GDT Game #37 Montreal at Washington 4pm EST Dec. 31

[The Chicoutimi Cucumber]

I didn’t see the game, having been too busy prepping for and then enjoying a NYE party chez Cucumber. But you know, reading Tom Haapanen’s excellent game summary on the main page, I note that the Habs actually had a 7-6 edge in high-danger scoring chances until the third period, but were down 5-2.

 

So what does this mean? Were the chances we gave up disproportionately catastrophic? Or did our G just stink? How much of the current skid really comes down to sub-par netminding? (Not saying we’re a good team, just wondering whether our actual team play is not being represented by these disastrous scores).

 

If the real Achilles’ Heel is in net, then there’s not a whole lot MSL can do.

 

At least it sounds as though, abetted by the return of Dach to that line, Slick Nick and Caufield managed to generate some offence. A revival of Line 1 would make a big difference, since they were basically carrying the team over October/November.

[tomh009]

On last night's game (and the one in Miami) our goaltending was definitely subpar. And Lindgren played a very good game for the Capitals (or our forwards were snakebitten, hard to tell the difference from a single-game statistical sample).

 

The appearance of CAREY PRICE (all caps) notwithstanding, better goaltending would not have won the game for us, but it certainly would have been closer.

 

Our goalies are at .904 (Montembeault) and .894 (Allen) for the season, that's somewhat better than last season when we had .920 Hammond, .905 (Allen), .891 (Montebeault), .878 (Price), .868 (Primeau) and .571 (McNiven). .904 is somewhere in the weak 1G/strong 2G territory (Husso, Knight, MAF, Raanta) so it's not atrocious at the season level. One game (or even the last handful) is just a really small sample -- but consistency is not a strong point for either Allen or Montembeault.

 

At the end of the day, to contend, we certainly need stronger goaltending. Whether Dichow or Vrbetic (or Primeau or Montembeault) can step up, or whether the team can identify and secure a stronger prospect, some kind of solution will be needed.

 

And thanks for the kind words, CC.

[The Chicoutimi Cucumber]

26 minutes ago, tomh009 said:

On last night's game (and the one in Miami) our goaltending was definitely subpar. And Lindgren played a very good game for the Capitals (or our forwards were snakebitten, hard to tell the difference from a single-game statistical sample).

 

The appearance of CAREY PRICE (all caps) notwithstanding, better goaltending would not have won the game for us, but it certainly would have been closer.

 

Our goalies are at .904 (Montembeault) and .894 (Allen) for the season, that's somewhat better than last season when we had .920 Hammond, .905 (Allen), .891 (Montebeault), .878 (Price), .868 (Primeau) and .571 (McNiven). .904 is somewhere in the weak 1G/strong 2G territory (Husso, Knight, MAF, Raanta) so it's not atrocious at the season level. One game (or even the last handful) is just a really small sample -- but consistency is not a strong point for either Allen or Montembeault.

 

At the end of the day, to contend, we certainly need stronger goaltending. Whether Dichow or Vrbetic (or Primeau or Montembeault) can step up, or whether the team can identify and secure a stronger prospect, some kind of solution will be needed.

 

And thanks for the kind words, CC.

 

Nice follow-up here - thanks. 

 

Losing is one thing, getting blown out another. I do share the view of some hereabouts that blowouts are bad for team culture and player development. I want our young players to be in competitive games. And it sounds like the recent lapse into blowouts has more to do with slumping goalies than team play per se; where we might lose 4-2 with a good goalie, we’re losing 7-2 and 9-2 instead.

 

I’m beginning to wonder whether acquiring a third G (another Montembault type) might become necessary *if* this keeps up - if only to increase the odds of one of our goalies being on a good run when the others struggle. The more obvious path forward, though, is for the existing guys to grind their way out of this trough.  

[GHT120]

23 minutes ago, tomh009 said:

... At the end of the day, to contend, we certainly need stronger goaltending. Whether Dichow or Vrbetic (or Primeau or Montembeault) can step up, or whether the team can identify and secure a stronger prospect, some kind of solution will be needed ..

 

There is also un-signed 2022 draftee, Emmett Croteau ... recently turned 19 yrs-old, big kid (6'4", 196lb) committed to Clarkson for 23-24.

[dlbalr]

14 minutes ago, GHT120 said:

There is also un-signed 2022 draftee, Emmett Croteau ... recently turned 19 yrs-old, big kid (6'4", 196lb) committed to Clarkson for 23-24.

 

And Jakub Dobes who might be the best prospect of them all (or at least the highest-rated in our prospect rankings).

