecking pressure and net front pressure from that fourth line. The issue is that after that, the team went dead offensively for nearly the next 20 minutes.

Offensively, the Ducks really struggled in this game through two periods, with the Ducks only generating 1.31 xG through two at 5v5. It felt like Boston had taken notice of what other teams had done well to really limit the Ducks’ ability to generate offense by maintaining tight gaps on Leo Carlsson and pressuring the McTavish line on any bobble they had.

The Ducks also did themselves no favors in this one defensively through two periods, by continually giving the puck up and being extremely turnover-prone, which led to Boston having the better of the chances and making it extremely difficult for the Ducks to find any opportunities to generate offensive chances. The Ducks allowed 2.24 xG from Boston through two periods at 5v5, and as you can see from the chart, it was largely a consistent flow of chances for the Bruins.

The positive outlook, though, is that all of that is just about the first two periods. The Ducks came out to start the third with a 1-goal lead, and it seems like Boston tying the game almost woke them up, finally. The final 12 minutes of this game were the best stretch for the Ducks, and the only extended period where you could say they were the better team. They dominated the puck over that period of time, leading them to getting chance after chance to get the game winner, with Ian Moore eventually finding the back of the net.

Just for context, over that 12-minute stretch, the Ducks generated 1.4 xG, while in the roughly 39 minutes of 5v5 prior to that, the Ducks generated that same 1.4 xG.

In addition to that, they limited the costly turnovers that have led to odd-man chances the other way over that stretch.

To kind of wrap this game up at 5v5, this was one where the Ducks did not play that well for the vast majority of the game, but on the back of timely goal scoring, great goaltending, and solid play when it mattered, they were able to get 2 points. The concern is that it is not exactly a recipe for repeatable success.

The 5v5 rates in this game came out at 3.25 xGF/60 on the heels of that strong final 12 minutes and 3.25 xGA/60. As of writing, that is better than the 2.89 xGF/60 average on the season and worse than the 3.13 xGA/60 on the season.

On the individual level, I wanted to mention that the Vatrano Strome Killorn line was excellent in this one, and they have been a very solid trio since being put together, with a team-best 64.44 xGF% and a team-best 1.58 xGA/60. For a team that has largely struggled defensively this season, that line has excelled in that portion of the game.

Vs Ottawa

So remember how in that Boston game, the Ducks played pretty poorly through two periods, but they were able to turn it on in the final 12 minutes to nearly offset all of the poor play in that game. Well, this Ottawa game was very similar to that game, except that the final 12 minutes never really happened.

The first period in this game was a bit of a low-event game, where neither team was really able to gather its footing. The Senators appeared to hold the puck more than the Ducks, but the Ducks, in the first, did a decent job of limiting where those shots were coming from.

That changed in the 2nd period, though, with Ottawa really having their way with the Ducks for the first 10 minutes of that period. The Ducks fell back on bad habits, with poor turnovers and decisions on the breakout that allowed Ottawa to just maintain control and find their way into the middle of the ice. Petr Mrazek, in this period, was stellar and was the only reason the Ducks did not allow more than the 1 goal they did on the PK.

The Ducks, to their credit, did weather the storm, and the coaching staff made a savvy change-up in the lineup to try and get the offense going again by switching McTavish and Carlsson. That change resulted in the best flurry of the game for the Ducks, with both of those lines potting a goal to give the Ducks a 2-1 lead.

The issue is that after taking the lead, the Ducks essentially flatlined offensively, only generating 0.4 xG in the rest of the game after taking the lead (the goal happened with 5 minutes left in the 2nd). The Ducks looked stagnant offensively for that final period, and while playing on a back-to-back can certainly do that to you, the lackluster offense has become an issue for this team of late.

The rates for this game ended up at 2.03 xGF/60 and 3.84 xGA/60, which are both worse than the season average as of writing.

On the individual level, the 4th line was exposed in this one by the Senators. That line has had its solid games, but this game, they were a net negative for the Ducks.

VS Vegas

I was very interested in this game vs Vegas because, for those who have forgotten, the Ducks played extremely well in Vegas a few weeks back, with the only negative being that in the third period, they really allowed Vegas to control the game. The Ducks really enforced their will on Vegas for a large stretch of that game, and with Bruce Cassidy being one of the best coaches in the league, I was intrigued to see if Vegas would make an adjustment and how the Ducks could get through.

From the numbers side of things, Vegas certainly did make that adjustment, and that also shows in the eye test. In that first game, the Ducks were able to cause turnovers upon entry into the zone for Vegas and create rush opportunities seemingly at will during their great stretch, with Leo Carlsson being a main driver of that.

In this game, Vegas employed a strategy similar to other teams against Leo of playing physical and maintaining a tight gap so that he cannot enter the zone with the downhill momentum that makes him so dangerous, which resulted in the Ducks not being able to generate a ton off the rush.

The first period for this team was not exactly one to write home about. They showed good resiliency to tie the game after going down by two goals, but from a pure xG percentage perspective, neither chance was necessarily a high-danger look, and then after those two goals, they generated next to nothing for the rest of the period, all while Vegas took control.

The 2nd period was a bit more even, with the Ducks having their stretches of control and getting chances off in zone offense, which is not something they have consistently done in the last little stretch of games. This was a step in the right direction against a team that had clearly made tweaks to try and mute the Ducks’ offense.

