Jump to content

Tank Hard for Bedard (as heard on TSN690)


alfredoh2009

Recommended Posts

4 hours ago, The Chicoutimi Cucumber said:

Overall, the Habs's situation may be more “existential” than we fully realize. Here’s what I mean:

 

Anderson/Edmundson are by far our most valuable trade chips. But if we trade them, we weaken the current group in a major way.

 

And if/when we move out Monahan, Drouin, and Dandonov, we will also create significant roster holes that will need to be filled somehow. Right now those guys, no matter how badly the latter two suck, are better than any alternative within the organization. So the team will only get worse with their departure. 

 

We can replace some or all of these players with UFAs, yes. But then you risk taking on more contracts that will be getting in the way when your next wave of youth is coming up. 

 

Absent UFAs, we could be looking at a situation next season where we’re throwing a bunch of rookie FW into the fire in much the same way we’re doing with the D this season. If we have a bunch of great FW prospects banging on the door, then we can do this and still ice a competitive team. I’m no prospect expert, but it’s not clear to me that we do have such a crop of FW prospects.

 

Management may therefore end up facing a choice: is this a real, hard-core, multi-year rebuild? Are we prepared to have this team be even worse next season, and probably a year or two thereafter?

 

If the answer is ‘yes,’ then you ship guys out and don’t replace with UFAs. 

 

If the answer is ‘no,’ then you keep Edmundson at the very least, and probably Anderson too, and maybe look at re-signing Monahan, if he’s interested. You also aren’t too motivated on Hoffman/Gally, since they are at least veteran bodies who can take shifts, and Gally does some things even if he’s not productive.

 

I am not sure Montreal fans are in fact truly prepared for, like, three more seasons of awfulness. The sheer fun of this team over October/November papered over the harder realities of a full-on, all-in rebuild. 

 

It’ll be interesting.

 

I think you have to trade Edmondson and Anderson *IF* the return is worth it. I don’t see them being part of the future. We are at least two full years away from being a playoff team.  Realisticly, I think Anderson is a hard in-season deal to make becuase of the term.
 

we also need to trade Monohan, Drouin, Dadanov.  The trick is to take back some  expiring expensive contacts back that will not only boost the return from Edmondson, Anderson, and Monohan, but also give us some veteran past their best before date, that can fill the roster for this year.  If we someone is willing to overpay for Dvorak, I’d move him as well. We are stuck with Armia, Hoffman, and Gallagher. So my preference would be to try and get experienced but aging dman and centres who can at least bring experience.

 

If the cap is only going up by $1m, there will be a cap crunch, so I’m pretty sure we can get some depth/experience signings for next year.

 

How long the rebuild takes. Is going to depend on how are NHL kids and prospects in junior/college/minors progress. It won’t be Edmondson, Anderson, or Monohan that will speed up the rebuild.

 

if we were in one of the western divisions, we might have a chance to go for the playoffs next year, but that ain’t happening unless we draft a couple of generational players (ie Bedard), and they have a Ovechkin/Crosby type rookie year. Not likely.

 

we may as well go through another year of pain, by signing aging veterans on cheap short term deals to shelter the kids. I’d rather do that than go back to the Bergevin anything can happen approach sand be a bubble team for a decade, rather than go through two years of pain.

 

what is important is bringing in the right veterans to shelter thr kids until they are ready. I’ve been complaining about  our D for the past five years, and our S still sucks. I like the promise of some our kids, but I don’t want to throw them into the fire. I wouldn’t mind picking up an expensive, overpaid, but steady dmen with 2-3 years left from a team needing to move salary.
 

I also hate that we kept Slafkovsky up all year. Maybe he suddenly blossoms the way Joe Thornton did after a mediocre rookie year.  But he isn’t the highly touted prospect Thornton was. The kid needs to learn to adjust to North America ice wouldn’t getting creamed with a big hit every game or two in the NHL. At this rate he is at risk of having eric/Brett lindros concussion issues.

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, Prime Minister Koivu said:

I don’t think finishing bottom 5 is out of the question at all. This team doesn’t look very good and trades that will make us worse are surely coming. 

 

Not to mention the rough schedule for the second half of the season. 
 