[Canajun]

As this game went on, I thought back to 1975 when I was an 11 yr old kid and my Dad took me along with him on his business trip in Montreal... with plans of going to see my first-ever Habs game. This was the one:

 

https://www.hockey-reference.com/boxscores/197504050MTL.html

 

I couldn't believe my eyes and ears the whole time I was there, it was like I was in a dream. Our team were indeed the Flying Frenchmen back then... every 30 seconds it was score! score! score! score! score! Dad even took me up to the gondola before the game started up and I met Dick Irvin... Danny Gallivan wasn't there at that moment though, too bad.

 

Anyways, as Washington was piling up the goals last night, I thought "Well, here's the payback for the 1975 10-2 drubbing... they're gonna turn it around right back on us almost 50 years later". They pretty near did.

[hab29RETIRED]

On 12/31/2022 at 10:32 AM, alfredoh2009 said:

Hoffman, Drouin and Armia have not been used properly. All three have big holes in their game, but when used by a Davy coach in specific roles, they provide value.

In how they are being used, their value is not maximized and I believe they ate fling through the motions knowing they will be traded.

 

Odd lineup, I would have:

 

Caufield - Suzuki - Dach

Anderson - Dvorak - Gallagher 

Hoffman - Evans -  Armia 

Slafkovsky  - Drouin - Dadonov

 

Edmundson -  Kovacevic

Xhekaj - Wideman 

Harris -  Barron

All three are horrible contracts that Bergevin saddled us with. You could play either with Suzuki and Caufield and they would still stuck. Armia already was given a chance and, I think Drouin also had a chance. Both were beyond useless.

 

this is not a coaching deployment issue. It’s a garbage player issue. Drouin and Hoffman are not tradeable because of the cost and length of their contracts (same issue as Gallagher). I was hoping that Drouin would show some life, so that we could at least get a 2nd or 3rd from him. The way he is playing unless a major contender gets some serious injuries, even if we retain 50%, I don’t see us getting more than a fourth (IF Drouin by some miracle goes on a hit streak), most likely return would be a 5th or a 6th.

 

What sucks is the Monohan, is a guy who could have potentially brought us another first, is injured.

 
 

[hab29RETIRED]

On 12/31/2022 at 11:17 AM, dlbalr said:

 

I can't fault Bergevin for the salary structure on that one.  This was when fixed escrow percentages were coming in so a lot of contracts signed that summer were back-loaded.

I do fault him for signing Armia. He’s the type of player you let walk. When he was signed, I had said I’d preferred to have given that contract to Lekhonan. But Armia has always been a borderline 3rd liner, who occasionally moves up, but more often than not moves down the lineup.

[hab29RETIRED]

On 12/31/2022 at 11:50 AM, alfredoh2009 said:

mid I was GM, I would let the pending UFAs walk if I cannot get anything in a trade. The extra salary cap room should be enough to resign Monahan if he wants to stay. moneyhands at Dadonov’ sir Drouin’s salary is what I would resign him for 

If move Monohan for whatever I could get. If he wants to return as a UFA on an affordable contract after testing free agency, sure. But no way I’d keep him beyond the trade deadline unless he is injured and can’t be moved.

[hab29RETIRED]

22 hours ago, alfredoh2009 said:

A penalty? Gallagher? 
 

let’s pit

him put him out of his misery and trade him for a late 3rd

Yiu couldn’t trade him for a late 7th without retaining salary.

[dlbalr]

14 minutes ago, hab29RETIRED said:

What sucks is the Monohan, is a guy who could have potentially brought us another first, is injured.

 

In a centre rental market that's going to feature Bo Horvat, Jonathan Toews, and probably Ryan O'Reilly, Monahan was never going to fetch a first-rounder, healthy or not.

[Habs Fan in Edmonton]

6 minutes ago, hab29RETIRED said:

Yiu couldn’t trade him for a late 7th without retaining salary.

 

You couldn't give Gallagher away right now. You would either have to retain a lot of salary as you said or offer some type of sweetener which would have to be substantial.  We are stuck with him as there are no good options to move him. The toughest contract on the Habs to move. I think all we can hope for is he regains some of his old form. At least his attitude and work ethic are a good example for the young guys. 

[Habs Fan in Edmonton]

3 minutes ago, dlbalr said:

 

In a centre rental market that's going to feature Bo Horvat, Jonathan Toews, and probably Ryan O'Reilly, Monahan was never going to fetch a first-rounder, healthy or not.

 

I disagree. Horvat will be really expensive. A lot of people here thought they wouldn't get a 1st for Chiarot last year. Teams always overpay at the deadline. A healthy Monahan playing the way he was before he got hurt is a very attractive piece for a contender. 

[hab29RETIRED]

12 minutes ago, dlbalr said:

 

In a centre rental market that's going to feature Bo Horvat, Jonathan Toews, and probably Ryan O'Reilly, Monahan was never going to fetch a first-rounder, healthy or not.

