Speculation: Caps Roster General Discussion (Coaching/FAs/Cap/Lines/etc) | 2023-24 Regular Season Edition

kicksavedave

I'm just here for the memes and gifs.
Sponsor
Apr 29, 2009
10,963
13,841
Fallbrook, CA
www.tiasarms.org
only knock I have is playing the last 5 years without a real goaltender (I like Lindgren). True he was handcuffed by the cap and winning the cup causes the problem of having to reward players most likely on the downward swing of their careers but as soon Holtby fell apart / left, nothing real was done to give a team that may have had one more shot at winning a real chance with a proven goaltender. Vanny, Sammy, Kuemper all suck / sucked. Even if Lundqvist hadnt had his health issues NY let him go. DId he really have anything left. Lindgren was a nice surprise

How long do you give Vanny and Sammy, in the NHL, to show if they can be stars or scrubs? Sammy and Vanny were the post Holtby plan. When it became apparent that neither one of them was really seizing the starting job, he signed Lundy as a stop gap. But no one predicted Lundy's heart condition, so that plan failed.

If Sammy or Vanny had developed like Holtby did, then we're not having these conversations and we likely win a few more playoff rounds since 2018.

Sometimes, things just don't work out.
 

AlexBrovechkin8

At least there was 2018.
Sponsor
Feb 18, 2012
27,018
25,747
District of Champions
Feels like we have this conversation every couple months with GMBM…

Hes been good at finding value plays to maximize the roster at limited cap - I think of Dowd, Lindgren, Strome when he was first signed, Sheary at league minimum, TVR when he first came on around $1 mil, Gustafssson last year, even Brett Connolly years ago, he’s quite good at this!

He doesn’t give out many horrendous contracts, especially long term, but he’s given out enough that have limited us in the near term. The Hagelin/Panik contracts were questionable at the time. Those both resulted in dumping Burakovsky and Stephenson. Bura was probably on his way out anyway to be sure, he needed the change of scenery. And I get that Stephenson wasn’t playing great when he was dumped for a 5th, but feels like we just didn’t give our young players a little more leash. And then dumping Panik was a big part of the Mantha trade too.

Same is true when we dumped Siegs for Chara. And I loved seeing Chara in a caps uni, that was fun. But we let go another perfectly solid young player for a vet. It was ultimately not a smart play.

And then he’s just generally missed on being part of any high impact acquisitions. I think of Devon Toews or Sam Reinhart for instance. Both likely could have been had but we didn’t do it. Maybe he tried, I have no idea!

I say all this because I get tired of seeing “what did you expect GMBM to do??” All the time. There were plenty of moves to be made (or not made) and he’s definitely missed on a few. And I’m not saying this as a means of calling for his job, he’s been mostly ok in my opinion. But he has fumbled things a few times
Everybody fumbles things. The Lightning, who I think everyone would agree has an excellent scouting and development operation, let Carter Verheaghe walk for nothing after playing him less than 10 minutes a night on the fourth line. They let Jonathan Marchessault walk for nothing after not giving him much of a chance. And then they traded a bunch of picks to try and build scoring depth.

What I like most about BMac is: (1) his ability to diagnose issues and his aggressiveness in filling or attempting to fill those holes, and (2) his willingness to change course if something isn’t working. His drafts in the 2016-18 space were largely underwhelming because I think he went away from what worked for them and took safer picks to provide organizational depth but he’s changed back to what’s worked historically in recent years. He got a vet coach in Lavi and then changed course completely and hired the youngest coach in the NHL without any previous NHL HC experience.

He doesn’t seem to have a big ego on him and he seems willing and eager to do things differently if need be. He’s not perfect but I am a fan of the way he sets up process and structure around the way the organization makes decisions and I think he’s one of the better GMs in the league all things considered.
 

Kalopsia

Registered User
Jun 25, 2018
796
1,199
Feels like we have this conversation every couple months with GMBM…

Hes been good at finding value plays to maximize the roster at limited cap - I think of Dowd, Lindgren, Strome when he was first signed, Sheary at league minimum, TVR when he first came on around $1 mil, Gustafssson last year, even Brett Connolly years ago, he’s quite good at this!

He doesn’t give out many horrendous contracts, especially long term, but he’s given out enough that have limited us in the near term. The Hagelin/Panik contracts were questionable at the time. Those both resulted in dumping Burakovsky and Stephenson. Bura was probably on his way out anyway to be sure, he needed the change of scenery. And I get that Stephenson wasn’t playing great when he was dumped for a 5th, but feels like we just didn’t give our young players a little more leash. And then dumping Panik was a big part of the Mantha trade too.

Same is true when we dumped Siegs for Chara. And I loved seeing Chara in a caps uni, that was fun. But we let go another perfectly solid young player for a vet. It was ultimately not a smart play.

And then he’s just generally missed on being part of any high impact acquisitions. I think of Devon Toews or Sam Reinhart for instance. Both likely could have been had but we didn’t do it. Maybe he tried, I have no idea!