The 3rd period was the Ducks’ best period of the game from both an offensive and defensive perspective, especially late in that period. They did a great job of killing plays entering their defensive zone and then getting into the Vegas zone successfully, and then finding dangerous spots to get chances from. Like the Boston game, you could argue the Ducks were fortunate to be tied or, in the case of the Boston game, leading going into the 3rd, but they did not sit back and receive the game in the third.

In this one, the Ducks would have fully deserved to get the game-winner in the third with how they were playing, but as it goes in hockey, you don’t always get what you deserve.

It is not 5v5, but I do want to mention that the Ducks are such a dangerous team at 3 on 3 hockey, which makes sense. They are a team that thrives at getting out into the rush and having the open space to make plays, and that type of game is exactly what is successful in 3 on 3. It is an interesting contrast to Vegas, which can be a dominant 5v5 team, but looked very out of sorts in 3 on 3. I almost view them as being similar to the mid to late 2010s Ducks, who were a great 5v5 team, but just could not have success at 3 on 3 at all. Those teams were successful because they knew how to get chances in the zone off cycles and were not largely rush dependent, so when the game opened up, they struggled a bit more. All of this is to say 3 on 3 is a ton of fun, but personally, I view it similarly to a shootout.

Back to the numbers in this one, the rates for this game came in at 2.54 xGF/60 and 2.73 xGA/60, so this was a step back offensively from their average at 2.89 xGF/60, but an improvement on their 3.13 xGA/60 season average defensively.

Looking at the player-level numbers, the Kreider McTavish Terry line was very good in this one. That could be the best line for in-zone offense for this team with both McTavish and Terry’s ability to hold the puck and find plays under pressure when they are on their games.

Also, I wanted to mention that Mintyukov looked very good in his return to the lineup. He did not pop offensively in this one, but he made a bunch of very smart defensive plays and jumped into the play on occasion. It was a step in the right direction for him after being in the news for the last week or so.

Big Picture trends

xGF/60 vs xGA/60 per game

So let’s start with the offensive side of things, this 3 game stretch was an improvement for them over the performances against Minnesota and Utah, with those two games being sub 2.0 xGF/60, and this little 3 game stretch sitting at 2.61 xGF/60 on average, but that 2.61 xGF/60 is still a step back from their season average of 2.89 xGF/60, and a significant one from where they were at when they were at during their stretch from the home game vs Detroit to the home game vs Winnipeg. During that stretch, they averaged 3.32 xGF/60. For context around the league, a 2.61 xGF/60 would be good for 16th in the league, so the average from this 3 game stretch is not bad, but this is a team that has been at its best when the offense is really going.

Defensively, this 3-game stretch was a step back for the Ducks, with their 3-game average being at 3.27 xGA/60, which is above their season average as of writing of 3.13 xGA/60. This was also a large step back from the 2.68 xGA/60 that they had allowed over the previous 3-game stretch. From the eye test perspective, they had bad habits come back with poor turnovers occurring, which led to extended stretches of offense for the opponent. They need to find ways to make better plays with the puck exiting the zone to limit these stretches more.

On the whole, at 5v5, the team posted a 44% xGF%, which is well below the 48% xGF% that they have in total for the season. They came out of this three-game stretch with 4 out of a possible 6 points, but their play at 5v5 will need to improve.

On the individual/line level, the only line over the course of these three games that had an above 50% xGF% was the Killorn Strome Vatrano line, with those three being the only Ducks in general above 50% that played in all three games (Shoutout to Pavel Mintyukov for posting an 83.01% xGF% in the one game he played). The worst line for the Ducks during this period was the 4th line with Harkins and Johnston posting sub 40% xGF% and Nesterenko being right at 40%.

It is going to be interesting to see how things develop in this upcoming week for the Ducks with the forward line adjustments that were greatly needed.

victory+ $10m streak game

For those who have missed it, Victory Plus is running a fun little game where you can try to guess the last goal scorer for the Ducks in each game, and if you get the player right for a streak of games, you can win prizes! Head to victoryplus.com/streaks for more info and how to play.

With this being an analytics breakdown, I wanted to break down how many last goals each player has had this season. Here are the totals

Last Goals

This game is pretty hard to predict, but from looking at the season so far, your best bet is going to be a top 6 forward, which makes complete sense.

We are going to be playing for the next month and tracking our totals on the podcast and Twitter, so make sure to play along with us!

Brian Hayward Fit Check

This article has gotten a bit long in the tooth, so let’s blitz through Hazy’s fits for the past week

This is probably the nicest upscale fit for Hazy this season (Apologies Hazy for the face in the pic, blame the CTP discord who sends me the pics for use, specifically the one that is called Hey Yo Dflo. Its his fault not mine! I am just the messenger). I like the jacket a lot and the sweater vest with the printed shirt go well together

I give this look an 8.1 out of 10

Hazy was cooking with this one! The patterns on the jacket with the turtleneck. I love this look for him!

I give this look a 9.2/ out of 10.

It is possible I have praised this in the past, but I am just not really feeling this leather jacket right now. Maybe it is because we are getting close to entering the festive season, but I want to see more sweaters and patterns! I don’t hate the look but not my favorite.

I give this look a 6.7 out of 10

All stats per Evolving-Hockey and Hockey Viz

Analytics Breakdown: Find My Way Back (Vs Boston, Vs Ottawa, Vs Vegas)