Digest for alt.sports.hockey.nhl.mtl-canadiens@googlegroups.com - 18 updates in 3 topics

Wednesday, June 14, 2017

Mike <mike@gmail.com>: Jun 14 08:09AM -0300

With eh rumour du jour being that Galchenyuk is going to be traded, why
would price want to sign a renewal of his contract on July 1? Wouldn't
it make much more sense to at least see what kind of team Bargain Bin
Bergy puts in front of him? To me it only makes sense. If the team is
similar to last year's team and they go out in the first round then why
would Price want to hook is wagon to that dying star? Makes no sense. I
think if I were him I'd tell BBB that we can talk about an extension but
that my goal would be to sign it no earlier than October 1. In all
honesty, if he wants to win a cup then his best option is to sign with
the Leafs because that's a team on the rise and not one stuck in the
foxhole of mediocrity.
Gerry <gerry14@hotmail.com>: Jun 14 05:03AM -0700

I'm not sure many players have vision that is particularly different than what we see from Bergevin. Most players would probably wholeheartedly take Weber over Subban. And if Bergevin does trade Galchenyuk in a package for a Matt Duchene, then it doesn't really matter what that package looks like, they'll just be happy to have a player who played on Team Canada and has the reputation of Matt Duchene. His stats aren't important, things like draft picks or prospects included in the package aren't important.
 
There's a lot of "intangibles" value in hockey, where by and large intangibles = mythology, but players have always bought into it. I can imagine Price being fooled. Which is good for Habs fans, anyway, even if not necessarily optimal for Price himself.
 
l8r,
Gerry
Jim Bauch <j.bauch@ca.rr.com>: Jun 14 09:47AM -0700

On Wednesday, June 14, 2017 at 5:03:43 AM UTC-7, Gerry wrote:
> I'm not sure many players have vision that is particularly different than what we see from Bergevin. Most players would probably wholeheartedly take Weber over Subban. And if Bergevin does trade Galchenyuk in a package for a Matt Duchene, then it doesn't really matter what that package looks like, they'll just be happy to have a player who played on Team Canada and has the reputation of Matt Duchene. His stats aren't important, things like draft picks or prospects included in the package aren't important.
 
> There's a lot of "intangibles" value in hockey, where by and large intangibles = mythology, but players have always bought into it. I can imagine Price being fooled. Which is good for Habs fans, anyway, even if not necessarily optimal for Price himself.
 
We also don't -- or at least, *I* don't -- know enough about what Price's considerations are. Sure, every player wants to win a Cup, but that's very rarely the only factor. If it were, he could just take a series of one-year deals with whichever team looked like the best contender in need of a goaltender, at whatever number fits their cap, but I doubt we'd see that. He's going to want a hefty salary, probably a lengthy term, possibly a no-trade or no-move clause. How much does he like living in Montreal? How much does his wife like living in Montreal?
 
And as the old line goes, predictions are hard, especially about the future. Sure, you could say now that Price would have a better chance of winning a Cup in Toronto than in Montreal, but if, say, Matthews blows out a knee, and the Habs have a prospect or two that blossom surprisingly, that could flip around. It wasn't that long ago that we were mostly optimistic about the Habs' future and glancing at the Leafs' disarray with almost pity.
 
Jim
Chuck <barberphoto411@gmail.com>: Jun 14 11:30AM -0700

If Price does decide to test the free agent Market they will need to see how Lingren can handle the pressure of the NHL sooner then later
Gerry <gerry14@hotmail.com>: Jun 14 05:48PM -0700

One thing about the whole Trading Galchenyuk circus that seems to have come to town... it's like it is universally taken for granted that the Habs have to ADD (usually a 1st, sometimes Beaulieu also) in order to get into the conversation about the various names being bandied about (Nugent-Hopkins, Drouin, Duchene).
 
Wait, what? None of these players has done anything more than Galchenyuk, none has a better resume or pedigree. They're all kind of in similar spots, actually, having been super-high picks who have kind of failed to live up to expectations to various degrees, in various fashions. If anything, it feels to me like Galchenyuk has had the most valid excuses of all for his struggles (Michel Therrien).
 
It seems a little surreal, and I have to bite my tongue on the various forums, because it's honestly at this point taken widely for granted that Galchenyuk isn't on the level of these players.
 
?!
 
l8r,
Gerry
Chuck <barberphoto411@gmail.com>: Jun 14 07:46PM -0700

Galchenyuk is still capable of being the team's best playmaking forward. Playmaking forwards are a sparse commodity on Montreal. But some fans want to exchange Galchenyuk for a better goal scorer. If they did make such a trade, who is left amongst the forwards, set that players goals up? No one is going to trade Montreal a player who can produce star like stats without chemistry from capable linemates. MBs only hope is to work on getting more consistent production from more lines. To get more 20 goal scores then gambling on acquiring a single potential 40+ scorer. I think CJ with a fresh start this season will do a lot better then MT did at developing offence past the 1st line. There are no easy one for one trades to fix this
Jim Bauch <j.bauch@ca.rr.com>: Jun 14 03:52PM -0700

Hey, it's the offseason, and I can only talk so much about the expansion draft.
 
