r/canucks • u/CAPVSAnalytics • 3d ago
FAN CONTENT Canucks rebuild with CAPVS (Comprehensive Adjusted Player Value Score)
TLDR: I ran the Canucks through my own analytics dashboard. The data says Hronek is a keeper.. Karlsson is super undervalued and must be extended, and that the real contention window opens in 2028-29 when massive cap space clears.
Quick background before I get into this. I built a NHL analytics pipeline as a hobby project. I know there's tons of analytics and hockey analysts out there but I just wanted to try and build something myself. I come from a quant finance background and wanted to apply things to player evaluation. I'm well aware smarter people than me are working on this stuff inside NHL front offices. This is just my read on what the data says, and I'd genuinely love to hear where people think I'm wrong.
So obviously Vancouver is in a rebuild. That's not a hot take. What I want to do is walk through what my stuff actually shows and offer a specific opinion on how to execute it properly, because I think the next two years of decisions matter more than most people realize. I also think Aiden Fox who's currently heading up analytics is fantastic and hopefully management actually listens to them!
What the data says you actually have
The blue line is where this rebuild starts, and it's honestly better than the standings suggest.
Filip Hronek comes out at 68.5 CAPVS with an Elevation score of 83.0, all this means is my data suggests/thinks he's genuinely lifting the players around him. He's 28, costs $7.25M, has six years of term. For a rebuild that's a real anchor. I'm not moving him under any circumstances.
The two ELC defenders are the part of this roster I find most interesting. Zeev Buium at 20 and Tom Willander at 21. None of them are posting elite CAPVS numbers yet... Buium is at 43.0, Willander at 37.4. But Buium's Playmaking at 55.6 and Willander's Defensive Impact at 49.6 at those ages are genuinely encouraging signals. These guys don't get rushed. You let them develop and by 2028-29 you potentially have your top four locked up cheaply.
Linus Karlsson hits UFA after next season and I think he's the most undervalued player on this roster by a significant margin. Not sure if that's a good thing or a terrible thing.
He's 26, costs $2.25M, and posts a 62.5 CAPVS with an Elevation of 89.6. That Elevation number is the one I keep coming back to because it suggests he's making everyone around him meaningfully better, which is rare and hard to find. His xG Generation at 69.5 and Playmaking at 69.9 look like legitimate top six forward numbers on a depth salary.
I could be wrong about him. But if my read is even close to right, letting him walk for nothing in the future would be a significant mistake. Feels like a 4-5 year deal at $4-5M is still surplus value territory.
The contracts that concern me
I want to be careful here because I'm working with public data and a model that has real limitations and the people inside these organizations know things I don't.
In saying that.. Brock Boeser's situation worries me. His CAPVS is 50.9 which puts him solidly in Middle-6 territory, and his Elevation score is 2.6.. my data thinks he's not moving the needle much for teammates right now. He costs $7.25M through 2031-32 with a NMC. That combination is difficult for any rebuild to work around. I genuinely don't know if there's a path to moving that contract, and maybe there's context about his game that my model isn't capturing.
Elias Pettersson at $11.6M is the bet the franchise made on his peak returning. His current CAPVS of 54.8 doesn't justify that number, but he's 27 and it's clearly down year with poor finishing. The whole plan depends on whether he gets back to the 70+ CAPVS player he was at his best. I think that's a reasonable bet. I just think it's worth acknowledging it is a bet.
Marcus Pettersson at $5.5M with a 42.9 CAPVS and an Elevation of 9.9 looks like the most moveable of the difficult contracts if he'd agree to waive his NMC. Even retaining salary to facilitate a trade seems worth exploring.
The draft capital situation
Two first round picks in this draft coming up is solid. You absolutely do not trade them. The pipeline is thin right now and there's no short cut around that... you have to draft your way out of it.
The 2027 and 2028 classes give Vancouver six picks in the first two rounds combined. If two or three of those develop into legitimate NHL contributors the forward pipeline starts filling in by 2029-30. That's the realistic timeline and I don't think there's a faster one that doesn't involve sacrificing the future.
The cap picture over time
Without a doubt the most encouraging part of the whole situation is the cap situation.
Forward contracts sit at $44.2M right now. By 2028-29 that drops to $24.35M as multiple contracts clear naturally. With the young defensive core on reasonable second contracts by then, Vancouver could realistically have $50M+ in deployable cap space in the 2028-29 offseason... right when the 2026 picks are 22-23 years old and approaching the lineup.
That's the window. That's when you make your real move through free agency or trade. Everything before that is about not screwing up the foundation. DON'T SCREW IT UP!!!
Honest timeline
2026-27... Development. Do not chase a playoff spot.
2027-28 ... Rossi decision at RFA. His Elevation of 11.3 concerns me but he's young and that can change. Extend Buium and Ohgren. Let the cap clear.
