Jump to content

The last 10 games


tomh009
 Share

Recommended Posts

I just compiled some high-level player stats from our last 10 games (all losses bar the singular win over NJ). Pretty sad reading overall, only a few bright spots.

 

Forwards:

  • Suzuki: 185 TOI, 2g+5a, 19sog, -5
  • Caufield: 164 TOI, 4g+1a, 28 sog, -4
  • Anderson: 151 TOI, 1g+0a, 21 sog, -5
  • Dvorak: 150 TOI, 1g+7a, 12 sog, -3
  • R. Pitlick: 146 TOI, 2g+2a, 5sog, -6
  • Hoffman: 142 TOI, 1g+4a, 20sog, -4
  • Gallagher: 131 TOI, 0g+5a, 23sog, +3
  • Evans: 126 TOI, 3g+2a, 11sog, +0
  • Poehling: 94 TOI, 3g+0a, 11sog, -3
  • Armia: 85 TOI, 2g+0a, 17sog, +3
  • T. Pitlick: 74 TOI, 0g+1a, 8sog, -6

 

Suzuki is close to his season pace, but both he and Caufield have cooled well off from the initial St-Louis era highs. And Andreson has been struggling to make things happen.

 

On the positive side, Dvorak is the leading scorer over this stretch, and Gallagher and Armia are finally getting their games together -- even if they are not putting the puck into the net very often.

 

Defence:

  • Romanov: 199 TOI, 0g+1a, 16sog, -8
  • Savard: 187 TOI, 0g+3a, 12 sog, -11
  • Edmundson: 174 TOI, 2g+0a, 15sog, +4
  • Petry: 171 TOI, 0g+6a, 25sog, +1
  • Wideman: 117 TOI, 1g+3a, 9sog, -7
  • Harris: 81 TOI, 0g+0a, 4sog, -3
  • Schueneman: 71 TOI, 0g+1a, 4 sog, -4

 

Romanov and Savard appear to have regressed. How much of that is due to exhaustion -- Romanov has never played this much in a season -- and how much due to their assignments is less clear. Edmundson continues to be solid, and Petry is showing signs of what he was until last season.

 

Goal:
Allen: 2 games, 0.898, 4.31 GAA, +1.95 GSAA
Montembeault: 4 games, 0.870, 4.27 GAA, -0.50 GSAA
Price: 4 games, 0.835, 4.38 GAA, -1.44 GSAA

 

Allen was solid, again, for the few games that he played, even if there were a lot of goals. For Price, the positive is that he seems to be physically healthy, but his play has not been at the hoped-for level, maybe reasonably so as these were the first four games he has played since last spring.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Good breakdown and analysis.

 

What the numbers show is above all that this is a terrible hockey team. But more specifically, the team is atrocious on the back end. Not only does this lead to horrible +/-, but it ramifies for the entire lineup: guys like Suzuki and Caufield don’t have the benefit of any offensive push from the D.

 

The numbers also suggest, not quite that St. Louis has turned into a pumpkin, but rather that honeymoon period of over-performing is behind us. Next season, he will be evaluated NOT in contrast to DD, but on the basis of whether the team is playing sound hockey. He does seem to have instilled a never-quit ethos in the lineup, which is great. But it only goes so far. If you’re going to favour “concepts” over “systems,” does this ultimately lead to feel-good-but-unstructured, and therefore losing, hockey? Next year at this time, will we be crying out for an old-fashioned coach who can instil solid defensive structure and sound positional play?

 

I would look to sign MSL to a 2-year deal. No more.

 

Although this will somewhat contradict my first paragraph above, can I also add a nagging worry here: is Nick Suzuki a legit, impact #1C? He’s on a 60-point pace this season, outstanding for a 22-year-old C on a roster mostly made of elephant feces. I always figured he’d be good for 60 points per season…the question is whether he has more in him. I think he does, and it would certainly be unfair to criticize him for not putting up more points during this tire-fire of a season. Still. If he is going to be the C who drives the rebuild, we’ll probably need significantly higher production than that from him. Just putting it out there. 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, The Chicoutimi Cucumber said:

Good breakdown and analysis.

 

What the numbers show is above all that this is a terrible hockey team. But more specifically, the team is atrocious on the back end. Not only does this lead to horrible +/-, but it ramifies for the entire lineup: guys like Suzuki and Caufield don’t have the benefit of any offensive push from the D.

