HF Habs: 2020 Montreal Canadiens Off-Season Thread part 3

[DAChampion]

Mete won't get much lower than 2 per.

Hard to see the 7th D get that much during a cap crunch.

 

[jaffy27]

Mete won't get much lower than 2 per.

Not a chance....1.35m$ per for 3yrs and that’s about it

 

[Grate n Colorful Oz]

Hard to see the 7th D get that much during a cap crunch.

Because, for some reason you decide to paint that situation only in this light, a #7D, as if the context was only limited to that.

The context is quite a bit larger, with Mete being a young RFA that has pretty strong defensive and transition stats. If he was up for arbitration, he'd get over 2 mil. Also, it's not because you decided he was a 7th D, that he actually is. The team is loaded with #4-5 dmen, aside from Petry-Weber, and possibly Romanov who's still a big question mark. Everybody else are all borderline top 4s, ideally #5s. It also varies depending if they simply bridge him or go for longer term.

I definitely think he'll sigm north of 1.5 short term, north of 2 mil for a bit longer term.

 

[Grate n Colorful Oz]

Not a chance....1.35m$ per for 3yrs and that’s about it

As seen from your previous comments about Mete, I'll simply ignore your ignorance.

 

[jaffy27]

As seen from your previous comments about Mete, I'll simply ignore your ignorance.

Fair enough

 

[odishabs]

Habs Future:

- predicting Gallagher Signed
- predicting Danault Signed
- Tatar walking (just a guess)

XXXX - Suzuki - Gallagher
Drouin - Kotkaniemi - Caufield
Poehling - Danault - Anderson
Ylonen - Olofsson - Hillis

Romanov - Weber
Norlinder - Petry
Guhle - Struble

Price
Primeau

 

[ahmedou]

 

[Agalloch]

Do you draft 3 players on the second round or trade to go up ?

 

[Price4Prez]

Do you draft 3 players on the second round or trade to go up ?

At this point, you there is no point trading 2 seconds for a higher second. You either trade a 2nd for a current player OR trade on of this years 2nds for a 2nd next year + a 3rd this year or something like that.

 

[MrNasty]

A couple positive thing these acquisitions (Allen, Edmundson, Anderson) do: 1. Sends a message to UFA's that Montreal is serious about building up their roster. 2. Same goes for other GM's, MB making these moves sends a message to them as well that he is not afraid to move talent and picks in the right deal.

 

[Agalloch]

A couple positive thing these acquisitions (Allen, Edmundson, Anderson) do: 1. Sends a message to UFA's that Montreal is serious about building up their roster. 2. Same goes for other GM's, MB making these moves sends a message to them as well that he is not afraid to move talent and picks in the right deal.

Also, we are getting so much bigger.

 

[Miller Time]

If that happens, it'll only be for a very short while as Weber and Petry aren't getting any younger.

Agreed.

 

[DAChampion]

Because, for some reason you decide to paint that situation only in this light, a #7D, as if the context was only limited to that.

The context is quite a bit larger, with Mete being a young RFA that has pretty strong defensive and transition stats. If he was up for arbitration, he'd get over 2 mil. Also, it's not because you decided he was a 7th D, that he actually is. The team is loaded with #4-5 dmen, aside from Petry-Weber, and possibly Romanov who's still a big question mark. Everybody else are all borderline top 4s, ideally #5s. It also varies depending if they simply bridge him or go for longer term.

I definitely think he'll sigm north of 1.5 short term, north of 2 mil for a bit longer term.

Also RFAs have no leverage and players generally get paid for offensive stats. Have you ever heard of a player getting paid for transition stats?

As for the pairings, assuming that everyone is healthy (lol), it's:

Weber-Chiarot
Petry-Edmundson
Romanov-Kulak
Mete

Of course, there are always injuries, and Romanov might play a few games in the AHL. But that's the depth chart. Meanwhile if Juulsen or Fleury are healthy, they might pull ahead of Mete.