I say all this because I get tired of seeing “what did you expect GMBM to do??” All the time. There were plenty of moves to be made (or not made) and he’s definitely missed on a few. And I’m not saying this as a means of calling for his job, he’s been mostly ok in my opinion. But he has fumbled things a few times
I don't think anyone here's denying MacLellan's made mistakes. The "what did you expect GMBM to do?" posts are specifically in response to the people who fault him for not making some hypothetical major addition along the lines of Vegas adding Eichel and Pietrangelo. Those are lazy takes, so they're always gonna get pushback.

Dallas on the other hand has built a core of Robertson, Hintz, Johnston, Heiskanen, Harley, and probably Stankoven as well. Only Heiskanen was a top pick. The rest are late first or second rounders and guys like Robertson/Stankoven were fallers because of superficial concerns like size and speed.

Brayden Point and Alex DeBrincat were available for the taking and teams just passed on them. Washington did really well last year to pounce on Cristall but they've had opportunities to draft well-known high level talents with these superficial deficiencies in late rounds and instead took a few duds.
Dallas has had an impressive run with their drafting, but we'll see how long it lasts. Remember when Tampa built their insane depth primarily with guys drafted after the first round? Kucherov (58th OA) and Palat (208th) in 2011, Paquette (101st) in 2012, Point (79th) in 2014, Cirelli (72nd) and Joseph (120th) in 2015, Colton (118th) in 2016. Well since 2016, the only player they've drafted who's currently a full time NHLer is Nicklaus Perbix. Before anyone says "well Stevie Y must've been the draft mastermind," Detroit's only had one player drafted outside the top 10 make it to the NHL level since Yzerman took over in 2019. Every once in a while a team hits on a bunch of later picks in a short period and people think they've figured something out, but really I think it's almost all luck.
 

Ridley Simon

HFBoards Sponsor
Sponsor
Feb 27, 2002
18,426
9,452
Marin County — SF Bay Area, CA
Everybody fumbles things. The Lightning, who I think everyone would agree has an excellent scouting and development operation, let Carter Verheaghe walk for nothing after playing him less than 10 minutes a night on the fourth line. They let Jonathan Marchessault walk for nothing after not giving him much of a chance. And then they traded a bunch of picks to try and build scoring depth.

What I like most about BMac is: (1) his ability to diagnose issues and his aggressiveness in filling or attempting to fill those holes, and (2) his willingness to change course if something isn’t working. His drafts in the 2016-18 space were largely underwhelming because I think he went away from what worked for them and took safer picks to provide organizational depth but he’s changed back to what’s worked historically in recent years. He got a vet coach in Lavi and then changed course completely and hired the youngest coach in the NHL without any previous NHL HC experience.

He doesn’t seem to have a big ego on him and he seems willing and eager to do things differently if need be. He’s not perfect but I am a fan of the way he sets up process and structure around the way the organization makes decisions and I think he’s one of the better GMs in the league all things considered.
Well said.

GMBM is a top 8ish or so GM, at worst. I personally have him higher (top 3), so obv I like him a lot.

As I’ve said before, he’s never had to build a team *as a GM* (he was there as AGM for McPhee’s build). WHY people assume he won’t do it well, is beyond me. Like waaaaay beyond me.

He’s very experienced, he’s tough but fair, he’s been very successful overall, and he’s ours. Why do we want the Caps to pick someone else? We really all think the odds of the next GM being some messiah are….good? I’d wager there’s maybe a 10% of getting someone better, and 20% of getting someone the same/yet different, a 50% chance of getting someone worse, and the last 20% would be to get someone just dreadful.

GMBM is not this franchises problem. In fact, he’s going to be a big part of the solution — just as he has been so far.
 

Calicaps

NFA
Aug 3, 2006
22,056
14,553
Almost Canada
Everybody fumbles things. The Lightning, who I think everyone would agree has an excellent scouting and development operation, let Carter Verheaghe walk for nothing after playing him less than 10 minutes a night on the fourth line. They let Jonathan Marchessault walk for nothing after not giving him much of a chance. And then they traded a bunch of picks to try and build scoring depth.

What I like most about BMac is: (1) his ability to diagnose issues and his aggressiveness in filling or attempting to fill those holes, and (2) his willingness to change course if something isn’t working. His drafts in the 2016-18 space were largely underwhelming because I think he went away from what worked for them and took safer picks to provide organizational depth but he’s changed back to what’s worked historically in recent years. He got a vet coach in Lavi and then changed course completely and hired the youngest coach in the NHL without any previous NHL HC experience.

He doesn’t seem to have a big ego on him and he seems willing and eager to do things differently if need be. He’s not perfect but I am a fan of the way he sets up process and structure around the way the organization makes decisions and I think he’s one of the better GMs in the league all things considered.
All of this. And I'll add that not all of these fumbles are really fumbles. We keep talking about "fit" around here, and it works both ways. Yes, a roster needs the right mix of guys who fit. But individual players also need that. That's why change of scenery trades are a thing and why they often work out for the player. Stephenson and Siegs weren't thriving in DC. There could be any number of reasons for that: coaching, psychological stuff, training habits, etc. It's totally normal for a young guy to need a new environment to find his groove. A GM who recognizes that is actually doing his job right, and especially so if he looks internally and tries to make fixes in systems that might have contributed to a player failing to thrive.
 