Depends how many teams think they GM have a shot. Avs definitely will add a centre. I could easily seeing another three teams willing to give up a 1st l, if they think they have a shot, and they think they are adding the right player. I think if we are willing to take a bad contract (expiring) back, Monohan is healthy and producing, AND we retain 50%, there will be a market. 

[dlbalr]

14 minutes ago, Habs Fan in Edmonton said:

I disagree. Horvat will be really expensive. A lot of people here thought they wouldn't get a 1st for Chiarot last year. Teams always overpay at the deadline. A healthy Monahan playing the way he was before he got hurt is a very attractive piece for a contender. 

 

Chiarot was the best rental defenceman available which gave Montreal a bit of leverage, plus the contract was considerably cheaper.  Monahan will be the third or fourth-best at his position and would be a third-liner on most teams that would be interested in him.  Colorado is probably the only one where he could be a second-liner.  Teams nowadays aren't moving a first-rounder for a third-liner, even with the Habs eating 50%.  And there are some notable wingers that will fetch first-rounders as well.  They should get a good pick for him but I'd be stunned (happily) if it's a first and I'd caution anyone expecting one to perhaps lower their expectations.

[dlbalr]

1 minute ago, hab29RETIRED said:

Depends how many teams think they GM have a shot. Avs definitely will add a centre. I could easily seeing another three teams willing to give up a 1st l, if they think they have a shot, and they think they are adding the right player. I think if we are willing to take a bad contract (expiring) back, Monohan is healthy and producing, AND we retain 50%, there will be a market. 

 

I don't doubt there will be a market, especially with retention and the ability to take back a contract.  I just doubt there will be anyone offering up a first-rounder for him when there are several more prominent rentals that are going to be out there.  And as I always say, there are only so many first-round picks to go around.

[tomh009]

3 hours ago, dlbalr said:

 

And Jakub Dobes who might be the best prospect of them all (or at least the highest-rated in our prospect rankings).

Oops, forgot to include him, I should have checkedyour rankings!

[Habs Fan in Edmonton]

12 minutes ago, dlbalr said:

 

Chiarot was the best rental defenceman available which gave Montreal a bit of leverage, plus the contract was considerably cheaper.  Monahan will be the third or fourth-best at his position and would be a third-liner on most teams that would be interested in him.  Colorado is probably the only one where he could be a second-liner.  Teams nowadays aren't moving a first-rounder for a third-liner, even with the Habs eating 50%.  And there are some notable wingers that will fetch first-rounders as well.  They should get a good pick for him but I'd be stunned (happily) if it's a first and I'd caution anyone expecting one to perhaps lower their expectations.

 

Lindholm and Klingberg were also on the market in March last year. His contract is somewhat cheaper but after eating 50% and with much of it accounted for by March it is not a big deal, we are looking at maybe a million bucks, can always take back an expiring contract if need be. He doesn't have to be a 2nd line center to get a 1st on a team that thinks it has a chance and there are a lot of teams that have a legitimate shot. 

[dlbalr]

1 hour ago, tomh009 said:

Oops, forgot to include him, I should have checkedyour rankings!

 

They're not out yet so you didn't miss it.  I have them figured out but nine articles of writeups is quite time-consuming.

[dlbalr]

1 hour ago, Habs Fan in Edmonton said:

Lindholm and Klingberg were also on the market in March last year. His contract is somewhat cheaper but after eating 50% and with much of it accounted for by March it is not a big deal, we are looking at maybe a million bucks, can always take back an expiring contract if need be. He doesn't have to be a 2nd line center to get a 1st on a team that thinks it has a chance and there are a lot of teams that have a legitimate shot. 

 

Klingberg wasn't really on the block (that was more his agent getting Jeff Marek to try to generate a bidding war for him that never came close to materializing).  Lindholm's situation was different in it being a trade-and-sign which is why Boston paid several pieces for him including a first.

 

We'll find out in a couple of months about Monahan but if I'm a contending team, there's no way I'm paying a first-round pick for him.  Let's not overstate what he's done either, six goals in 25 games at over 17 minutes a night with PP1 time is not the type of production that will have teams thinking of him as a core contributor down the stretch.  He's a secondary piece, not a key one.  With all the top rental talent that's likely going to be available (which is much better than a year ago), those guys will get the first-rounders and the crew that's a tier below like Monahan will have to come in below that.  I think they can get a second-rounder but that's as high as the top element of the trade is going to be.

[tomh009]

40 minutes ago, dlbalr said:

We'll find out in a couple of months about Monahan but if I'm a contending team, there's no way I'm paying a first-round pick for him.  Let's not overstate what he's done either, six goals in 25 games at over 17 minutes a night with PP1 time is not the type of production that will have teams thinking of him as a core contributor down the stretch.  He's a secondary piece, not a key one.

