Canucks Show Fight in Late Push, but Fall Short Against Penguins
The Vancouver Canucks didn’t get the result they wanted against the Pittsburgh Penguins, but they gave fans something to chew on in a hard-fought 3-2 loss. This wasn’t a mail-it-in kind of night.
After a shaky start and a second period where things could’ve unraveled, Vancouver came alive in the third and nearly clawed their way back. In the end, it was a regulation loss-but one that showed signs of growth, resilience, and maybe even a glimpse of what this team could become.
Let’s dig into the numbers and the story they tell.
Game Flow: A Tale of Three Periods
The Canucks came out flat, no question. Pittsburgh controlled the pace early, and while Vancouver’s expected goals for percentage (xGF%) hovered above 50%, their Corsi For percentage (CF%) sat at just 45.45% in the opening frame. That imbalance gave the Penguins the upper hand in possession and momentum, and they didn’t waste it.
The second period was where Pittsburgh really made their move. With a 57.14 CF% and 59.89 xGF%, the Penguins struck three times, putting Vancouver in a hole.
But credit to the Canucks-they didn’t fold. The third period saw a completely different team hit the ice.
Vancouver turned up the intensity, finishing the final 20 minutes with a 61.76 CF% and a 63.73 xGF%. They generated 10 high-danger chances and 1.59 expected goals in that frame alone.
That’s not just a push-it’s a full-on surge. They could’ve packed it in, but instead, they fought to the final buzzer.
Heat Map: Trading Blows in the Slot
The heat map tells a story of two teams getting their chances in the high-danger areas. Vancouver gave up their fair share of looks in the low slot, but they also generated plenty of their own. The Canucks edged the Penguins in total scoring chances, 31-29, and held a 20-14 advantage in high-danger chances at 5-on-5.
That kind of offensive generation is encouraging. They didn’t convert as often as they’d like, but the volume and quality of chances were there. For a team still finding its identity, that’s a step in the right direction.
Individual Standouts and Struggles
Corsi Champ:
Nils Höglander led the team with a 57.89 CF%, but the underlying numbers weren’t quite as shiny.
His expected goals for percentage (xGF%) came in at 47.05%, a bit below the team average. Alongside Max Sasson and Linus Karlsson, Höglander’s line didn’t quite replicate the spark they’d shown in previous outings.
Still, for a bottom-six unit, it wasn’t a disaster-and there’s reason to believe Höglander’s best is still ahead.
Corsi Chump:
It was a rough night for Pierre-Olivier Joseph.
Without a consistent partner on the blue line, he struggled to find rhythm, finishing with a 36.00 CF% and a team-worst 28.67 xGF%. On the ice for two goals against, it was a forgettable outing.
As the seventh defenseman, the expectations aren’t sky-high-but performances like this highlight the gap between depth and reliability.
xGF Workhorse:
Filip Hronek continues to be a stabilizing force on the Canucks’ back end.
He posted a team-best 68.94 xGF% and led all skaters with 2.30 expected goals for. The numbers back up what the eye test shows: Hronek is doing everything he can to carry this defensive group.
He was on the ice for a 19-11 edge in scoring chances and a 13-7 advantage in high-danger looks. That’s big-time impact from the blue line.
Between the Pipes:
Kevin Lankinen didn’t steal the show, but he gave the Canucks a chance.
Facing 3.24 expected goals against, he allowed three-one from each danger zone-finishing with a modest but respectable +0.24 goals saved above expected (GSAx). It wasn’t a lights-out performance, but it was solid.
Lankinen held his ground, and that’s all you can ask for in a game like this.
Line-by-Line Breakdown
Kane - Pettersson - DeBrusk:
This trio has had its ups and downs, but they showed flashes of cohesion against some tough competition.
Matching up against Sidney Crosby’s line, they posted a 52.17 CF%, a 59.61 xGF%, and held their own in high-danger chances. That’s no small feat.
If they can build on this performance, it could be a turning point for a line that’s struggled to find chemistry.
O’Connor - Chytil - Boeser:
This line didn’t fare as well.
Despite logging the most minutes of any Canucks trio, they finished with a 46.88 CF%, a team-worst 1.01 xGA, and a 38.42 xGF%. The silver lining?
They didn’t give up a goal. But the underlying numbers suggest they were chasing the play more than driving it.
Team-Wide Metrics
- CF%: 54.84%
- HDCF%: 67.44%
- xGF%: 56.51%
These are the kinds of stats you’d usually associate with a win. The Canucks controlled possession, generated more high-danger chances, and held the edge in expected goals.
But hockey isn’t always fair. Sometimes you do everything right and still come up short.
That was the story last night.
Final Takeaway
This was a game that showed both how far the Canucks have come-and how far they still have to go. They played well enough to win, especially in the third period, but the Penguins showed what good teams do: they capitalize when it counts and close out games with authority.
Vancouver isn’t quite there yet. But with players like Hronek anchoring the back end and signs of life from key forward lines, there’s reason to believe they’re building something. Losses like this sting in the moment, but in the context of a long season and a developing roster, they can serve as valuable lessons.
Next up: the Canucks host Macklin Celebrini and the San Jose Sharks. Another chance to test themselves-and maybe turn lessons into results.