Then it’s a simple 20% chance at Bedard (or is it 25% for bottom 4?). 

 

 

I think we will be a much worse team in the second half of the year. So I can see us falling to the bottom 4th or 5th spot.  But will be hard to fall lower than that - too many teams trying hard for Bedard.

 

Having said that i think we probably finish in the bottom 6/7 position.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, tomh009 said:

 Lottery percentages:
32nd: 25.5 / 18.8 / 55.7

31st: 13.5 / 14.4 / 32.0 / 40.2

30th: 11.5 / 11.5 / 7.4/ 40.7 / 28.8

29th: 9.5 / 9.8 / 0.0 / 15.4 / 44.9 / 20.5

28th: 8.5/ 8.8 / 0.0 /0 .0 / 24.5 / 44.2 / 13.9


Thanks Tom

 

So you’re saying there’s a chance 👍

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Prime Minister Koivu said:


Thanks Tom

 

So you’re saying there’s a chance 👍

 

There is a chance. In 2018 Carolina jumped from 11 to 2.  A jump like that doesn't happen often but if the Habs have 2 lottery picks then you never know.  Speaking of Carolina, I will be cheering for them tonight, that doesn't happen often. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, The Chicoutimi Cucumber said:

We're not getting Bedard without some crazy lottery luck..

 

 I think that is what "…if things work out" meant.

 

5 hours ago, The Chicoutimi Cucumber said:

Being guaranteed a top-10 pick and quite possibly a top-5, we should be able to get an impact prospect, although not necessarily one who is NHL ready. Of course, Slaf wasn't NHL ready either and we still threw him into the mix, so who knows, we might make the same stupid decision with our top 2023 pick.

 

Although if using Slafkovsky as a point of comparison one must ask where he (or other top end players from 2022) would be ranked if they were 2023 draft eligible?

 

5 hours ago, The Chicoutimi Cucumber said:

Given how things are playing out, it might well make sense to go all-in on Dubois. On an 8-year deal he'd be 33 when it expires and would likely still be a solid player at that point. Whether the $8 mil it would probably take is a wise use of cap space, that's another question. But he and Slick Nick down the middle would certainly sort out C for an entire generation of Habs.

 

Until at least the 2023 draft lottery is complete, and we have some good idea of who the Habs might be able to draft, it is early to discuss Dubois ... as an RFA next summer or as a UFA in 2024.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Prime Minister Koivu said:

Thanks Tom

So you’re saying there’s a chance 👍

 

Better than the 0.000003% chance of winning the LottoMax tonight

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, GHT120 said:

Better than the 0.000003% chance of winning the LottoMax tonight

But suckers will still purchase lots of tickets, as they actually also think there is "a" chance.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

The Habs have Bedards Fathers blessing: 

image.png

 

Apparently, Connor's grand parents lived in Quebec City but they moved out west before his Dad was born.  Plus, his Dad grew up watching the Habs in the 70's and says it would be fantastic for Connor to end up playing for the CH.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

it is almost half-season and the Habs have a chance to pick twice in the top 10 (FLA is 11th worse at this time)

 

Here are the standings based on points but sorted by Save %

 

SOS = Strength of schedule, lower is easier from beginning of season

 

image.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is the mid-season and I am waiting for one of my kids at the Drs office.

so, here are my thoughts:

Guhle is excellent, Xhekaj is better than anyone expected but no better than a 6-7 on a cup winning team once he matures; same for Kovacevic, 6-7 D on a cup winning team.

I am not sold on Harris. He has been good most nights but seems to respond poorly to physical play and pressure when targeted by other teams.

The other ads are “meh” to me. Ok second pair Ds with strengths and weaknesses but not top pairing Ds on any cup winning team.

 

I have made inconsistent comments in Montembeault. Sometimes he is good other times terrible. Him and Allen seem to be similarly inconsistent. 
 

On forward, it is obvious that the Caufield-Suzuki-Dach line has been outstanding despite being overplayed. Monahan showed he could be a really good 2C if healthy. Evans shows heart, grit and responsible play but seems to be as bad as Pyatt was in creating offense. 
I am not sure how to evaluate the rest of the forwards other than disappointing.