That would also imply that his contract (once he hits UFA) should not be in the top tier, either, right?

 

But I wonder at what point Hugo will decide to simply extend him. If they do want him back, getting a late third-rounder would probably not be worth the risk of losing him to the UFA market, or would it? A late second, maybe. (Going on the assumption here that the other team would likely be at least in the second round of playoffs and thus the pick would likely be a late one.)

[Habs Fan in Edmonton]

1 hour ago, dlbalr said:

 

Klingberg wasn't really on the block (that was more his agent getting Jeff Marek to try to generate a bidding war for him that never came close to materializing).  Lindholm's situation was different in it being a trade-and-sign which is why Boston paid several pieces for him including a first.

 

We'll find out in a couple of months about Monahan but if I'm a contending team, there's no way I'm paying a first-round pick for him.  Let's not overstate what he's done either, six goals in 25 games at over 17 minutes a night with PP1 time is not the type of production that will have teams thinking of him as a core contributor down the stretch.  He's a secondary piece, not a key one.  With all the top rental talent that's likely going to be available (which is much better than a year ago), those guys will get the first-rounders and the crew that's a tier below like Monahan will have to come in below that.  I think they can get a second-rounder but that's as high as the top element of the trade is going to be.

 

We will find out in a couple months. Another wild card in this is any injuries a contender may incur between now and the deadline. 

[dlbalr]

1 hour ago, tomh009 said:

That would also imply that his contract (once he hits UFA) should not be in the top tier, either, right?

 

But I wonder at what point Hugo will decide to simply extend him. If they do want him back, getting a late third-rounder would probably not be worth the risk of losing him to the UFA market, or would it? A late second, maybe. (Going on the assumption here that the other team would likely be at least in the second round of playoffs and thus the pick would likely be a late one.)

 

The biggest thing for Monahan is going to be term.  The AAV is probably going to be around - maybe a bit below - the $6.375M it is now on a market-value deal.  We've seen higher-end 2C's get $7M and while the contenders that might want Monahan in the next couple of months would have him on the third line, there will be weaker teams in free agency that would view him as a 2C which will drive up the cost to that range.  But how long of a deal can he get?  Is there a team willing to go 6+ years?  That might lower the AAV a bit but the risk is much higher.

 

I think the only way Montreal re-signs Monahan early is if it's a short-term contract.  If they're comfortable with, say, 3 years around his current cost, then maybe they forego the late second-rounder.  That gives them some short-term certainty, less pressure to make Dach a centre, and potentially opens up a lane to move Dvorak.  Is that worth the opportunity cost of not getting that draft pick?  I think it could be.

 

But if Monahan wants a long-term deal?  They'll have to pass.  If they're trending towards having a top-6 or top-7 pick where they're likely to get a centre, do they want to lock up Monahan that long knowing they'll be eyeing the youngster for that spot in a few years? 

[hab29RETIRED]

58 minutes ago, dlbalr said:

 

The biggest thing for Monahan is going to be term.  The AAV is probably going to be around - maybe a bit below - the $6.375M it is now on a market-value deal.  We've seen higher-end 2C's get $7M and while the contenders that might want Monahan in the next couple of months would have him on the third line, there will be weaker teams in free agency that would view him as a 2C which will drive up the cost to that range.  But how long of a deal can he get?  Is there a team willing to go 6+ years?  That might lower the AAV a bit but the risk is much higher.

 

I think the only way Montreal re-signs Monahan early is if it's a short-term contract.  If they're comfortable with, say, 3 years around his current cost, then maybe they forego the late second-rounder.  That gives them some short-term certainty, less pressure to make Dach a centre, and potentially opens up a lane to move Dvorak.  Is that worth the opportunity cost of not getting that draft pick?  I think it could be.

 

But if Monahan wants a long-term deal?  They'll have to pass.  If they're trending towards having a top-6 or top-7 pick where they're likely to get a centre, do they want to lock up Monahan that long knowing they'll be eyeing the youngster for that spot in a few years? 

Frankly, I think I three years is a long term contract for Monohan given how injury history. We already have given out too much $ and term to guys that either don’t produce, don’t show up, or are injured too much (Armia, Gallagher, Hoffman, Anderson). Thankfully will be rid of Drouin after this season.
 

Unless Monohan wants to sign a 2-3 year deal, or even a one year show me deal at a reduced contract, I want nothing to do with Monohan.

 

i could see a team that needs help at centre, but needs to get rid of other expensive deals, giving up a 1st for Monohan at 50%. They aren’t just paying for Monohan, they’d also be paying to unload salary.

[Sir_Boagalott]

Right when you're convinced that nothing else could possibly be worse about that game and then this happens: