Series Discussion: (M1) Washington Capitals vs (WC1) Columbus Blue Jackets

Who will win?


  • Total voters
    130
Status
Not open for further replies.

RandyHolt

Keep truckin'
Nov 3, 2006
34,639
6,800
If Bura is back that is going to shakeup a winning lineup. I actually thought he may be a scratch candidate after his late game trip but he got injured instead. So, Vrana must sit. So we are looking at a 3pm game, which means the younger guys will still be a little hungover. We need to put our foot on their necks and take game 5 dammit no more f***ing around. I have debated over the year the benefits of winning a series quickly, vs going to 7 and staying in rhythm. Since we never win a series quickly, I think the answer has become clearer, but its still not a bad thing to lose 1 game in there and maintain overcoming adversity, adjusting etc.
 

HunterSThompson

[}=[][][][][]
Jun 19, 2007
4,480
1,097
Washington, DC
I had it set to even strength in the link, and his corsi is even but his high danger chances still suck and his generated one's suck as well. Meaning maybe he's giving up as many shots as he gets when on ice, but the quality is night and day. If you change it to look at all data you can see he's allowing 2.55 xGA/60 and 1.62 xGF/60 while Orlov had 1.64 xGA/60 and 4.22 xGF/60. But that's with Orlov playing almost half an hour more of TOI and having an xGF of 4.22 and an xGA of 1.64. You can bump it to just ES, since Orpik has double Orlov's TOI for the PK and none of his PP time, and the numbers change to a more respectable 1.95 xGF/60 and 2.03 xGA/50 for Orpik and 2.43 xGF/60 and 1.09 xGA/60 for Orlov.

At ES Orlov is still a team worst 87 in PDO, while Brooks is compeltely average at 100. So Orpik's been better then we give him credit for, still awful in high danger chances, and Orlov has been insanely unlucky this series.

I have my own qualms with high danger scoring chances and how they are measured and so named, but i would agree that it is only fair to compare them 5on5, especially in such a small sample size. While PDO is generally billed as luck it is hard to accept that the quality of play does not factor into it somewhat. Sure Orlov's on-ice save percentage is weak, but maybe that is because he handed Panarin and Atkinson a 2 on 1, and allowed Panarin to beat him wide, and had a turnover in the defensive zone leading to a scoring chance and a goal. Those weren't lucky goals. Low on ice shooting percentages could be that he isn't taking the right shots at the right times to create actual scoring chances, maybe he is taking a lot of shots but they are going wide or getting blocked (some of this is luck but a lot of it is choice). It all factors in and is why looking at just the stats is very risky. And all of that can be variance issues because of such a small sample size as well.

He hasn't played all that badly in truth if you look at the totality of his game, but he has made a couple errors and they all ended up in the back of the net or into actually good scoring chances. Those stick out in people's minds.
 

hockeykicker

Moderator
Dec 3, 2014
35,052
12,489
Contract year, and he’s going to get a six or a seven-year deal at $7 million-plus, is what he’s going to get,” predicted NHL Insider Bob McKenzie during a Friday morning radio hit on Edmonton’s TSN 1260. “That’s going to be the market value. And I don’t know if he’s going to get it from Washington. If he is, they’re going to probably have to move a few pieces around or what have you.
“And they do want to try to get him signed. And he wants to stay there. He loves it there and likes the guys and what have you. But he’s been taking a hometown discount for… quite aside from having a career offensive year, if you look at his salary – which is right around $4 million – he’s been one of the better bargains in the National Hockey League for the last three, four, five years. And so I don’t think he’s overly-inclined now to say, ‘Oh yeah, I could get $7 million-plus on the open market. I’ll be happy with something in the low 6s.’ I don’t think it’s going to cut that way this year.
“So whether that allows him to stay in Washington or allows him to move… his attitude has been a good one. It’s been, ‘You know what? I don’t have any control over any of that. We’ll sort that out. All I can do is play and play well,’ and that’s what his focus has been and it’s been good. The results have been there.”

Bob mckenzie on carlson and caps
 

RandyHolt

Keep truckin'
Nov 3, 2006
34,639
6,800
@RandyHolt it appears you did not accurately channel TexMD.

Things are a bit hazy today..... did I say knee? I meant um.... yeah.... elbow.... macaroni and cheese nom nom

What could need minor surgery on the upper body? Maybe its minor in the grand scheme of things but will be out for some time and trotz is being top secret. Wrist/hand?
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: calicapsfan

Brian23

Registered User
Dec 3, 2011
5,655
2,462
His high danger chances? His partners have been healthy scratched. Is that factored in that he is covering for mistake prone young defensemen? He's not out there by himself

Oh come on, that's a ridiculous argument. Carlsons numbers tanked playing with Orpik, are you gonna blame Carlson for those numbers now? Orpik's not a good player anymore, he's a servicable guy used very sparingly as a bottom pairing defender. He's thrown out their as a shut down defender and a grade A crease clearer. He's neither of those things. Accept it.

I have my own qualms with high danger scoring chances and how they are measured and so named, but i would agree that it is only fair to compare them 5on5, especially in such a small sample size. While PDO is generally billed as luck it is hard to accept that the quality of play does not factor into it somewhat. Sure Orlov's on-ice save percentage is weak, but maybe that is because he handed Panarin and Atkinson a 2 on 1, and allowed Panarin to beat him wide, and had a turnover in the defensive zone leading to a scoring chance and a goal. Those weren't lucky goals. Low on ice shooting percentages could be that he isn't taking the right shots at the right times to create actual scoring chances, maybe he is taking a lot of shots but they are going wide or getting blocked (some of this is luck but a lot of it is choice). It all factors in and is why looking at just the stats is very risky. And all of that can be variance issues because of such a small sample size as well.