One way I reason why veterans are so inconsistent is that I believe they see how their ice time is limited by how much the top line plays. They are not counted to contribute in key situations and seem to be played as fillers or trade assets. If this was my job and I would not be appreciated for what I can bring, I would have checked out a long time ago.

 

I am not saying the veterans have checked out; but that Ineould have under the same circumstances.

 

I will not judge coaching staff or management until the end of  next season. Except for the odd snarky comment on other threads. I just want to add that I am still confused to their approach to player development 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Habs top line doesn't play more than what the average top line on other teams plays.  I don't see that as a reason why anyone would zone out. 

 

The reality is that Hoffman, Drouin, Armia, etc... they just aren't very good. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, alfredoh2009 said:

It is the mid-season and I am waiting for one of my kids at the Drs office.

so, here are my thoughts:

Guhle is excellent, Xhekaj is better than anyone expected but no better than a 6-7 on a cup winning team once he matures; same for Kovacevic, 6-7 D on a cup winning team.

I am not sold on Harris. He has been good most nights but seems to respond poorly to physical play and pressure when targeted by other teams.

The other ads are “meh” to me. Ok second pair Ds with strengths and weaknesses but not top pairing Ds on any cup winning team.

 

I have made inconsistent comments in Montembeault. Sometimes he is good other times terrible. Him and Allen seem to be similarly inconsistent. 
 

On forward, it is obvious that the Caufield-Suzuki-Dach line has been outstanding despite being overplayed. Monahan showed he could be a really good 2C if healthy. Evans shows heart, grit and responsible play but seems to be as bad as Pyatt was in creating offense. 
I am not sure how to evaluate the rest of the forwards other than disappointing.

One way I reason why veterans are so inconsistent is that I believe they see how their ice time is limited by how much the top line plays. They are not counted to contribute in key situations and seem to be played as fillers or trade assets. If this was my job and I would not be appreciated for what I can bring, I would have checked out a long time ago.

 

I am not saying the veterans have checked out; but that Ineould have under the same circumstances.

 

I will not judge coaching staff or management until the end of  next season. Except for the odd snarky comment on other threads. I just want to add that I am still confused to their approach to player development 

 

Good post - I like your provisional and reflective approach here. I am inclined to cautiously disagree on Wifi - I have a feeling that he will continue to surpass expectations over a long NHL career, probably becoming a solid #5 and maybe even a #4 during his peak. But I’ll admit that most analysts would probably share your view. Certainly I agree on Kovacevic, who has been a nice enough addition to a terrible blueline, but really isn’t more than a borderline guy on a quality club. (He reminds me of Karl Dykuis or Peter Popovic). And while I’d like to disagree on Harris, I fear you may be right. 

 

19 minutes ago, Commandant said:

The Habs top line doesn't play more than what the average top line on other teams plays.  I don't see that as a reason why anyone would zone out. 

 

The reality is that Hoffman, Drouin, Armia, etc... they just aren't very good. 

 

Yeah, I tend to think that’s the issue more than “feeling undervalued” by the coaches. Any coach in hockey would play that fabulous top line to death rather than give those turds enhanced and undeserved minutes. They stink.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, The Chicoutimi Cucumber said:

 

Good post - I like your provisional and reflective approach here

 

 

much appreciated, thanks for the kind words

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, alfredoh2009 said:

Guhle is excellent, Xhekaj is better than anyone expected but no better than a 6-7 on a cup winning team once he matures; same for Kovacevic, 6-7 D on a cup winning team.

I am not sold on Harris. He has been good most nights but seems to respond poorly to physical play and pressure when targeted by other teams.

The other ads are “meh” to me. Ok second pair Ds with strengths and weaknesses but not top pairing Ds on any cup winning team.

Guhle, Harris, Kovacevic and Xhekaj are all rookies. It's not unreasonable to expect them to develop and improve yet; some will improve a lot, others may stagnate, of course. I am quite pleased how well the rookie defence corps has played overall, even if that includes some lows as well as highs. Many of us were expecting a defensive dumpster fire this season, and that has not been the case, credit to the rookies who have more than held their own. Hope they will continue their progression yet.