I've got three that are bugging me:
 
1. "A two-goal lead is the most dangerous lead in hockey." I literally have no idea what this is supposed to mean. It can't possibly be intended at face value. Nobody actually thinks that a one-goal lead is preferable to a two-goal lead. Players don't intentionally avoid shooting with a one-goal lead lest they inadvertently make it a "dangerous" two-goal lead. Is it supposed to mean that "teams that are trailing by two goals are more likely to score the next goal than in other score situations"? Because that seems unlikely, too, plus I've never seen anyone attempt to back this up with actual data. It just seems to be one of those things that people say because somebody once thought it was clever and nobody's really giving it any actual thought any more. Can't we please retire it?
 
2. "This game may be over, but they're sending a message for Game Two." Used in playoff series to justify a team gooning it up late in a hopelessly lost game. What, pray tell, is the "message" being sent? "We're poor losers and will react with pointless violence if you beat us?" Perhaps that's the actual message, but since commentators generally seem to approve of this message-sending, that's probably not what they mean. "You may have beaten us tonight, but we've got plenty of fight left in us and will come out playing hard in the next game!"? This is probably it. But why would you want to send that message? Wouldn't it be better to just come out playing hard in the next game, without warning the opponent that you intend to do so? Why not let them get overconfident? The only rational reason I can think of for doing this is to send a message to your TEAMMATES and coach that "hey, I'VE still got some fight in me, what about the rest of you?" Of course, I suspect the real reason isn't rational at all, it's just blowing off some steam since (a) you're pissed at losing; and (b) you hate the other team or at least a particular player, and now's a good time to take your shot when you don't care about giving up a power play. Which is a perfectly good explanation -- why try to pretend it's some strategic thing?
 
3. "Team A wins blah% of the time when Player X scores a goal." Usually said with the implication that (1) "blah%" is awfully high, (2) that this is meaningful, and (3) that this shows that X is a clutch player who's really important to the team's success (bonus points for saying "he's the straw that stirs the drink." Point (1) is often misleading, because almost every player's "blah%" should be higher than his team's record. In today's NHL, there are a lot of shutouts. The Habs were 47-26-9 last season, for a 62.8 points percentage. Take away the six regulation and one OT/SO loss in which they were shut out, and they were 47-20-8, for 68.0%. That means that, on average, the Habs won 68% of the points when ANYONE scored. That percentage will be higher for some players, lower for others, but on a weighted-by-goal basis, it's 68%. So the percentage for any particular player better be significantly higher than that to even be worth commenting on. Point (2), well, that's our old friend sample size. Even a 20-goal scorer only scores in at most 20 games, which is not a big sample, so the team's record in those games could easily be coincidence. And as to Point (3): couldn't you just as easily say that "Player X gets a lot of easy goals in games his team is dominating"?
 
Sorry -- that's three long rants for one post, but I couldn't justify starting three separate threads on my pet peeves.
 
Jim
Chuck <barberphoto411@gmail.com>: Jun 14 04:15PM -0700

A two goal lead is dangerous when a team stops going for a 3 goal lead! Coasting playing offence free hockey while protecting a two goal lead, if a goal is scored, the momentum created by that goal often leads to a quick tying goal.
Chuck <barberphoto411@gmail.com>: Jun 14 04:20PM -0700

2. The game is out of reach, the losing team's knuckle staggers get the chance at icetime they'd never would see in a close game. So they use that icetime to showcase the only skill set they have.
Chuck <barberphoto411@gmail.com>: Jun 14 04:24PM -0700

Hate autocorrect the post should read knuckle draggers
Gerry <gerry14@hotmail.com>: Jun 14 05:00PM -0700

Give me one of those nice writeups about historical records vs. teams, or records in Building X, dating back the last waaaay-too-many-years-to-be-remotely-meaningful. Like it matters that some version of the Habs beat some version of the Leafs 10 years ago, when like 3 skaters in the whole game are even on the same team anymore (and for that matter are 10 years older and either shadows of their former selves or have blossomed from when they were baby-faced rookies).
 
Last season's record? Ok, for a division rival you played many times last season, I'll accept it. But the roster turnover is too significant even over a few years for most of these records to have any significance.
 
l8r,
Gerry
Gerry <gerry14@hotmail.com>: Jun 14 05:10AM -0700

One thing I was thinking I should put here too is my prediction of who the Habs protect, as separate from who I would protect... thus:

7F:
Pacioretty
Galchenyuk
Gallagher
Shaw
Danault
Byron
De La Rose
 
... where I think they will realize they're safe enough exposing Plekanec, and if it came to protecting a young forward, then DLR would be their man. If they end up needing to protect Radulov, then DLR comes off the list.
 
3D:
Weber
Petry (NMC)
Benn
 
I'm going to imagine they go with either Benn or Emelin ahead of Beaulieu. They will try to trade Beaulieu before the draft, but it may not seem to be a lot of pressure on them to do so, because just losing Beaulieu to Vegas may be better than a bad trade. With Benn having the attractive cap hit over the next 2 years, they may feel that he's the better D to protect than Emelin at a higher hit with just 1 year left.
 