 

[Grate n Colorful Oz]

Also RFAs have no leverage and players generally get paid for offensive stats. Have you ever heard of a player getting paid for transition stats?

As for the pairings, assuming that everyone is healthy (lol), it's:

Weber-Chiarot
Petry-Edmundson
Romanov-Kulak
Mete

Of course, there are always injuries, and Romanov might play a few games in the AHL. But that's the depth chart. Meanwhile if Juulsen or Fleury are healthy, they might pull ahead of Mete.

Your assesment of Mete is off and time will prove it.

Also, you do not determine that ranking.

I sincerily am starting to doubt your wisdom if you think we'll get anywhere with Chiarot on the first. The team will dive again and he'll eventually be replaced.

You also transformed defensive and transition stats into simply transition stats, showing you're not intent on modifying or controlling your bias, but simply brush off an argument that negates yours. Yes some RFAs do get paid for their defensive stats, no matter if I added transition.

 

[nyhabsfan]

Also RFAs have no leverage and players generally get paid for offensive stats. Have you ever heard of a player getting paid for transition stats?

As for the pairings, assuming that everyone is healthy (lol), it's:

Weber-Chiarot
Petry-Edmundson
Romanov-Kulak
Mete

Of course, there are always injuries, and Romanov might play a few games in the AHL. But that's the depth chart. Meanwhile if Juulsen or Fleury are healthy, they might pull ahead of Mete.[/QUOTE

You have a couple of Dmen playing on their wrong sides, besides Kulak or Mete I expect will be part of a trade.

LD ----------------- RD
Chariot ---------- Weber
Edmundson------Petry
Romanov------ Juulsen/Fluery
Kulak
Mete ---did play RD in playoffs


I was hoping Domi + Kulak and 16th would land us a big sniper, but lets see what Bergy has in mind in Free Agency.

 

[Lshap]

With the addition of Anderson I’d be surprised if we are going after Simmonds as well. I think he was plan B if Anderson didn’t pan out, which he did.

I think he looks to get something done with Hall, and it that falls through he adds Tofolli of Hoffman via FA.

Yikes - please, no Simmonds. I would've loved the guy four/five years ago, but he adds nothing now except truculence.

I'd say our chances of getting any of those UFAs are slim to none. Even with cap space, Bergevin's been unable to attract any of the top players. He'd have to perform a miracle of convincing one of them to sign here, and then perform a second miracle of trading a contract to free up cap room.

There is zero top 6 winger depth & the centre depth is entirely predicated on a 10 game sample where Suzuki & JKO looked "arrived"... Somehow that has made everyone forget that JKO was AHL bound during the season & Suzuki was getting scratched mid season... Neither are sure bets to give us a full year of playoff-level top 6 or top 9 centre play.

I appreciate your hopeful optimism... It's a regular sentiment every offseason, sadly, as in 4 of the last 5 years, the reality of our poorly built roster is that it's more likely destined to the lottery as soon as a bit of adversity pops up...

Weber, Price, Petry, Danault, Gallagher... Injuries to any one of those guys creates a hole we aren't set up to deal with (& before you rush to say Allen, keep in mind that the very reason we "had" to get him is predicated on the belief that Price with a bad backup wasn't good enough... Imagine Allen with no backup lol).

Your first paragraph is dead-on. Our offence might be okay if the young kids develop well and our lunchpail forwards avoid the usual slumps. But I wouldn't bet on pure optimism. Chances are the Habs score more, but nowhere close to the level we need.

I disagree about depth. The Habs have as good a depth in nets and D as any team. Injuries happen to every team, but this time we have solid NHL players to take up the slack, versus the rotation of AHL callups we previously relied on. Besides, I wouldn't bet on pure pessimism either.

We probably agree on the bottom line: Bergevin has made this club into a more solid rowboat. We won't sink, but we're not equipped to beat the guys driving speedboats.