 

As for 6D/7D on a cup-winning team, different cup-winning teams are built differently, and not all of them have six stud D-men. At the moment, I think Kovacevic and Xhekaj are the least of our problems.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/9/2023 at 2:49 PM, alfredoh2009 said:

it is almost half-season and the Habs have a chance to pick twice in the top 10 (FLA is 11th worse at this time)

 

Here are the standings based on points but sorted by Save %

 

SOS = Strength of schedule, lower is easier from beginning of season

[...]

a follow up to yesterday's post, not with the 41st game played:

 

"A team which has an Actual Goal Differential exceeding its Expected Goal Differential ('axDiff') indicates a team converting or stopping an inordinate amount of good chances compared to league average. This could indicate the team has great shooters, a prolific goalie, or is just getting lucky."

 

when sorting the league's worst 11 teams (FLA is 11th), the Habs have been decent average except for converting their scoring chances. This bodes well for next season after trades and additions to the roster. It is very unlikely the Habs pick top 5 with their pick of FLA's, unless they win the lottery with either:

 

image.png

Edited by alfredoh2009
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, alfredoh2009 said:

It is very unlikely the Habs pick top 5 with their pick of FLA's, unless they win the lottery with either

I don't understand how you conclude this from the axDiff. The Habs are currently 6th last, barely ahead of San Jose and Arizona, and have a very challenging second-half schedule ahead of them. At this point I think a top-five pick is more likely than not.

 

Florida currently 10th-last by percentage, barely ahead of Ottawa, Philadelphia and Vancouver.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, tomh009 said:

I don't understand how you conclude this from the axDiff. The Habs are currently 6th last, barely ahead of San Jose and Arizona, and have a very challenging second-half schedule ahead of them. At this point I think a top-five pick is more likely than not.

 

Florida currently 10th-last by percentage, barely ahead of Ottawa, Philadelphia and Vancouver.

OTT (who are higher),  CBJ and CHI have way worse axDiff than the Habs. OTT usually implodes, their goaltending has been awful and they have had injuries on D that I do not think have been resolved. SJS and ANA have also awful axDiff.

On my earlier posts on this thread, the assumption by most reports was that CBJ, CHI, ARZ, SJS and PHI were going to tank. ARZ and PHI have similar axDiff as the Habs, so it is hard to predict based on that.

 

the trend for ANA, CBJ, CHI, SJS has been to the bottom, if I remember correctly. That is how I interpret it based  on axDiff.

 

If I use the Hockey Reference standing prediction tool, Habs would pick 5th but ARZ is definitely tanking and VAN may tank too after teh trade deadline:

 

https://www.hockey-reference.com/friv/playoff_prob.fcgi

 

DET = 85.7 pts

OTT = 85.4 pts

FLA = 85.2 pts

VAN = 83.6 pts

PHI = 82.9 pts

ARZ = 76.6 pts

MTL = 73.8 pts

SJS = 72.8 pts

CBJ = 64.8 pts

ANA = 64.4 pts

CHI = 62.9 pts

 

(adding earlier post with links)

On 10/11/2022 at 10:17 AM, alfredoh2009 said:

time for a little reading on the topic:

 

The Montreal Gazette reports that BetOnline.ag has the Habs finishing third worst but (if I understand the last paragraph) that the organization may tank to finish last because the daft class is better:

https://montrealgazette.com/sports/sports-betting/nhl-betting/arizona-chicago-and-montreal-among-the-teams-that-should-be-tanking-hard-for-connor-bedard

 

Pronman from The Athletic has them finishing ahead of ARZ, CHI, PHI and SJS 

https://theathletic.com/3668292/2022/10/10/nhl-season-predictions-stanley-cup-playoffs/

 

NY Post has one of the funniest lines about ARZ: "he Coyotes of Arizona State — why not? — are still tanking for Matthews, aren’t they?"

Habs are in the same group as ARZ, SJS, CHI and PHI

https://nypost.com/2022/10/11/2022-23-nhl-preview-the-tankers-the-haves-the-have-nots/

 

Finally, this CHI Blackhawks fan/forum web site has a good analysis from the outside looking-in on the chances of the Habs: "f that young talent progresses, Montreal probably won’t be a problem. If not ... look out. "

https://www.secondcityhockey.com/2022/10/10/23396721/chicago-blackhawks-2022-2023-nhl-season-preview-connor-bedard-sweepstakes

 

===

Happy NHL season, forum friends. It will be a fun ride once again!