He hasn't played all that badly in truth if you look at the totality of his game, but he has made a couple errors and they all ended up in the back of the net or into actually good scoring chances. Those stick out in people's minds.

I mean, at least offensively, he's passed the eye test to me. He's been dangerous, he's gotten good shots on net and made good passes to generate those shots the issues been when he's messed up it's been insanely obvious. Then again, that's what happens when a good player plays against a good player, my argument is more that he hasn't been as bad as people have billed him.
 

trick9

Registered User
Jun 2, 2013
12,076
4,949
Bob mckenzie on carlson and caps

That contract has so many red flags in it.

Career year in a contract year? Check.

Coming off of bargain contract? Check.

Relies heavily on teammates for points? Check.

He has been great in the Playoffs, as he was in the regular season. His past Playoff performances have been solid aswell. That being said i would pull the plug on 7-8 year deal worth 7+. It hurts at first but that's going to be a brutal contract in few years.
 

Brian23

Registered User
Dec 3, 2011
5,655
2,462
I mean if they can get Carlson down to an 8 year 6.25 deal I'd be all for it, GMBM has already put it out their he's not getting "market value" if he wants to stay here.

Will see what happens.
 

Bananas

****
Mar 26, 2007
3,758
1,817
Unfortunately for the Caps momentum doesn’t carry to the next game. The Classic Caps thing to do would be to have a letdown. The Theoretical “Winner” Caps would play their best games in G5 and G6. Neither team is out of it until the Fat Lady sings now that it’s a 3 gamer. It’s absolutely anyone’s series at this point. Real coin flip country -unless one team finds another gear like the Caps did last night. We are going to see two desperate hockey teams from here on out.
 

AtNightWeFly

You better run.
Jun 1, 2014
5,860
2,474
Upstate NY
So the only game I didn't watch or follow is the best game so far? :(
A Willy snipe.
A Kuzy 4 point night.
A crazy Ovie celly.


Highlights looked good. Glad they didn't turtle but will it last?
 

Calicaps

NFA
Aug 3, 2006
21,816
14,097
Almost Canada
That contract has so many red flags in it.

Career year in a contract year? Check.

Coming off of bargain contract? Check.

Relies heavily on teammates for points? Check.

He has been great in the Playoffs, as he was in the regular season. His past Playoff performances have been solid aswell. That being said i would pull the plug on 7-8 year deal worth 7+. It hurts at first but that's going to be a brutal contract in few years.

I mean if they can get Carlson down to an 8 year 6.25 deal I'd be all for it, GMBM has already put it out their he's not getting "market value" if he wants to stay here.

Will see what happens.

So, doesn't everyone rely on teammates for points? I never understand that as a critique. Carlson relies on Ovie, but Ovie can't get the one-timer off if Carlson doesn't make the pass. That's how it all works. And he's a proven playoff performer, not just this year, but consistently. What more do folks want from the guy? He's earned his payday.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Raikkonen

trick9

Registered User
Jun 2, 2013
12,076
4,949
So, doesn't everyone rely on teammates for points? I never understand that as a critique. Carlson relies on Ovie, but Ovie can't get the one-timer off if Carlson doesn't make the pass. That's how it all works. And he's a proven playoff performer, not just this year, but consistently. What more do folks want from the guy? He's earned his payday.

Some do more than others.

I disagree with your point. There has been several guys on the Carlson spot in the PP and it's always been fine. Even better in the past without him. He's not really an integral part of the PP, IMO. He has a big shot but he misses the target a lot, and most teams are happier letting him take the shot rather than have Backstrom or Kuznetsov work half-wall or Ovechkin taking a shot from the other side. I wouldn't be shocked if the next coach (or any coach in the future) wanted to take him off the PP1 to cut his ice-time or get him on the ice more ES. That will result in his production dipping a lot.

Okay, if you feel that way: How many years in the past has Carlson been worth, let's say 7.5m AAV for example?

For me the answer is one, and it's this season. He's earned his payday for a while and i would gladly give it to him short-term. In my eyes 1 great year is just not worthy of being paid for 8 more. It's risky as hell. How many seasons like this he needs for that 7-8 year contract to be considered good? I'd say atleast 4. What about great? I'd say 6.

Is that realistic? I don't see it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Empty Goal Net

Calicaps

NFA
Aug 3, 2006
21,816
14,097
Almost Canada
Some do more than others.

I disagree with your point. There has been several guys on the Carlson spot in the PP and it's always been fine. Even better in the past without him. He's not really an integral part of the PP, IMO. He has a big shot but he misses the target a lot, and most teams are happier letting him take the shot rather than have Backstrom or Kuznetsov work half-wall or Ovechkin taking a shot from the other side. I wouldn't be shocked if the next coach (or any coach in the future) wanted to take him off the PP1 to cut his ice-time or get him on the ice more ES. That will result in his production dipping a lot.

Okay, if you feel that way: How many years in the past has Carlson been worth, let's say 7.5m AAV for example?

For me the answer is one, and it's this season. He's earned his payday for a while and i would gladly give it to him short-term. In my eyes 1 great year is just not worthy of being paid for 8 more. It's risky as hell. How many seasons like this he needs for that 7-8 year contract to be considered good? I'd say atleast 4. What about great? I'd say 6.

Is that realistic? I don't see it.
You are the one who said he's been consistently strong in the playoffs. My point is, if you're the Caps, who gives a shit about RS stats. The playoffs are the mountain that needs climbing and a strong proven player is worth bucks. That's my view, anyway.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->