Here me out cause its bargain bin, in free agency I think the Habs go after M Granlund on a cheap 1-2 year deal. He just came off a bad season but is only one removed from 54 and two removed from back to back almost 70 point seasons (67 and 69).

I know he is small but throw him on a line with KK and Armia and they can insulate him.

He could probably be had for 3.5-4 million. And if he rebounds we have a 15g - 35a forward cheap. If not we prbly have a guy making 500k too much.

This fits in our cap and feels like a bargain bin move no?

Another idea would be to send Byron home to Ottawa for whatever they will give us then go after someone in FA like Dadonov, toffoli, or Hoffman.

I like the idea of getting Granlund. Good catch. Didn't even think of him, but timing, skill, and cost might thread the needle for what we need and what Bergevin could deliver.

 

[DAChampion]

Your assesment of Mete is off and time will prove it.

Also, you do not determine that ranking.

I sincerily am starting to doubt your wisdom if you think we'll get anywhere with Chiarot on the first. The team will dive again and he'll eventually be replaced.

You also transformed defensive and transition stats into simply transition stats, showing you're not intent on modifying or controlling your bias, but simply brush off an argument that negates yours. Yes some RFAs do get paid for their defensive stats, no matter if I added transition.

Hey man I'm wrong all of the time it's fine. I thought that Galchenyuk would be a good player. I thought that Tavares would drastically improve the Leafs. I thought that Suzuki would need more time before becoming great.

Which RFAs get paid for defensive stats?

I'll tell you what. I didn't watch any regular season games last year. But I watched the playoffs, 10 of 11 games I think. Mete was the least effective Habs D. Provided no offense and no physicality. Unless he drastically improves his offense I don't see much of a fit for him.

Abd we know that management like Chiarot, Edmundson, and Romanov.

 

[admiralcadillac]

Your assesment of Mete is off and time will prove it.

Also, you do not determine that ranking.

I sincerily am starting to doubt your wisdom if you think we'll get anywhere with Chiarot on the first. The team will dive again and he'll eventually be replaced.

You also transformed defensive and transition stats into simply transition stats, showing you're not intent on modifying or controlling your bias, but simply brush off an argument that negates yours. Yes some RFAs do get paid for their defensive stats, no matter if I added transition.

There is no proof Chiarot can’t handle big minutes. D men improve over longer periods and Chiarot is just entering his prime. He was underused in Winnipeg.

 

[Grate n Colorful Oz]

There is no proof Chiarot can’t handle big minutes. D men improve over longer periods and Chiarot is just entering his prime. He was underused in Winnipeg.

His GA/60 IS OVER 3.00 playing with either Petry or Weber. That's proof enough. Not that you'll understand any of this.

 

[admiralcadillac]

His GA/60 IS OVER 3.00 playing with either Petry or Weber. That's proof enough. Not that you'll understand any of this.

Being condescending doesn’t make you intelligent. His play on the ice dictated that he’s a capable defender.

 

[DAChampion]

His GA/60 IS OVER 3.00 playing with either Petry or Weber. That's proof enough. Not that you'll understand any of this.

How did Chiarot's GA/60 this year compare to his GF/60? Did he provide any intangibles such as hits, intimidation, etc? Did he contribute to the special teams?

 

[montreal]

I think they will either be a wild card team or like 2 years ago just barely miss. That said I don't care if they do or don't make the playoffs, the most important thing to me is how Julien handles Suzuki and Kotka and how they do.

 

[Grate n Colorful Oz]

How did Chiarot's GA/60 this year compare to his GF/60? Did he provide any intangibles such as hits, intimidation, etc? Did he contribute to the special teams?

Not that it was anything to do with what was being discussed (being paired with Weber at ES), but I already posted the differences (GF60 GA60) compared to either Mete and Kulak and pretty sure you were around, but i'll repeat them for your convenience. Chiarot is close to even with either #6 or # 26 (Mete is close to +1.00 per 60 with either #6 or #26), and while the offense is up a smidgen (+.20 GF60 at max) with Chiarot, the GA60 goes UP a full 1.00 PER 60 with him rather than Kulak or Mete (with 6 or 26 exclusively).

