Canucks and Sharks - Game Five Scoring Chances

What a great game. For the second consecutive contest the Canucks were widely outshot, and yet not widely outchanced (and that's without counting all of the chances at chances that the Sedins passed on in trying to make an aesthetically pleasing goal). The Canucks also got the breaks, of course, what with the wrong call on the icing at the end of the third and that crazy bounce off the stanchion that led to the winner, but it wouldn't be fair to call this one a lucky win. No, this was a hard-fought victory that felt like it should have come in Game Seven. But it's over now, and the Canucks are off to the Stanley Cup Finals where they'll meet an inferior club to play for the big prize. Well... I'll take solace in the fact that it can't be as bad as 2006-07. Scoring chances and more after the jump.

Scoring Chances

For those who'd like a definition: a scoring chance is defined as a clear play directed toward the opposing net from a dangerous scoring area - loosely defined as the top of the circle in and inside the faceoff dots, though sometimes slightly more generous than that depending on the amount of immediately-preceding puck movement or screens in front of the net. Blocked shots are generally not included but missed shots are. A player is awarded a scoring chance anytime he is on the ice and someone from either team has a chance to score. He is awarded a "chance for" if someone on his team has a chance to score and a "chance against" if the opposing team has a chance to score. Finally, a big thanks to Vic Ferrari for making the whole damn thing possible with his awesome scripts.

First off, I'd like to note that the first chart doesn't show the right men on the ice for the OT chances, but the individual charts are in fact accurate. I'll talk more about the Sedins below, but boy did they ever have a whale of a game. One of the more interesting things in this game was the way both coaches decided to run their respective benches with Alain Vigneault cutting down to three lines almost right away as opposed to Todd McLellan who was playing his fourth line throughout the game.

Fathers in the Faith

3. Dany Heatley -Easily his best game of the series playing mostly with Kyle Wellwood and Torrey Mitchell. Too little too late from Heatley as it turned out, but this game sure felt like the kind of game a guy has just before breaking out of a slump. He got himself into good positions, and got the shots off, but was missing his spots by just a tiny bit.

2. Daniel Sedin - He and his brother

1. Henrik Sedin - were absolutely dominant on this night. They were on the ice for about two thirds of Vancouver's chances, and that doesn't include all of the chances that they passed up! Henrik in particular made a great play on Vancouver's first goal by winning a two-on-one battle to get the puck to his brother, received a return pass and then made a great play to Burrows for the goal.

Men without a History

3. Kent Huskins - Or is it Todd McLellan? Either way, matching Huskins against the Sedins and playing Huskins more than any other defender at even strength led to some rather predictable results. Not good results, mind you, but certainly predictable.

2. Douglas Murray - He doesn't look all that bad by scoring chances, but he made some really poor plays in this game. He lost a critical battle in the corner on Vancouver's first goal, went out of position to make a hit, which led to a 2-on-1 (13:04 of the second period), and then had a puck hop past him for a 2-on-1 (9:30 of the third). Not a lot of mistakes, but some real doozies taht led to some of Vancouver's best chances.

1. Joe Pavelski - Here's a guy that didn't get on track all series long and got simply crushed in this game. He and linemate Ryane Clowe were the only two Sharks with a chance differential of -6 or worse, and Pavelski also brought up the rear with a Corsi differential of -6. Yes, he played a lot against the Sedins, but he also managed to get completely owned by them. Hoping that they miss the net from prime areas does not count as a strategy.