And frankly, if they do expose Beaulieu, then that pretty much solves the Expansion Draft for them. Barring Vegas signing Radulov, it then becomes a no-brainer that they take Beaulieu, and by exposing him you basically protect the rest of the team en masse.
 
l8r,
Gerry
Chuck <barberphoto411@gmail.com>: Jun 14 07:18AM -0700

Neither Benn or Emelin have any puck skills. It would be a bad move to give up Beaulieu for nothing in order to keep either of them especially Emelin. If they do not trade Beaulieu they should protect him. Via trade I think they could still pick up a better asset then Emelin
Gerry <gerry14@hotmail.com>: Jun 14 11:00AM -0700

I wonder if there is any real trade market right now for Beaulieu, though. There aren't too many teams with an open protection slot on D. And other players like Dumba/Brodin also on the market presumably. If you can't get anything in a trade, don't value him over Benn or Emelin yourself (as I could easily see being the case for Bergevin), then just letting him sail away in the expansion draft may make the most "sense".
 
Sigh. Imagine in a week if the Habs have no Galchenyuk and Beaulieu... the anti-skill/youth issue could become even more jarring. The mobility of the D is already an issue. Jerabek and Sergachev will have better chances of sticking, though.
 
l8r,
Gerry
Jim Bauch <j.bauch@ca.rr.com>: Jun 14 11:21AM -0700

On Wednesday, June 14, 2017 at 11:00:49 AM UTC-7, Gerry wrote:
> I wonder if there is any real trade market right now for Beaulieu, though. There aren't too many teams with an open protection slot on D. And other players like Dumba/Brodin also on the market presumably.
 
 
And if you're a GM with interest in Beaulieu, because of the protection slot issue you mention, it's actually easier to work a deal with Vegas, e.g. "you draft Beaulieu, and flip him to me for X," than it is to deal with Bergevin, because with the Habs you have to (a) be able and willing to protect Beaulieu once you acquire him; and (b) offer Bergevin something that he's able and willing to protect (or that doesn't need protecting).
 
 
If you can't get anything in a trade, don't value him over Benn or Emelin yourself (as I could easily see being the case for Bergevin), then just letting him sail away in the expansion draft may make the most "sense".
 
> Sigh. Imagine in a week if the Habs have no Galchenyuk and Beaulieu... the anti-skill/youth issue could become even more jarring. The mobility of the D is already an issue. Jerabek and Sergachev will have better chances of sticking, though.
 
I didn't follow the Bruins closely enough to know whether this was Julien's choice or something imposed on him by management, but before the Bruins fired him, Julien seemed willing to give young defensemen a real shot. (I'm thinking Brandon Carlo, and before him Torey Krug.)
 
Obviously it remains to be seen if the Habs' D prospects are as good. But at least there's reason to believe they might get a fairer shot than MT would have given them.
 
Jim
Chuck <barberphoto411@gmail.com>: Jun 14 11:25AM -0700

I don't mind Benn. Of all the Dmen they have I wish they could get rid of both Emelin and Petry. Unfortunately because of his contract they are stuck with Petry. With Beaulieu gone, it solidifies Petry's hold on a PP role he has done little to justify holding. I wish there was a fountain of youth for Markov but relying on him to be the team's primary PP playmaker will just lead to disappointment if no moves are made to pull back on his per game minutes.
Gerry <gerry14@hotmail.com>: Jun 14 11:57AM -0700

Yeah, I like Benn too. Granted, maybe we just aren't past the honeymoon phase. But even still, whether he's just a passable character guy on the bottom pairing, or even whether the staff gets a bit enamoured of him and overuses him a tad, it's not quite as much of an annoyance when the guy is making $1.1M instead of $4.1M. His lower cap hit will buy him a great deal of forgiveness. But so far so good, no forgiveness needed.
 
l8r,
Gerry
Chuck <barberphoto411@gmail.com>: Jun 14 12:09PM -0700

On Wednesday, June 14, 2017 at 2:21:23 PM UTC-4, Jim Bauch wrote:
 
> I didn't follow the Bruins closely enough to know whether this was Julien's choice or something imposed on him by management, but before the Bruins fired him, Julien seemed willing to give young defensemen a real shot. (I'm thinking Brandon Carlo, and before him Torey Krug.)
 
> Obviously it remains to be seen if the Habs' D prospects are as good. But at least there's reason to believe they might get a fairer shot than MT would have given them.
 
> Jim
 
I would be great if one or both Jerabek and Sergachev stick. One big factor working against that is I think other then Weber, the remainder of their top 4 defence are not capable of supporting a shortened bench in the 3rd period (unless Price on his own stops everything thrown at him) The load will not be any lighter with Markov, Emelin and Petry attempting to play shutdown hockey in the slot
You received this digest because you're subscribed to updates for this group. You can change your settings on the group membership page.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it send an email to alt.sports.hockey.nhl.mtl-canadiens+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.

0 comments:

Post a Comment