It's not some insignificant outlier stat. You know that by being paired up with either Weber or Petry on a regular basis, they get about the same matchups and uses and close to the same fowards. So there's a lot of context there, with output, if you replace a single player by another.

I can present the same case versus Drouin and people have less difficulty accepting that one, because unlike Chiarot, Drouin doesn't work his butt off and makes heaps of errors WITH the puck which makes it obvious to see, whereas it's the opposite with Chiarot, he does work his butt off, but makes heaps of positional and decisional errors without the puck (in the context of being paired up with Weber), imo because he's a mismatch for Weber on top of being over his head defensively, being used on a pairing too high for him, defensively, as offensively, he does have a good nose for the net and would work on a top pairing, again, only offensively, if paired up right.

Anyway, back to the Drouin example, in two instances we can see the same drastic change of output as with Chiarot vs Mete or Kulak. When he was used with Danault and Gallagher at the start of the 18-19 season, compared to when he was replaced later on by Tatar. And further into the season when he was a regular with Domi and Shaw, before being replaced by Lekhonen when he hit his major drought.

So, first case, Drouin vs Lekhonen, 18-19 season:

Domi-Shaw-Drouin
291.8 minutes 22 GF 16 Ga
4.52 GF60
3.29 GA60
1.23 +/-60

Domi-Shaw-Lekhonen
130.8 minutes 10 GF 5 GA
4.59 GF60
2.29 GA60
2.30 +/- 60

Same offensive output, but a huge 1.00 less goals allowed per 60 with Lekh. Meaning neither drive the offense on the line, but Lekhonen helps it far more defensively.



Second case, Drouin vs Tatar, 18-19 season:

Danault-Gallagher-Drouin
195.6 minutes 12 GF 13 GA
3.68 GF60
3.99 GA60
-0.31+/-60

Danault-Gallagher-Tatar
671.6 minutes 41 GF 20 GA
3.66 GF60
1.79 GA60
1.87+/-60

Again, the same relationship. Both don't seem to actually drive the offense, but Tatar is much better defensively.



Now Chiarot, Mete & Kulak;

There's more to state about all three of them on the top 4 or outside the top 4, but I will keep this versus Weber only, because Chiarot is not as much a mismatch with Petry and his stats with Weber brings his top 4 totals way down. I'm not counting Mete's rookie season, as he progressed leaps and bounds between his rookie and sophomore seasons. He also got better offensively between 18-19 and 19-20.

Mete with Weber 18-19 + 19-20
947.9 minutes 44 GF 28 GA
(679.2 28-21 in 18-19)
2.79 GF60
1.77 GA60
1.02+/-60

Kulak with Weber 18-19 + 19-20
220.8 minutes 13 GF 6 GA
3.53 GF60
1.63 GA60
1.90+/-60

Chiarot with Weber 19-20
698.2 minutes 35 GF 37 GA
3.01 GF60
3.18 GA60
-0.17+/-60

Granted, Kulak's samples are pretty short, but Mete-Weber has been one of our most effective pairings in the last 3 years.

 

[DAChampion]

Not that it was anything to do with what was being discussed (being paired with Weber at ES), but I already posted the differences (GF60 GA60) compared to either Mete and Kulak and pretty sure you were around, but i'll repeat them for your convenience. Chiarot is close to even with either #6 or # 26 (Mete is close to +1.00 per 60 with either #6 or #26), and while the offense is up a smidgen (+.20 GF60 at max) with Chiarot, the GA60 goes UP a full 1.00 PER 60 with him rather than Kulak or Mete (with 6 or 26 exclusively).