 

Edited by alfredoh2009
appended previous post with links to taking predictions
Link to comment
Share on other sites

aXDiff is not a measure of how good a team is. 

 

Its a measure of whether they have been getting lucky shooting or goaltending to have more goals than expected, or less goals than expected, or more/less goals against than their play is showing. 

 

Its like PDO was for Corsi, but this is for xG. 

 

Its not a stat thats supposed to be used on its own to tell you how good the team is.  Its a stat that the further you get away from 0, the more likely you should expect the team to revert to the mean.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

not all teams' axDiff revert back to zero, the equation calculates how well a team is clicking or how poorly they are performing based on converting or stopping chances above league average:

 

https://www.hockey-reference.com/leagues/NHL_2022.html#stats_adv::15

 

https://www.hockey-reference.com/leagues/NHL_2021.html#stats_adv::15

 

https://www.hockey-reference.com/leagues/NHL_2020.html#stats_adv::15

 

https://www.hockey-reference.com/leagues/NHL_2019.html#stats_adv::15

 

https://www.hockey-reference.com/leagues/NHL_2018.html#stats_adv::15

 

if compared with the actual league ranking on the table just above it, you can see correlation at the top and bottom  and what seems like a statistical distribution (don't know the skew, variance)

 

It's fairly straight forward in hindsight but har to us to predict (like I am trying to do). That is why I also used the other tool, the Playoff Probability Report: https://www.hockey-reference.com/friv/playoff_prob.fcgi

 

Between the two, a good guess can be made.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, tomh009 said:

Dom L’s model on The Athletic currently projects the Habs to finish 29th, with about 69 points.


that would be awesome, I did not think of checking it

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, alfredoh2009 said:

not all teams' axDiff revert back to zero, the equation calculates how well a team is clicking or how poorly they are performing based on converting or stopping chances above league average:

 

https://www.hockey-reference.com/leagues/NHL_2022.html#stats_adv::15

 

https://www.hockey-reference.com/leagues/NHL_2021.html#stats_adv::15

 

https://www.hockey-reference.com/leagues/NHL_2020.html#stats_adv::15

 

https://www.hockey-reference.com/leagues/NHL_2019.html#stats_adv::15

 

https://www.hockey-reference.com/leagues/NHL_2018.html#stats_adv::15

 

if compared with the actual league ranking on the table just above it, you can see correlation at the top and bottom  and what seems like a statistical distribution (don't know the skew, variance)

 

It's fairly straight forward in hindsight but har to us to predict (like I am trying to do). That is why I also used the other tool, the Playoff Probability Report: https://www.hockey-reference.com/friv/playoff_prob.fcgi

 

Between the two, a good guess can be made.

 

"

A team which has an Actual Goal Differential exceeding its Expected Goal Differential ('axDiff') indicates a team converting or stopping an inordinate amount of good chances compared to league average. This could indicate the team has great shooters, a prolific goalie, or is just getting lucky.

 

A negative differential would indicate a team is getting more good chances than its opponent, but is not converting or is allowing more than league norms. This could mean bad shooting, bad goaltending, or just being unlucky."

 

Thats from HRef

 

Its not a predictive tool.  Its basically PDO but using xG instead of Corsi.

 

xG% is far more predictive of results. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Bruins are 1st in axDiff this year.  Last year they were 29th.   Not much has really changed on the team.   Its a measure that they are getting breaks this year that they didn't last year. 

 

While the Bruins are a good team, their current points pace threatens the best records in NHL history if maintained over 82 games.  The axDiff tells us that the number of points they have picked up has exceeded the quality of their play, and they aren't actually one of the best teams of all-time.  Expect that in the second half, they will regress from that pace, and while still one of the top teams in the NHL, are unlikely to be historically good. 

 

A similar situation is seen with Seattle.  Last year they were 31st in this stat, this year they are in 2nd.  Again, those who looked at that stat last year saw that Seattle was not nearly as bad as their record and were due for an improvement this season.  Looking at this season they are overperforming.  Their true talent is somewhere in the middle of last season and this season. 

 

 

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.

×
×
  • Create New...