 

The numbers also suggest, not quite that St. Louis has turned into a pumpkin, but rather that honeymoon period of over-performing is behind us. Next season, he will be evaluated NOT in contrast to DD, but on the basis of whether the team is playing sound hockey. He does seem to have instilled a never-quit ethos in the lineup, which is great. But it only goes so far. If you’re going to favour “concepts” over “systems,” does this ultimately lead to feel-good-but-unstructured, and therefore losing, hockey? Next year at this time, will we be crying out for an old-fashioned coach who can instil solid defensive structure and sound positional play?

 

I would look to sign MSL to a 2-year deal. No more.

 

Although this will somewhat contradict my first paragraph above, can I also add a nagging worry here: is Nick Suzuki a legit, impact #1C? He’s on a 60-point pace this season, outstanding for a 22-year-old C on a roster mostly made of elephant feces. I always figured he’d be good for 60 points per season…the question is whether he has more in him. I think he does, and it would certainly be unfair to criticize him for not putting up more points during this tire-fire of a season. Still. If he is going to be the C who drives the rebuild, we’ll probably need significantly higher production than that from him. Just putting it out there. 

 

 

 

I agree with your analysis. I see what you are saying about Suzuki but I don't have the same nagging concern as I don't expect him to be an elite, high impact (85-90 points/season) player. If he accomplishes that, great. My expectations are a little more modest. I see him more of an excellent #2 centre (70-75 points/year) on a championship type team. Someone who consistently  plays a 200 foot game.    Now if you have 2 like Suzuki then you are set.  We need to find another one in the next 2 drafts. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, The Chicoutimi Cucumber said:

What the numbers show is above all that this is a terrible hockey team. But more specifically, the team is atrocious on the back end.

I think so, too. While our scoring isn't great at the moment, allowing more than four goals a game -- on average! -- is quite bad. And I expect that Petry will be gone before next season as well, leaving this as a huge question mark.

 

I don't foresee Hugo signing a top UFA D-man (or trading for the equivalent) this year so I think improvements in the next year or two will really depend on our prospects. Harris, Barron, Norlinder, Guhle, Mailloux and others. We have enough good-quality prospects, but we need to develop them so that at least a few of them can reach their ceilings.

 

With a stronger D corps in front of them, I would be more comfortable with any of our three roster goalies, too.

 

And, yes, how well will St-Louis's concepts translate into improving the D, in particular?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, The Chicoutimi Cucumber said:

 

 

Although this will somewhat contradict my first paragraph above, can I also add a nagging worry here: is Nick Suzuki a legit, impact #1C? He’s on a 60-point pace this season, outstanding for a 22-year-old C on a roster mostly made of elephant feces. I always figured he’d be good for 60 points per season…the question is whether he has more in him. I think he does, and it would certainly be unfair to criticize him for not putting up more points during this tire-fire of a season. Still. If he is going to be the C who drives the rebuild, we’ll probably need significantly higher production than that from him. Just putting it out there. 

 

 

 

He may turn out to be more of Koivu level 1b guy, which is fine at his cap hit. However, this makes it imperative that we hit on a true #1 stud in the next two drafts. Wright and Bedard come on down! We can't go into the next era of trying to build a contender with another Pleks-Desharnais or Danault-Suzuki tandem that doesn't stack up down the middle.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, tomh009 said:

I think so, too. While our scoring isn't great at the moment, allowing more than four goals a game -- on average! -- is quite bad. And I expect that Petry will be gone before next season as well, leaving this as a huge question mark.

 

I don't foresee Hugo signing a top UFA D-man (or trading for the equivalent) this year so I think improvements in the next year or two will really depend on our prospects. Harris, Barron, Norlinder, Guhle, Mailloux and others. We have enough good-quality prospects, but we need to develop them so that at least a few of them can reach their ceilings.

 

With a stronger D corps in front of them, I would be more comfortable with any of our three roster goalies, too.

 

And, yes, how well will St-Louis's concepts translate into improving the D, in particular?

I think he’ll probably sign at least one veteran dman capable of playing the #4-6 role. You need to have more insulation for the kids, if the need to be in the AHL instead of the NHL. We can’t sit them if they aren’t ready for long stretches and we can’t throw guys in before they are ready.

if Petry is gone that leaves us with Edmondson and Savard as the veterans, Romanov, and not much else. Hopefully at least one of the kids shows he is a regular, if more show they are ready - great, but that can’t be the expectation. Nothing wrong with bringing guys up for a taste of the NHL and an evaluation how they are doing, but we can’t keep throwing kids in before they are ready.