It's not some insignificant outlier stat. You know that by being paired up with either Weber or Petry on a regular basis, they get about the same matchups and uses and close to the same fowards. So there's a lot of context there, with output, if you replace a single player by another.

I can present the same case versus Drouin and people have less difficulty accepting that one, because unlike Chiarot, Drouin doesn't work his butt off and makes heaps of errors WITH the puck which makes it obvious to see, whereas it's the opposite with Chiarot, he does work his butt off, but makes heaps of positional and decisional errors without the puck (in the context of being paired up with Weber), imo because he's a mismatch for Weber on top of being over his head defensively, being used on a pairing too high for him, defensively, as offensively, he does have a good nose for the net and would work on a top pairing, again, only offensively, if paired up right.

Anyway, back to the Drouin example, in two instances we can see the same drastic change of output as with Chiarot vs Mete or Kulak. When he was used with Danault and Gallagher at the start of the 18-19 season, compared to when he was replaced later on by Tatar. And further into the season when he was a regular with Domi and Shaw, before being replaced by Lekhonen when he hit his major drought.

So, first case, Drouin vs Lekhonen, 18-19 season:

Domi-Shaw-Drouin
291.8 minutes 22 GF 16 Ga
4.52 GF60
3.29 GA60
1.23 +/-60

Domi-Shaw-Lekhonen
130.8 minutes 10 GF 5 GA
4.59 GF60
2.29 GA60
2.30 +/- 60

Same offensive output, but a huge 1.00 less goals allowed per 60 with Lekh. Meaning neither drive the offense on the line, but Lekhonen helps it far more defensively.



Second case, Drouin vs Tatar, 18-19 season:

Danault-Gallagher-Drouin
195.6 minutes 12 GF 13 GA
3.68 GF60
3.99 GA60
-0.31+/-60

Danault-Gallagher-Tatar
671.6 minutes 41 GF 20 GA
3.66 GF60
1.79 GA60
1.87+/-60

Again, the same relationship. Both don't seem to actually drive the offense, but Tatar is much better defensively.



Now Chiarot, Mete & Kulak;

There's more to state about all three of them on the top 4 or outside the top 4, but I will keep this versus Weber only, because Chiarot is not as much a mismatch with Petry and his stats with Weber brings his top 4 totals way down. I'm not counting Mete's rookie season, as he progressed leaps and bounds between his rookie and sophomore seasons. He also got better offensively between 18-19 and 19-20.

Mete with Weber 18-19 + 19-20
947.9 minutes 44 GF 28 GA
(679.2 28-21 in 18-19)
2.79 GF60
1.77 GA60
1.02+/-60

Kulak with Weber 18-19 + 19-20
220.8 minutes 13 GF 6 GA
3.53 GF60
1.63 GA60
1.90+/-60

Chiarot with Weber 19-20
698.2 minutes 35 GF 37 GA
3.01 GF60
3.18 GA60
-0.17+/-60

Granted, Kulak's samples are pretty short, but Mete-Weber has been one of our most effective pairings in the last 3 years.

Three counterarguments:

1) GF/60 and GA/60 are mostly a glorified form if the +/-, they suffer from several issues such as not accounting for luck. In this case, the Habs had some very bad luck this year with several stretches of bad goaltending. That shows up in the PDO of the players. Mete was one of the luckiest players on the Habs with a PDO of 101.1. He was actually the luckiest of all of the regulars. In contrast, Ben Chiarot had average PDO for the Habs, 98.9. A full 2.2 points lower than Mete.

2) You ignore the contributions that those players make while on the bench. For example, Chiarot gave 152 hits last year, Mete gave 20. The impact of those hits is cumulative throughout the game and continues after the player leaves the ice, since the opposing players are more fatigued.

3) Chiarot can play on the PK, which provides some rest to the other D. There are only three pairings of defensemen, which means that ideally every defenseman needs to play on either the PK or PP. Mete is a 5on5 specialist which creates a puzzle for the coach.

 

[Kriss E]

Man they're boring.