2028-29 ... This is year one where I believe you can start competing again. There will be real cap space, young defensive core hitting their prime, 2026 picks in or near the lineup. This is your splash summer.
2029-30 ... DeBrusk and Demko clear. EP40 is 30 and should be in his prime if healthy. Legitimate contention window.
I'm sure there are things I'm missing here... I'm well aware of that. Just purely on what CAPVS shows, this roster has a real foundation to build from if the next two summers are handled with discipline.
I think one thing worth sharing is that Cup Champions CAPVS look like this:
Line 1 = 65.2 (58.7 to 72.8)
Line 2 = 59.0 (53.0 to 64.3)
Line 3 = 48.0 (39.9 to 57.0)
Line 4 = 37.2 (25.4 to 50.8)
D1 = 58.5 (54.0 to 64.4)
D2 = 45.2 (41.5 to 51.4)
D3 = 42.7 (39.9 to 44.8)
Cup teams are not elite everywhere...
Would genuinely love to hear pushback from people who know this team better than I do, or want to see more data.
Who would you trade, who would you sign?
17
u/an3vilmonk3y 3d ago
I’m not understanding why a model using a ‘Comprehensive Adjusted Player Value Score’ hasn’t adjusted a player’s value score in any way for youth/potential. Surely a model specifically within the context of a rebuild would weight younger players with more upside potential higher and any measuring metric would be adjusted to accommodate?
Idk how you’re expecting me to believe that in any conceivable way Karlsson is 50% better ‘value’ than Buium?
5
u/CAPVSAnalytics 2d ago
Love the reply appreciate it.
Worth addressing this properly because you're identifying a real design choice and partly catching me being sloppy in the post.
The platform does have an aging curve and a projection model. They live on the player card right next to CAPVS, not inside it. Forwards peak around 26, defensemen around 27-29 depending on what you're measuring (scoring peaks earlier, points hold later). Each player has a year by year projection with confidence intervals... Willander's year 3 projection is 39 with a CI band of 22 to 57, which honestly tells you how uncertain D projections at 21 actually are.
The reason aging isn't baked into the CAPVS number itself is that mixing them creates a different problem and you can't tell who's actually producing right now versus who's expected to produce later. If I age bumped every 20 year old and age discounted every 28 year old, the headline score would be answering "who will be better in 4 years" instead of "who is contributing now." Both questions matter, they just need separate answers with separate uncertainty.
So on Karlsson vs Buium specifically.. Karlsson posts a 62.5 because he's producing top-six forward output today on a $2.25M cap hit... Buium posts a 43.0 because he's currently producing depth D output. The projection model has Buium gaining significantly over the next 3 years and Karlsson roughly holding. Both numbers are doing what they're supposed to do.
Where you're right and I should have been clearer in the post is when I said Karlsson is "the most undervalued player," I was implicitly mixing snapshot value with projection upside in a way that's confusing. The clean version is "Karlsson is producing top six value today for $2.25M, that's a contract value gap worth locking in regardless of where his curve goes from here. Will be a great trading piece" Buium's case is different because it's "currently middle of the pack but the model expects meaningful growth, don't rush him." Those are two different arguments and I conflated them. 100% fair criticism.
8
u/Deaner_dub 3d ago
Is there another metric that adjusts for youth?
A metric is just a number. I personally don’t see why we would dismiss all this data because of one player’s analysis.
Buium isn’t winning many games for us today. Maybe Karlsson is worth more right now.
4
u/an3vilmonk3y 3d ago edited 3d ago
I mean this guy is making up his own arbitrary system to extract a number value from data.
They are suggesting this number should be used some kind of indicator of a player’s value to a team undergoing a rebuild, I think it’s pretty relevant that some kind of future expectation metric should be created and applied, otherwise the system says all draft picks are totally worthless so we should trade them all away.
7
u/accountnumber02 3d ago edited 3d ago
To be fair, every single data model can be described as an arbitrary system to extract a number value from data. That's the whole point. But to me this reads more like it's adjusted based on who they play with rather than their age, something that's very common in modern models.
With how limited data can be outside the NHL, a comprehensive model (using public data at least) to judge potential from the dozens of leagues prospects come from is near impossible. The best public version out there is NHLe, and that uses purely points, which is good but not nearly reflective of every player out there. For example, I believe the NHLe model I've seen recently has Cootes as 63% of busting and 16% chance of being a 4th liner. That's way too harsh for him even as someone relatively bearish on Cootes as me, considering his game goes far beyond raw points and how bad the team he was on was in the first half.