 

with a lot of teams against the cap, we may pick up a veteran on a good short deal, but we can’t be going big game hunting yet.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Neech said:

 

He may turn out to be more of Koivu level 1b guy, which is fine at his cap hit. However, this makes it imperative that we hit on a true #1 stud in the next two drafts. Wright and Bedard come on down! We can't go into the next era of trying to build a contender with another Pleks-Desharnais or Danault-Suzuki tandem that doesn't stack up down the middle.

I think with the right linemates he can be a Bergeron type player. Caufield is a good start.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here is the thing on St. Louis.

 

Yes, the roster sucks.

 

But look at last night.  The goalie wasnt playing well.  The score was 5-1 at one point.  It would have been easy to give up.  How many games under ducharme did they do that? Give up at the first sign of adversity?

 

The team may not have completed the comeback but they never gave up last night 

 

Thats a positive sign for coaching 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Habs need to finish bottom 5 the next two seasons, or all this losing is for nothing.

 

Or have we changed the consensus ?

 

I don’t like that approach, but I semN to be alone with that view 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, alfredoh2009 said:

The Habs need to finish bottom 5 the next two seasons, or all this losing is for nothing.

 

Or have we changed the consensus ?

 

I don’t like that approach, but I semN to be alone with that view 

 

 

 

Only a sith speaks in absolutes.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, alfredoh2009 said:

The Habs need to finish bottom 5 the next two seasons, or all this losing is for nothing.

 

Or have we changed the consensus ?

 

I don’t like that approach, but I semN to be alone with that view 

 

 

 

Well, I think there is a good chance they will finish bottom 5 this year. We will see what next year brings but another year of high draft picks will certainly help the rebuild. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Habs Fan in Edmonton said:

 

Well, I think there is a good chance they will finish bottom 5 this year. We will see what next year brings but another year of high draft picks will certainly help the rebuild. 

Next year we are not going to be a playoff team, unless we suddenly have two young D’s and two a couple of forwards in Calder contention, AND we have Carey HART Price back. I don’t see us a lock for bottom 3, but I’d rather finish bottom 3, than the more likely bottom 5 to 10.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, hab29RETIRED said:

Next year we are not going to be a playoff team, unless we suddenly have two young D’s and two a couple of forwards in Calder contention, AND we have Carey HART Price back. I don’t see us a lock for bottom 3, but I’d rather finish bottom 3, than the more likely bottom 5 to 10.


The Habs better finish in the bottom 5 next year with at least two first round picks. I want this rebuild to work, I feel no joy in watching g the Ha s suck as they are right now 

 

I hope the Bruins do not crush them in Guy’s night. It would be unbearable to watch 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, alfredoh2009 said:


The Habs better finish in the bottom 5 next year with at least two first round picks. 

Suzuki Pick #13

Caufield Pick #15

Guhle Pick #16

Romanov Pick #38

 

Gakchneyuk/KK 3rd

 

Crap shoot, earlier pick should be better with more options obviously, but need to make better choices or get luckier?

 

image.jpeg

 

Cooley will be nice centre addition for Habs and will tear up the NCAA for Minnesota next season.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, alfredoh2009 said:


 I feel no joy in watching g the Ha s suck as they are right now 

 

 

Do you think anybody on this site enjoys watching the Habs suck right now??  I am pretty sure the  answer is no, losing is simply a means to an end right now. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, DON said:

Suzuki Pick #13

Caufield Pick #15

Guhle Pick #16

Romanov Pick #38

 

Gakchneyuk/KK 3rd

 

Crap shoot, earlier pick should be better with more options obviously, but need to make better choices or get luckier?

 

image.jpeg

 

Cooley will be nice centre addition for Habs and will tear up the NCAA for Minnesota next season.

 

 

 

so, being a fringe/bubble team would be acceptable for the next 3-5 years? picking middle-of-the pack (those picks) never panned out for the previous management.

 

Quoting @tomh009

4 hours ago, tomh009 said:

[...] improvements in the next year or two will really depend on our prospects[...] but we need to develop them.

[...]

And, yes, how well will St-Louis's concepts translate into improving the D, in particular?