HTFN

Registered User
Feb 8, 2009
12,335
11,051
Which years? Like all of them?
After our cup year we had to play cap tricks with an Oprik trade.
We had to pay a team to take on Brooks Laich contract. We made many other bad trades to dump contracts. Like that Panik trade listed bellow.
Maybe you can say GMBM in our peak years never used the long term injury list cheat code like many other teams have used in the playoffs.

Looking up other trades GMBM made... That Wyatt Johnston pick going in the trade :cry:
Apr. 12, 2021

Washington Capitals Acquire:
Logo of the Washington Capitals

Anthony Mantha · $5,700,000

Sum: $5,700,000
Change: +$675,000
Trade

Detroit Red Wings Acquire:
Logo of the Detroit Red Wings

Richard Pánik · $1,675,000
Jakub Vrána · $3,350,000
2021 1st round pick (WSH - #23 - Wyatt Johnston)
2022 2nd round pick (WSH - #52 - Dmitri Buchelnikov)

Sum: $5,025,000
Change: -$675,000
So we're starting after the cup win (not a decade) and then putting the surprise pandemic flat cap down as an error in management? They were clearly on a roadmap to push to the cap as it grew before it suddenly stopped growing for a few years and when it did, it wasn't only teams in "cap hell" that started making moves to change their immediate future plans as a result... which means the market was volatile.

The Orpik thing, I don't know why or how you'd count it against GMBM for doing something so shrewd they had to check the rules to make sure it was okay. With applied hindsight would we like a different trade than what we got with Detroit? Sure, of course every team can do that so I'm not sure how helpful it is, and we're pretty much still in pandemic market conditions at that time.

Then there's the elephant in the room: is he to blame for the Backstrom/Kuznetsov contracts? Nothing has done more to handcuff their ablity to make an impact over the last few years than Backstrom flirting with LTIRetirement and Kuznetsov deciding he doesn't want to be a hockey player anymore. Play with the window dressing all you want, when you've got like 16+ million in centers who can't or won't play... then what?

And all that said, if they hadn't made trades wouldn't we be sitting here saying GMBM wasn't aggressive enough coming off a cup? If you analyze his tenure in chunks, say batches of 2-3 years, it's always been very clear what the driving philosophy and reasoning behind the actions are. Not every move is a win, but even the losses make sense in a way that is frankly a luxury with NHL GMs right now.
 

Jags

Mildly Disturbed
May 5, 2016
1,814
2,006
Central Florida
Washington did really well last year to pounce on Cristall but they've had opportunities to draft well-known high level talents with these superficial deficiencies in late rounds and instead took a few duds.

And I’m not saying this as a means of calling for his job, he’s been mostly ok in my opinion. But he has fumbled things a few times

You guys say these things with the benefit of hindsight. If Mac had a crystal ball he either easily wouldn't need a job at all or he'd still be our GM and we'd be the best team in the league every year.

His recent drafts have been good despite you preferring Benson, twabs, and most of the moves you mentioned, pman, were either good on paper when he originally made them (Panik, for example, had good numbers and might've improved playing alongside superior talent) or fell prey to his belief in letting his coaches run their teams without much interference. MacLellan said it plainly when he dealt Stephenson, and the situation was very similar with Sieg. Both guys were basically doghoused.

If a decision appears reasonable based on the info available at the time, it can only really be a mistake in hindsight. We can debate the reasons all day long, and I'd be with you on some of those situations. Mac did have a penchant there for a while of telling us we needed more youth in the lineup but then going out and giving his coaches the veterans they needed to not play the kids.

So yeah, he's not perfect by any stretch of the imagination, but he's proven adept at finding clever solutions to our cap issues, both the ones he inherited and the ones he created. Mentioning the Laich trade was bonkers. That was a genius move that paid off big for us. Nobody thought that contract was movable at all, and he managed to get a superior player back somehow.

He also appears to see the error in his ways, and has course-corrected well in response. His drafts and draft strategies have improved lately, and he's been far more apt to dumpster-dive with the keen eye for misfit toys that he has than to gamble on the Paniks of the world. Humility is a good thing in management.

And now that we're out of contender mode, he appears to have made his first shrewd coaching hire, is prioritizing youth in a big way, and has stood pretty firm on turning over the top of the roster, finding a taker for Kuz and appearing to put pressure on Backstrom to hang it up. I wouldn't be surprised if he's encouraging Oshie to do the same.

NHL GMs basically play musical chairs, and I don't want any of the retreads floating around. Finding the next genius is a tricky business, and can be done by hiring them as assistants first. We have a good GM. Very good, even. I'm pretty sure the grass is greener right where we're standing, fellas.
 
Last edited:

HTFN

Registered User
Feb 8, 2009
12,335
11,051
What site's that chart from?
I pinched it from this compilation on RMNB but the source is NHL Edge data.

Also interesting from the same article is this:
malenstyn-zone-start.jpg


The chart above shows every NHL forward from the last decade and how often they started in the defensive zone versus the offensive zone. Malenstyn ranked 7th for most defensive-zone starts (behind this season’s Dowd and 2018’s Jay Beagle). Out of 3046 player-seasons, Malenstyn ranked 3045th in offensive-zone starts (ahead of only this season’s Nicolas Aube-Kubel). That ratio is simply the most extreme defensive deployment for a forward since the NHL started tracking zone starts.
NAK-Dowd-Malenstyn (+whoever) was basically like sending the defense out in football where the only job is to bend without breaking. It's insane how little we complained about the 4th line when they were basically set up to be underwater (and I mean that as a good thing) and they took a shitload of yeoman's work this year to let guys like Strome play offensively and not try to become the perfect center.

Considering that, I'm not even that frustrated with Malenstyn's offensive metrics. If they can manage to build a roster that doesn't leave the 4th line on historically difficult deployments it's going to look like they walked out of this place:
main-qimg-3c2c9648b8d505c5b02c3053d7600c97-lq
 

HTFN

Registered User
Feb 8, 2009
12,335
11,051
Dallas on the other hand has built a core of Robertson, Hintz, Johnston, Heiskanen, Harley, and probably Stankoven as well. Only Heiskanen was a top pick. The rest are late first or second rounders and guys like Robertson/Stankoven were fallers because of superficial concerns like size and speed.

Brayden Point and Alex DeBrincat were available for the taking and teams just passed on them. Washington did really well last year to pounce on Cristall but they've had opportunities to draft well-known high level talents with these superficial deficiencies in late rounds and instead took a few duds.
This might be surprising but... well-known high level talents on draft day aren't intentionally languishing in the later rounds. If they were well-known high talent players they'd be, you know, projected first round picks.

Saying they're well known now because they're the ones that succeeded is basically just survivorship bias, and ignores every other player picked with merit in the 3rd+ round with a notable flaw that doesn't do anything.

Any scouting team so sure that these players would be stars among the top of their draft class should be equally embarrassed for leaving it to chance by picking them so late.
 

kicksavedave

I'm just here for the memes and gifs.
Sponsor
Apr 29, 2009
10,963
13,841
Fallbrook, CA
www.tiasarms.org
I pinched it from this compilation on RMNB but the source is NHL Edge data.

Also interesting from the same article is this:
malenstyn-zone-start.jpg



NAK-Dowd-Malenstyn (+whoever) was basically like sending the defense out in football where the only job is to bend without breaking. It's insane how little we complained about the 4th line when they were basically set up to be underwater (and I mean that as a good thing) and they took a shitload of yeoman's work this year to let guys like Strome play offensively and not try to become the perfect center.

Considering that, I'm not even that frustrated with Malenstyn's offensive metrics. If they can manage to build a roster that doesn't leave the 4th line on historically difficult deployments it's going to look like they walked out of this place:
main-qimg-3c2c9648b8d505c5b02c3053d7600c97-lq

I'm no fancy stats nerd, but, honest question, isn't that chart reasonably close to every 4th liner? Don't most all 4th lines just get the dirty work defensive starts? It doesn't seem unique to Beck... but I get he's near the top of the chart, percentage wise.
 

trick9

Registered User
Jun 2, 2013
12,283
5,331
I'm no fancy stats nerd, but, honest question, isn't that chart reasonably close to every 4th liner? Don't most all 4th lines just get the dirty work defensive starts? It doesn't seem unique to Beck... but I get he's near the top of the chart, percentage wise.

Well, if you look at the teams remaining then Rangers were basically the only team to have players below ~35-40% OZ starts. In the regular season they had Goodrow ~24% and Vesey ~31%. Malenstyn is at 9.9%.
 

Kalopsia

Registered User
Jun 25, 2018
796
1,199
I pinched it from this compilation on RMNB but the source is NHL Edge data.

Also interesting from the same article is this:
malenstyn-zone-start.jpg



NAK-Dowd-Malenstyn (+whoever) was basically like sending the defense out in football where the only job is to bend without breaking. It's insane how little we complained about the 4th line when they were basically set up to be underwater (and I mean that as a good thing) and they took a shitload of yeoman's work this year to let guys like Strome play offensively and not try to become the perfect center.

Considering that, I'm not even that frustrated with Malenstyn's offensive metrics. If they can manage to build a roster that doesn't leave the 4th line on historically difficult deployments it's going to look like they walked out of this place:
main-qimg-3c2c9648b8d505c5b02c3053d7600c97-lq
Thanks for the link! I'm gonna be playing around with that for a while.

Regarding the fourth line's deployments, I'm gonna be a little self-indulgent here and quote a comment I made on a Nic Dowd trade thread on the main boards back in January.

I wanna take a little deeper dive here to point out just how brutal the minutes for Washington's "4th" line are and how nuts it is that they're performing so well anyway.

The individual members of that line have started their shifts in the offensive zone 7.98% of the time (NAK), 8.02% of the time (Malenstyn), and 9.29% of the time (Dowd) over ~400 minutes of 5 on 5 play each. As you mentioned, as a unit they've outscored opponents 13-6 at 5 on 5. OZ Start% as a statistic dates back to the 07-08 season, and in that time only one player has posted a sub 10% season while playing at least 300 minutes at 5 on 5: Paul Gaustad in 15/16. He had 5.76% OZ Starts and was outscored 6-21. Coincidentally, Gaustad had been traded with a 4th for a 1st as a pure rental at the 2012 trade deadline, the only 4th line center I can think of who was traded for a 1st rounder. That year he ranked 8th out of 626 skaters with 31.98% OZ Starts. One of the things you notice as you go through OZ Start% year by year is that giving players extreme deployments in one direction or another is a pretty recent phenomenon. In 07/08, the skater with the lowest OZ Start% was Bobby Holik at 29.62%. This season, that number would good for 30th.

Long story short, the Caps 4th line is at the forefront of the current trend of highly specialized deployments, and as a result they're playing quite possibly the most brutal minutes of any line in the history of hockey, on a team that's overall been outscored 71-90 at 5 on 5 (58-84 if you factor their line out)... and they're outscoring their opponents by a 2-1 margin in the process. It's insane, it shouldn't be possible, and yet it's happening. Nic Dowd should've been the Caps' All Star, and he should legitimately be in the Selke conversation.
The 4th line's play dropped off slightly after that with Dowd's injury and some of the lineup scrambling needed to fill gaps after the trade deadline, but the final numbers for the NAK-Dowd-Malenstyn line at 5 on 5 last year were 16 GF and 12 GA across 425 minutes in which they got only 7.65% OZ faceoffs. The degree to which those three carried the defensive load for this year's Caps team is literally unprecedented.
 

Vivaldi

Registered User
May 18, 2024
69
53
Well, there's a salary cap, and the Caps had those perennial all star types already on the roster, in Ovi, Backie, JC and Kuzy. How many $10M/year players (in todays dollars) can you cram into one roster?

There's a salary cap for every team I believe, including model GMing franchise Dallas Stars. They had Benn and Seguin making 10M/year yet somehow that didn't stop them from getting Hintz, Heiskanen, Oettinger, Robertson, Johnston, Harley or Duchene and adding them to their roster. They didn't just throw their hands up and go aw shucks we already have enough 10M/year players, lets run it back and plug as many Paniks/Hagelins/Hathaways into the roster as we can.

Suggesting "why didn't they trade for Eichel" when they were already maxed out on the cap paying Ovi, Backie and JC, just doesn't add up. This team was winning Presidents Cups and one Stanley Cup over the last ten years while Ovi was still dominating the goal scoring department. They didn't need more stars, they needed their supporting cast to fully gel, which only happened in June 2018. They kept the 2018 Cup winner intact trying to run it back, but injuries derailed that effort. Then the core suddenly aged (or quit (Kuz)) all at once in the last three years.

Not sure why you zero in on Eichel of all people, but Vegas was pretty maxed out when they traded for him as well paying Mark Stone, Max Pacioretty, Alex Pietrangelo, as well as having a ton of supporting players making over 5M. My problem isn't that they didn't trade for Eichel or any specific player, its that they didn't draft, sign, trade for, claim, import from Siberia, etc a single player of that tier in all of his 10 years. Its that he managed to miss for all of them.

Keep in mind they were pretty maxed out during the Young Guns era when the cap was 2/3 of what it is now and Ovi was making more proportionally than McDavid is. And seemingly had all the talent they could need with Ovechkin, Backstrom, Semin, Green, Varlamov. Yet GMGM still got Carlson, Orlov, Kuznetsov, Holtby, Forsberg, Wilson somehow even though apparently we were full. And I don't think anyone really considers him a great GM since he was absolutely terrible at other parts of the job, but the fact remains that he could bring in more high end talent in a couple years in his sleep than GMBM has in a full decade.

So suggesting GMBM failed at acquiring all stars, when they already had a fair share of them taking up the cap space, misses the point. If you want to fault him for not adding players who became available, then explain which core roster players you would have dumped to make the cap room for those additions?

You can't just waive your hands and replace Lars Eller with Jack Eichel in the salary cap era. If the Caps were stingy on spending cap space then you might have a reason to fault them for not adding top line talent over the last 10 years. But that's not the situation. They always spent to the cap and always had their own home grown stars to pay.

Ok. You see that trigger happy Jim Rutherford is thinking about trading JT Miller. You see that he signed Mikheyev and imported Kuzmenko (would have been nice to use the Ovi Russia connections to get someone like him or Panarin from the KHL even once a decade, but nah), and sell him on Kuznetsov in 2022-23 before he completely collapses. Add the 1st they incinerated on Rasmus Sandin, McMichael whose spot Miller would take anyway, some late pick throw in. Suddenly you have a 100 point version of TJ Oshie signed for what Kuznetsov was already commanding who can anchor a much more meaningful attempt at contending team for the duration of Ovechkin's career, then still have mentorship/trade value after

No? Sure, maybe you see that a Jonathan Marchessault or Gustav Forsling or Carter Verhaeghe or Brandon Montour is likely to break out and get them cheaply, getting yourself a few years of top line/pairing play for pennies on the dollar. Not all of them, just a single one across 10 years. But nah, get married to TVR and play him on his off side if you have to instead.

No? Maybe you get lucky in the draft and grab an Igor Shestyorkin (drafted with a Caps draft pick dealt by GMBM), Tage Thompson (drafted with a caps draft pick dealt by GMBM), or hell even Wyatt Johnston or Dmitry Buchelnikov (see any pattern at all?) Or someone random like Anthony Cirelli or Jesper Bratt or Drake Batherson or Kirill Kaprizov or Roope Hintz or Brayden Point or Brock Faber. Not all of them, just a single one. Across all of these.

No? Ovi is a god in Russia, maybe they can lean on him to go for a Panarin, Kuzmenko, Nikishin or Michkov. See a player overlooked due to the Russian factor and get him cheaply, getting competitive advantage out of it. Again, not all of them, just a single one. Something McPhee pretty much did with Kuznetsov in 2010. He did draft Miro, yeah, and its looking like one of his better picks so far, but Miro slid due to Hodgkins lymphoma and went around where he'd have been gotten by anyone rather being way overlooked.

I don't think GMBM is a terrible GM per se, but his record at getting players. And the biggest reason everyone else doesn't think he's a terrible GM and the Ovi era wasn't a colossal Sharks tier waste was because of 2018, when the hockey gods pretty much grabbed a team that wasn't even aiming to compete that year, that almost fired their coach, pretty much stood pat at the deadline and got a player who was amazing for 3 months and never again, and dragged them to a cup when they were an OT post away from going down 3-0 to Columbus. This doesn't take away from the Cup win in any way, but they were built very much like 2006 Canes and 2019 St. Louis in a one and very firmly done category, as opposed to teams like Pittsburgh, Chicago, LA, (in the 2010s) Tampa, or even Boston that keep or kept meaningfully punching for it. If we consider him a top tier GM just because he won that cup, do we consider Peter Chiarelli and Ray Shero and Brian Burke top tier GMs as well? The issue is that he's GMing a team in a league where many other GMs acquire star or top line/top pairing players semi regularly, something he hasn't done ONCE, and you have to go through those GMs' teams to get to a cup or even a conference final.

One of the best picks the Caps ever made, like, ever. But you can't count on franchise cornerstones that late in the draft, every year. Most 27th overall picks, become Brian Sutherby or Jeff Shultz or Joe Finley. The Caps history in the back half of the first round is pretty good overall, but still well less than 50% success rate.

Its a little funny that under GMBM like 3 other teams have the Caps be on the Eminger side of the Carlson trade but its no big deal to anyone.

Everybody fumbles things. The Lightning, who I think everyone would agree has an excellent scouting and development operation, let Carter Verheaghe walk for nothing after playing him less than 10 minutes a night on the fourth line. They let Jonathan Marchessault walk for nothing after not giving him much of a chance. And then they traded a bunch of picks to try and build scoring depth.

Right. And Dallas had their huge infamous miss with Gurianov in the stacked 2015 draft as well as Nichushkin. Vegas traded Suzuki for Max Pacioretty. But the difference is those teams still hit repeatedly. Its not about fumbling, its about never hitting. 10 years of GMBMing and 7 of their most meaningful 8 players were from McPhee for all of their competitive duration.
 
Last edited:

Kalopsia

Registered User
Jun 25, 2018
796
1,199
Tangent from the Beck Malenstyn stuff - Beck is a textbook example of why with/without models are flawed. The RMNB article gives this player card from Evolving Hockey which evaluates him as a bad offensive player and an atrocious defender.

evolving-hockey-malenstyn.jpg

At the same time, it rates Dowd and NAK as both being average offensively and elite (90+) defensively. It think Beck was the passenger on that line, but in reality Beck was the player that defined the shutdown line. You can see through Natural Stat Trick's Line Stats tool that when that line was together, they got 7.65% OZ Faceoffs. So what happens when they break up?

  • NAK solo: 53.1%
  • Dowd solo: 35.7%
  • NAK+Dowd without Beck: 35.3%
  • Beck solo: 20.4%
For some league-wide context, if Malenstyn had 20.4% for the season that would drop his rank amongst forwards from 1/771 to 8/771, min 100 minutes played - still 1st percentile for hardest deployments.

What does a with/without model see in this context? Well when Dowd and NAK play away Beck they get significantly easier deployments with more skilled teammates, so their numbers improve away from him. Meanwhile, when Beck's away from Dowd and NAK he's being asked to play the same shutdown role, but now with teammates who aren't as well suited to it, so those teammates who are normally being sheltered by Beck's line see their numbers plummet. The model interprets this as Beck being a drag on all the players around him, so it gives him low scores.

This is the fundamental issue with these kinds of models. They'll always underrate players who consistently get tough, defensively-focused deployments, and they'll always overrate players who consistently easy, offensively-focused deployments. Hence why these models always seem to love the sheltered third pairing offensive defenseman or the speedy young winger the coach doesn't trust in his own zone and hate the steady, D-first guys that coaches lean on. I think there's some value to these models for the guys in the middle, but it inherently can't handle the edge cases.
 

hb12xchamps

Registered User
Dec 23, 2011
8,931
5,647
Pennsylvania
I see we are back to this again.

The Capitals haven’t had to “add” 10 million per year players. They literally drafted and developed their own. The ones they drafted stuck around and got paid market value (Ovechkin, Backstrom, Kuz, Carlson, Holtby, etc.) and the roster only needed to add around those core players. Do people just completely forget the Justin Williams, Brooks Orpik, Matt Niskanen, and TJ Oshie’s of the world that were added when the Capitals had cap space? Our cap was taken up primarily by our top guys and we had to add around them. Our core got old. The young guns are playing or on the verge of breaking out.

We really going to blame GMBM for not taking Shesty? Every single team passed on the guy for 3.5 rounds. The only real gripe was Thompson and it took him how many years to actually be a legit NHL player.
 
Last edited:

Kalopsia

Registered User
Jun 25, 2018
796
1,199
Keep in mind they were pretty maxed out during the Young Guns era when the cap was 2/3 of what it is now and Ovi was making more proportionally than McDavid is. And seemingly had all the talent they could need with Ovechkin, Backstrom, Semin, Green, Varlamov. Yet GMGM still got Carlson, Orlov, Kuznetsov, Holtby, Forsberg, Wilson somehow even though apparently we were full. And I don't think anyone really considers him a great GM since he was absolutely terrible at other parts of the job, but the fact remains that he could bring in more high end talent in a couple years in his sleep than GMBM has in a full decade.
I've wasted way too much time in here already today so I'm not going to respond to your whole comment, but I do want to point out that it seems really weird to criticize MacLellan's drafting and then turn around and use McPhee's drafting as an example of doing it better, considering MacLellan was the second-in-command during the McPhee years and Ross Mahoney was running the draft for both regimes. Do you think MacLellan's been ignoring Mahoney's genius recommendations for a decade and Don's sticking around cause he doesn't mind?

As I said in an earlier post, finding talent late in the draft is overwhelmingly based on luck. If McPhee and Mahoney really had some inkling that Holtby was gonna be the best goalie in that draft, they wouldn't have passed on him with consecutive picks in the 2nd round. They had a minor hunch at best and it happened to pay off. Tampa had a run where they looked incredible, then they suddenly went ice cold. The Caps had the same thing happen. Dallas will probably hit a rough patch soon as they regress back to the mean. All you'll do by obsessing over the diamonds in the rough we missed out on is drive yourself crazy.
 

Jags

Mildly Disturbed
May 5, 2016
1,814
2,006
Central Florida
they didn't draft, sign, trade for, claim, import from Siberia, etc a single player of that tier in all of his 10 years. Its that he managed to miss for all of them.
This doesn't take away from the Cup win in any way, but they were built very much like 2006 Canes and 2019 St. Louis in a one and very firmly done category

The offensive players we had in "that tier" are one-dimensional guys that were difficult to build around. I love Ovi as much as anyone does, but for the entirety of his tenure, our top line has been 100% "Get it to Ovi." Kane, Toews, Crosby, Malkin... Dynamic, versatile, mostly three-dimensional players that could anchor multiple lines.

Ovechkin is a cannon. Insert cannon ball, fire. Having Ovi made Backstrom far less versatile than he'd have been otherwise. One line with a singular focus. How do you win a Cup like that?

You need Oshies and Ellers and Connollys and Smith-Pellys and Kuznetsovs and Burakovskys and Beagles and Chiassons and Wilsons and Kempnys and Orpiks and Niskanens... And when the chips are down and your top C busts his hand up and your enforcer who just figured out how to score gets suspended, you need Boyds and Vranas and Stephensons and Djooses (Djeese?) and Walkers to step in and really contribute something.

You can talk all day about how thinly that team was built or which other Cup winners it compares to, but BMac put the guys on the roster that got us over the hump. Yes, some key McPhee guys were in there, but Mac was there for those picks and acquisitions. Look at how many of those guys were shrewd MacLellan pickups. The draft? Pffft. We were drafting late every year. NO ONE routinely hits dingers with draft positions like ours during those years. No one.

Maybe Mac got lucky, but even if he did he sure got very lucky a lot that year, because his "bottom half of the roster" acquisitions f***ing crushed it when it mattered most.

You want sexier acquisitions post-Cup? Who was trading for the guys we needed to move out? He could have read the tea leaves better on Kuznetsov or Vrana, and he could have fought his coaches to play a couple of the young guys he ended up having to move. He ain't perfect, for sure.

And all of the hindsight hand-wringing you're doing, playing the age-old game of, "Look at that trade! We could have given more for that guy! We failed!" What @Kalopsia has been saying about the draft is also true with other types of moves -- the guys you listed that were undervalued by teams that we didn't predict would break out huge? No one else predicted it either. Some of them just kinda happened, and the rest we could have been in on for all you know but couldn't get the deal done. The sheer volume of moves a GM wants to make but can't (or can't beat out the other 30 teams for) has to be staggering. DC isn't the destination or "hockey town" that other places are.

You wrote a really great post, but I think a lot of it is built on hindsight. Criticism is never easier than it is in retrospect. Being THAT retrospective is folly in this sport. BMac's been very good that last couple years, in my opinion. Recent history, the now, and the near future. The team's in the midst of a tough transition, and he's navigating it pretty damn well, all things considered.

We should have some flexibility this offseason, so it'll be interesting to see what he does.
 
  • Like
Reactions: CapitalsCupReality

pman25

Registered User
Aug 29, 2009
4,725
3,552
Richmond
I’d say what Vivaldi says more or less summarizes my thoughts a bit better. It’s not so much the fumbles, just the lack of hits. Hasn’t really landed a big time player in a trade since Oshie and has yet to draft a “star” during his tenure as GM

Sure it’s too early on Miro, Lapierre, Leonard, Cristall but no hits in the draft from 2014-2018 has hurt us big time.

In that same time, Tampa hit on Point and Cirelli, Carolina hit on Aho (and more recently Jarvis as a mid 1st), Boston hit on Pastrnak with a late 1st, NYI hit on Sorokin with a 3rd, NYR with Shesterkin and a 4th.

I know I know benefit of hindsight and all but at risk of someone digging up my posts from 10 years ago (ignore all my bad opinions please) I remember wanting Larkin in ‘14 and Konency in ‘15! I won’t pretend like I knew Sorokin or Shesterkin at the time, but it’s a valid point. The teams competing this year hit on stars at some point during those drafts, we did not. And of course there’s no way to get stars at every 1st or 2nd or every draft but damn would have been nice to have just one during that time!
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rayquaza64

DWGie26

Registered User
Sponsor
Oct 6, 2019
3,649
3,770
NOVA
I sure did miss a lot here today while i was working. Good times.

I enjoyed reading the banter. Frankly, makes me feel even better about GMBM. I have always thought he was a top 10. Maybe a top 5 GM. He has kept us out of Cap/player trouble over some really difficult times. And as someone mentioned a page back, he is ours. I’ll gladly keep him versus trying to trade up.

Look at it this way… In baseball, if someone hits .333 over their career, they go to the hall of game. It’s even worse for a GM in hockey. You are going to whiff more that you hit.

And i still contend that we’ll see a different approach by GMBM this offseason. And who knows, maybe there isn’t anything splashy at all but that would likely be because the moves would have been bad in long haul. Marner, Necas, Reinhart could all be buyer beware and those are the big splashes.
 

notDkristich

Registered User
Jan 27, 2013
1,281
1,075
Lost me putting Malenstyn in “slow”….

View attachment 873407
ill gladly eat crow. think my brain crossed wires with sgarbossa

ftr, here's more edge records. Edge says i'm right about CMM vs Lappie, but the Edge score for Lappie (and AA) seems way off.

tossed in fat ass JC74 and slow poke GR8 for the lolz

MAL - Top Skating Speed (mph) 23.63 22.10 97
NAK - Top Skating Speed (mph) 23.42 22.10 94
CMM - Top Skating Speed (mph) 23.23 22.10 91
FVR - Top Skating Speed (mph) 23.08 21.67 87
Pro - Top Skating Speed (mph) 22.74 22.10 73
Mil - Top Skating Speed (mph) 22.61 22.10 68
Lap - Top Skating Speed (mph) 22.56 22.10 66

JC74 - Top Skating Speed (mph) 21.97 21.67 Below 50th
AA - Top Skating Speed (mph) 21.91 21.67 Below 50th
STM - Top Skating Speed (mph) 21.89 22.10 Below 50th
GR8 - Top Skating Speed (mph) 21.69 22.10 Below 50th
Mir - Top Skating Speed (mph) 21.19 22.10 Below 50th
 

Pigskin

Registered User
Sponsor
Jan 14, 2014
748
446
Brisbane, Australia
How patient is he going to be? We can’t teeter on the brink of mediocrity forever and expect to go anywhere, a direction needs to be chosen somewhat soon

Cap space and draft picks burning a hole in your pocket already?
Lacking patience will end up with us making long term signings that we will regret immediately. I say let the other inferior GM's make these types of mistakes.
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad