Unless you’ve been living under a rock as a Canucks’ fan, you’d understand that Brendan Gaunce plays a defensive role on the team. A simple stats check would prove such; with the 23-year-old registering just two goals and eight points in 97 career NHL games.

Gaunce was extremely effective in this role last year, controlling possession and suppressing shot attempts against at an impressive rate. The former first-round pick finished as the best possession forward on the Canucks; controlling 51.4% of shot attempts. He was also the only forward on the team to allow fewer than 50 shot attempts per hour(49.3).

Even more impressive was the quality of shot attempts that he allowed. Gaunce was best on the Canucks in allowing just 10.3 high danger shot attempts per hour(HDCA/60). The shot suppression was working too - Gaunce was third best on the team in goals allowed per hour.

Things have been a lot different this year though. With the absence of Sutter, Horvat, and Dorsett, Gaunce has taken a much bigger defensive role; playing 14:31 a night. He’s averaging an extra five minutes per game compared to last season and is facing off against much tougher competition.

Gaunce’s underlying metrics show that he hasn’t coped well with these tougher assignments. In fact, you could make the argument that he doesn’t deserve a lineup spot based on his performance this season. While we only have a 21 game sample, it’s come to a point where we should at least acknowledge the struggles he’s facing.

Even Strength

The first thing we must establish is the difference in the way Gaunce has been deployed. He’s been playing in a shutdown role; facing the opposing team’s best players. It’s a huge difference compared to last season, where he played sheltered minutes against the opposition’s 4th line.

It’s not surprising then that Gaunce has slipped in almost every defensive category. The issue though is the margin by which he has fallen.

The chart above shows that Gaunce has regressed in almost every defensive category. His drastic regression in possession control(CF%) and shot attempts against(CA/60) indicates that opposing teams are able to control the puck and direct shot attempts at a much higher rate with Gaunce on the ice. Combine this increase in shot volume with a slight uptick in high danger shot attempts, and it’s no wonder why Gaunce’s expected goals per hour(xGA/60) has increased by half a goal.

What’s peculiar in this situation is that Gaunce has actually allowed goals at a lower rate despite this regression. That can actually be explained with luck — Nilsson and Markstrom have combined for a team-high .954 save percentage with Gaunce on the ice.

His poor expected goals against rate also confirms that he has been quite lucky. Expected goals against provide a more accurate indication of one’s defensive performance as it takes shot angles, locations, and types into account to determine an estimated total of goals one should concede with average luck.

This decline compared to last year has had a big effect when looking at where Gaunce stacks up relative to the other forwards on the team as well. Whereas Gaunce was at the top in multiple defensive categories last season, he’s lagging behind in almost every metric this season.

The underlying numbers just aren’t there to support Gaunce’s defensive results. Unless he improves defensively, we’re bound to see significant regression in the goals allowed rate with normalized luck.

Shorthanded

Unfortunately for Gaunce, his good luck hasn’t carried over to his penalty killing results. He is worst amongst qualified forwards on the team(min. 20 mins) in allowing 13.0 goals per hour. That’s nearly four goals higher than the second-worst mark on the team, and enough to rank bottom ten out of 202 qualified forwards.

Gaunce’s underlying metrics indicate poor shot suppression ability shorthanded. Not only are teams able to get a high volume of shots off(CA/60 and FA/60), but a large proportion of them are from high danger areas(HDCA/60).

There’s definitely a case to be made that Gaunce has been a bit unlucky though — Markstrom and Nilsson combine for a .759 save percentage with the 23-year-old deployed. The question to ask though is how much of that low save percentage is due to the high proportion of dangerous shot attempts they’re having to face? It’s a question that the expected goals metric can once again help us out with.

xGA/60 ranks Gaunce as 4th out of six qualified Canucks’ forwards. It tells us that while Gaunce isn’t nearly as bad as his GA/60 might indicate, he’s still below average even relative to Canucks’ penalty killers. Considering that the unit as a whole is 26th in the league in PK%, there’s definitely a lot left to be desired.

Gaunce’s struggles shorthanded last season indicate that this isn’t an issue with small sample size either. He finished 6th and 8th respectively on the team(eight qualified forwards) when looking at expected goals against and high danger shot attempt rates last season as well.

The coaching staff appears to understand these struggles as well — Gaunce has spent just 69 minutes shorthanded in the last two seasons. 41 of those minutes are from this season, where the Canucks have lost three key shorthanded forwards in Horvat, Sutter, and Dorsett. Nonetheless, it’s still important to recognize that Gaunce is a below average penalty killer.

Conclusion

Brendan Gaunce’s offensive struggles have overshadowed his deteriorating defensive performance. The regression is concerning even when accounting for the difference in quality of competition.

His poor underlying numbers this year makes us question Gaunce’s true defensive value. Is he the possession ace that he was last year, or is he a below average defensive forward with little offensive production? As it is in most cases, the truth likely falls somewhere in between.

*All stats courtesy Corsica and Natural Stattrick. Graphs courtesy Hockeyviz