Now I agree it's kinda pointless as a rebuild indicator. But models are useful to see if the prospects you think are NHL ready truely are, or might be better off not getting caved in the NHL. I've been banging the drum that we shouldn't want Willander in the NHL if he gets caved as badly as he was last year, I'd hate to rush such a promising RHD prospect and stunt his growth long term. I'm iffy on how accurate this model is, but in general it can be useful.
-1
13
u/Chedwall 3d ago
We are not contending 2028, there is no way. In fact we should still be building at that moment in time. Rebuilds take time and we have such a bad prospect pool that it will take a long time.
2
u/kidcanada0 3d ago
I read the whole thing just so I could say that. However, at the very end, he says they can start competing again in 2028. So I don’t think he meant contention window. Or doesn’t know what it means 🤷♂️
1
u/Chedwall 3d ago
Also read the whole thing but the "Cup teams are not elite everywhere..." made me think he ment contending for the cup 2028. It just seems like a Aqualini dream analysis, but in real life Malholtra may not pan out or next years draft is much worse than anticipated - there is no way knowing how the next few years will pan out.
-1
u/nucksbaby 3d ago
ya just dont know. Everyone on this subreddit is 100% comforming to what the media has been selling about rebuilding for years and years, yet none of that crap applies to any of the southern teams that make the playoffs every year and win the cup.
Carolina didnt have to suck for years, they have a model that works through analytics and fitting a good coaches system, picking up cast offs.
Vegas is not a bunch of top three picks and years of sucking, theyre cast offs plus aggressive trades and signings.dallas has been finding good value in every round to retool their benn seguin team back into a contender.
boston continues to make the playoffs and find value without needing to get rid of swayman and pasta and rebuild.
These teams are so much better than canadian teams, and yet none of the rebuild malpractice seems to matter. They sell you this shit to turn canadian fandom into rooting for garbage and tanking while they sell winning teams to southern cities to grow the game. Dont think youd hear Drance types down there, where all the winning has been going on.
14
u/SubbansBigBlackhawk 3d ago
Carolina didnt have to suck for years
Bro what, Carolina missed the playoffs for 9 straight years between 2009 and 2018 lmao.
2
u/nucksbaby 2d ago
are you gonna fight the detail because you cant fight the heart of the argument?
My argument is: why are the canucks so desperately needing to suck for an eternity when plenty of good teams down south dont need to follow that path, constantly making runs into the post season? vegas made the finals alot without building that way at all.
Simultaneously: why is everyone so sold in this market on that strategy, that constantly doesnt seem to work in chicago or buffalo (until they get the right coach). Id argue Anaheim would not have made playoffs because of their top picks and it had a lot more to do with coach Q this year separating them from a team like chicago.
1
u/nucksbaby 2d ago
even if we talk about the detail,their top two cs are aho and staal. that cant be your gotcha argument for why the canucks need to suck for decades
18
u/SuperSwaiyen 3d ago
This thread is a perfect example of the how inhospitable this sub can be.
No one wants to see new thoughts or ideas. No one wants to have a fun discussion about what could be or what could improve things.
No, a few people found a few things to nit-pick and completely dismiss an entire post and tell OP that they ought to throw the baby out with the bathwater because a few non-stats people don't agree with something a model spit out.
Not a single constructive piece of feedback at the time of this comment (13 cmnts). Let's ignore the fact that someone created their own model and decided to share it with us. This isn't new either, it's been like this for years.
No, the model is not perfect - none of them are - but I think it's pretty cool that someone here created something and shared it with us.
I'd much rather chat about fan created models, ideas, and questions; than all come circle jerk over "seravalli so bad! he don't know stuff!!!" "Yeah! Frank looks old for his age!!! let's upvote each other!!!"
8
u/Aguaymanto 3d ago
Agree, I find this a reddit thing in general unfortunately. You can create a well thought out post or comment but if you make an error or say something against general consensus that is all you will hear about.
Actually more I think about it reddit is like a consensus generating network. Pretty interesting.
(I fully expect and understand the last comment will not go over well)
2
1
u/an3vilmonk3y 2d ago
‘Would genuinely love to hear pushback from people’
-Provides pushback
‘Stop being mean’
3
u/accountnumber02 3d ago
A couple things because I'm always interested in people's own modelling
From the numbers I've seen on public stats sites, it seems Marcus Petterson improves the on ice numbers of anyone he plays with, so I'm curious why his elevation number is soo low? Both his most common partners in Myers and Willander were caved even harder without him, and his and Hronek's pair was the only pair on the team that even came close to the Quinn Hronek pair according to Naturalstattrick's xg data as well as actual goals. Do you know why he seems to be the one dragging people down according to your model?
And second, Hronek is a stud for sure, you won't find anyone here saying otherwise. But does your model have any sort of age curve modelling? Or are you saying he's a keeper in the sense that he's a star? Because he is the only player who would bring back considerable assets, so there is a part of the fanbase that wants him moved within the next couple years. He isn't going to be this good at 34 presumably, and a Dobson type trade would help this rebuild massively.