 

In the next few years, development at the NHL and lower leagues will be the focus. And Hugh-Gort has stated their desire for talent and concepts over Clydesdale-structured-systems 

 

The picks in the next two drafts will form the core after Suzuki-Caufield-Romanov-etc have reached peaks. Thye will be in their Danault-Anderson-like years

 

I still think that the plan is to finish at the bottom of the standings, to force-feed the prospect pipeline in the next couple of years for a consistent flow of high talent

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Habs have Bruins, Rangers, Florida. Will Florida be resting folks in last game?

Ariz. has Minni, Dallas, Nashville left.

 

I predicted 23g for Caufield, he may reach that #.

 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Habs Fan in Edmonton said:

 

Do you think anybody on this site enjoys watching the Habs suck right now??  I am pretty sure the  answer is no, losing is simply a means to an end right now. 

 

yes, those cheering them on with each loss and raving about "how well" they are playing

 

and please do not ask me to name who, I don;t feel like going to the other threads and collecting the names of the posters.

 

I cannot comment on anyone not posting

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Habs need, in no particular order:

  • Some additional quality prospects 
  • Quality player and skills development 
  • Long-term cap space (our young players will have big contracts by the time we’re ready to contend)

I don’t think that necessarily means a bottom-5 finish next year. Depending on the progression of the young players and our goaltending situation, I would expect somewhere between 5th and 15th from the bottom next year. Neither dead last but unlikely to be in the running for a playoff spot. And likely with a lottery ticket.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, alfredoh2009 said:

 

so, being a fringe/bubble team would be acceptable for the next 3-5 years? 

 

Acceptable? Likley is realistic way it will play out, doesnt matter if you or I think is acceptable or not.

 

So Caufield/Suzuki/Guhle/Romanov arnt panning out and the 2 top 5 picks did? 

 

Lottery/Draft is a crap shoot.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, alfredoh2009 said:

I hope the Bruins do not crush them in Guy’s night. It would be unbearable to watch 

 

Crush, no....but I most definitely want a regulation loss in this and every other game remaining.  Arizona handed us a gift by picking up a point last night...I will be beyond pissed if we blow last place by picking up a meaningless point.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, DON said:

Acceptable? Likley is realistic way it will play out, doesnt matter if you or I think is acceptable or not.

 

So Caufield/Suzuki/Guhle/Romanov arnt panning out and the 2 top 5 picks did? 

 

Lottery/Draft is a crap shoot.

Just as Edmonton blowing a ton of top 5 picks doesn't prove they are a bad thing to have, being unlucky to have a #3 pick in a weak draft (Galchenyuk) and making a poor selection (KK) doesn't prove the top end of the draft is a pure crap shoot ... admittedly the lower you go in the first round the greater role luck can play (i.e., teams allowing a player to slip who should not have) but it always remains a matter of teams (GMs, Director of Scouting, scouts, etc.) making the right selection ... come third round onwards I would say it becomes more of a crap shoot as you are generally selecting between better all-round players who usually will be bottom half of the roster players at best or players with top half of the roster potential but with one or more a weaknesses that will likely sink them.

 

BTW - by "top half" I mean top 6 forwards, top 3 defencemen and a starting goalie

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, tomh009 said:

The Habs need, in no particular order:

  • Some additional quality prospects 
  • Quality player and skills development 
  • Long-term cap space (our young players will have big contracts by the time we’re ready to contend)

I don’t think that necessarily means a bottom-5 finish next year. Depending on the progression of the young players and our goaltending situation, I would expect somewhere between 5th and 15th from the bottom next year. Neither dead last but unlikely to be in the running for a playoff spot. And likely with a lottery ticket.

Ideally not better the 11th so they have a SHOT at #1 overall.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Habs Fan in Edmonton said:

Do you think anybody on this site enjoys watching the Habs suck right now??  I am pretty sure the  answer is no, losing is simply a means to an end right now. 

 

1 hour ago, alfredoh2009 said:

yes, those cheering them on with each loss and raving about "how well" they are playing

 

Many/most fans have accepted that losses currently are for the best ... many/most are looking for the tiny silver linings in those losses ... but I don't think anyone ENJOYS watching them suck.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, GHT120 said:

Ideally not better the 11th so they have a SHOT at #1 overall.

Yeah. But it’s hard to target that precisely.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...