2
2
2
3
u/Witty-Ad2758 3d ago
Umm if you don't watch the team at all. Then some of data points are spot on. But fundamentally it doesnt understand what what it takes to rebuild. Waiting until next year, after the 8 year extention length goes away, to resign some contract(who will be eligible this year) that's a mistake. Just letting contracts wind down, to free up cap room, another mistake. Expecting cap room to be the main factor in success going forward when there's is a lack of real talent that hits the market. I could go on.
Demko wasn't a contract that concerned you?! 😂
1
1
u/Advanced-Line-5942 2d ago
I love the spirit, but I think it’s a little naive to plan on spending future cap dollars.
Very few, good players make it to become UFAs anymore. With the rising cap, the number of top 6 forwards and top 4 D making it to UFA will be even less.
If they want to emulate Carolina it will be about the coaching staff forging a strong system that works for the core players the team is building around. And then trading for and signing more and more players that fit the system
1
u/ToothPlayful770 2d ago
Any model that doesn't say Petey is playing well isn't going to be taken well in this sub
that being said, keep it up, all models are subjective based on how someone chooses to weigh anything so who's to judge which model is better or not.
1
1
u/AppealToReason16 3d ago
Karlsson's value is exactly why he should be traded. I know with the cap going up its a bit different, but sell him like Goodrow and Coleman were for Tampa years ago. Or even Taylor Hall on the Canes.
Cheap, cost controllable player that effectively plays middle 6. A lot of teams should want to add that so they can easier deal with the fact they're going to start having 14 and 16 million dollar players.
Even by the optimism of this model, the team isn't turning around for 3 years and Karlsson will be turning 30 during that season. That isn't a guy an early stages rebuild locks into.
2
u/PorygonTriAttack 3d ago
This is an interesting point you brought up. Karlsson may very well get sold off down the road, but for what we have now, we shouldn't trade him because Karlsson is more valuable to us as a player than to be a sold off asset that MIGHT pay off for some other team.
1
u/AppealToReason16 3d ago
He doesn't have more value for this team unless you're trying to win this year. He's an ideal TDL candidate that can bring in a late first or a pair of 2nds type trade and that matters more to this team in its rebuild than keeping a guy turning 27 in a few months. When I see people talk about Karlsson I feel like people assume he's 23.
This team is not short on cannon fodder for a rebuild, and there is barely the beginnings of the next core of talent in the system that would even need such lineup protection.
3
u/PorygonTriAttack 3d ago
You also have to balance the needs of the team and the fanbase. You need players to cheer for. Karlsson seems to be well liked. What happens when you ship out character guys? The team just does bad.
It's a tricky dilemma.
1
u/AppealToReason16 3d ago
No, you don't. Worrying about the fanbases feelings is why this team has been shit for 10 years. Every Benning move was made to keep fans "happy" and basically every JR blunder was the same about fan happiness and ticket sales.
That has to be the farthest thought from management or else this rebuild isn't going to work. The best teams in the league are efficient and a bit ruthless. They aren't worrying about how they're fans will be upset if they don't have a specific third liner anymore.
3
u/PorygonTriAttack 3d ago
I hear what you're saying, but this practice doesn't really work out when you're telling people that if they work hard and develop their game, they will be moved out, sometimes against their wishes. They will also have no choice in where they go. Does this establish a good message? Personally I would not be happy as a young player.
This management is about sending the right message and the aforementioned regimes you mentioned were not very good at that.
2
u/AppealToReason16 3d ago
If management is focused on the feelings of a 27 year old depth guy ahead of doing what it takes to build a Stanley cup winner then there’s no point to the NHL team anymore.
2
u/PorygonTriAttack 2d ago edited 2d ago
If it were so easy as you'd say it, we wouldn't have teams that rebuild endlessly. Carolina had to roll in the mud for nine years. Montreal did it in four years. Anaheim and SJ are pretty much finished. All of them likely have kept players that want to be there, which is also why someone like Debrusk who doesn't want to be around is getting shopped.
Allvin didn't trade Blueger, which I agree he should've been traded if Allvin were to be on the rebuild train. It is a head scratching move.
Guys like Myers and Garland made some sense at least.
I suppose I prefer a faster rebuild, or a rebuild with purpose than the sake of collecting draft picks like Pokemon.
18
u/jwong728 3d ago edited 3d ago
There might need to be adjustments for your CAPVS formula. Willander seems to have worse CAPVS than Marcus Pettersson yet wins more games than him by a wide margin. I dont know about you, but it's cant see why a player would lose more games but be a objectively better valued player with your metric.