Player Discussion Cole Caufield - Part XI

[The Great Weal]

Zegras was Anaheim best forward every game he played.

people pushing him out are only looking at hockeydb

Ya that draft class looks good. Still can't believe Newhook and Krebs were available at 16. As for Caufield, he does have the potential to go top 5 in the draft but it's too early to say rn.

 

[lamp9post]

Nah actually...I've literally NEVER said this.


But they're both rookies...

Does that rookie/inexperienced narrative get thrown out the window when it's forwards vs Dmen?

Ahhh...Ok...seems like solid logic.

P.S. not sure what grace I need to save...i'm not trying to be graceful.

Maybe treat players like individuals. Some rookies may be more mistake prone than others and some positions are less forgiving to the inexperienced. Pretty obvious that a team like Vegas has more opportunity to exploit a bottom pairing defenseman than they would a sheltered offensive winger. Especially at home.

Not sure what your logic is here...one rookie is playing therefore its not fair to sit another rookie?

 

[That Habs Fan]

I know it's a very small thing but his dump and change last night when he had a lot of tempting open ice in front of him is a big sign of maturity for a young sniper. Rookie Galchenyuk would have tried to dangle the entire team there. You love to see it.

 

[lamp9post]

I know it's a very small thing but his dump and change last night when he had a lot of tempting open ice in front of him is a big sign of maturity for a young sniper. Rookie Galchenyuk would have tried to dangle the entire team there. You love to see it.

Agreed. Much better situational awareness and positioning than I expected. Very smart and opportunistic player, and can adapt to the physical game (e.g. doesn't put himself in a bad situation while also not hurting his team by bailing out). Better vision and playmaking than I expected too. The kid is a treat to watch.

 

[ChesterNimitz]

Zegras was Anaheim best forward every game he played.

people pushing him out are only looking at hockeydb

He has a much higher upside than Hughes.

 

[MSLs absurd thighs]

From what I gather so far in those playoffs, I think he has the highest offensive ceiling of all our prospects in place. The Gaudreau similarities are definitely there.

 

[417]

Maybe treat players like individuals.

My point exactly.

Some rookies may be more mistake prone than others and some positions are less forgiving to the inexperienced. Pretty obvious that a team like Vegas has more opportunity to exploit a bottom pairing defenseman than they would a sheltered offensive winger. Especially at home.

All players are mistake prone, mistakes happen all over the ice, all the time.

Doesn't matter if you're a 16 year veteran like Shea Weber or a fresh faced rookie like Alexander Romanov.

Shea Weber had an awful turn over late in the 3rd period that Reilly Smith pounced on and had a great scoring chance that Price nullified.

It happens.

I assure you though, no matter who the Habs have on their bottom pair, whether it's veteran NHL dmen

- Erik Gustafsson
- Brett Kulak
- John Merrill

or rookie NHL dman

- Alexander Romanov

The Vegas Knights are going to try expose whoever is there...like EVERY team tries to exploit the bottom pair Dmen of their opponents.

To suggest there's less risk with the *those* veterans vs *that* rookie (Romanov) is just a lazy narrative.

Not sure what your logic is here...one rookie is playing therefore its not fair to sit another rookie?

I was being facetious...I fully understand the difference between a rookie winger and a rookie Dman.

 

[Nico Cauzuki]

Zegras was Anaheim best forward every game he played.

people pushing him out are only looking at hockeydb

agree the kid is really fun to watch,couple years and hes among the best in the league

 

[417]

I know it's a very small thing but his dump and change last night when he had a lot of tempting open ice in front of him is a big sign of maturity for a young sniper. Rookie Galchenyuk would have tried to dangle the entire team there. You love to see it.

So would have 8th year veteran Galchenyuk lol

 

[covfefe]

Whenever a hockey player rolls in with a Balenciaga shirt, $2,000 shoes and a purse, you know he's up for trying some dumb shit on the ice. (and in all likelihood, off the ice)

 

[Schooner Guy]

From what I gather so far in those playoffs, I think he has the highest offensive ceiling of all our prospects in place. The Gaudreau similarities are definitely there.

I think he's more like Debrincat. Natural scorer with great all around offensive instincts who finds open space. CC isn't a puck carrier like Gaudreau.

 

[Paddy17]

I know it's a very small thing but his dump and change last night when he had a lot of tempting open ice in front of him is a big sign of maturity for a young sniper. Rookie Galchenyuk would have tried to dangle the entire team there. You love to see it.

He has been very responsible out there by making safe plays. Sometimes you almost want him to take more chances but it's the right way to play in the playoffs to earn trust and icetime.

 

[tooji]

I think he's more like Debrincat. Natural scorer with great all around offensive instincts who finds open space. CC isn't a puck carrier like Gaudreau.

I think he looks much more dynamic than debrincat actually. Your assessment is the one I had before I watched him play.

 

[Schooner Guy]

I think he looks much more dynamic than debrincat actually. Your assessment is the one I had before I watched him play.

Debrincat took his game to another level this year and produced over a point per game. He's 3 years older than CC. I'd be very happy if CC's getting a ppg in 3 years.

 

[Wats]

It’s also great that he came in at the end of the season but he’s still getting 16+ playoff games of experience. NHL regular season gonna feel like easy mode compared to that.

Giving strong Subban flashbacks, really hope he becomes as impactful. Would be a franchise changer.

 

[Theodore450]

My point exactly.


All players are mistake prone, mistakes happen all over the ice, all the time.

Doesn't matter if you're a 16 year veteran like Shea Weber or a fresh faced rookie like Alexander Romanov.

Shea Weber had an awful turn over late in the 3rd period that Reilly Smith pounced on and had a great scoring chance that Price nullified.

It happens.

I assure you though, no matter who the Habs have on their bottom pair, whether it's veteran NHL dmen

- Erik Gustafsson
- Brett Kulak
- John Merrill

or rookie NHL dman

- Alexander Romanov

The Vegas Knights are going to try expose whoever is there...like EVERY team tries to exploit the bottom pair Dmen of their opponents.

To suggest there's less risk with the *those* veterans vs *that* rookie (Romanov) is just a lazy narrative.


I was being facetious...I fully understand the difference between a rookie winger and a rookie Dman.

In any job, you give the benefit of the doubt to the guy with experience... it’s not rocket science. Young players get their chance on this team, defence is just a fine tune game that veterans will 100% get over a rookie defence who still has problems communicating

 

[417]

In any job, you give the benefit of the doubt to the guy with experience... it’s not rocket science.

Not sure I agree with that...let's leave regular jobs out of the equation (and even then, I work in HR for federal government, experience matters but not always).

But let's look at sports.

I'm a big NFL, NBA and European soccer fan...and I assure you, MANY teams/coaches, don't share the sentiment that you always give the benefit of the doubt to the guy with experience.

Some people look beyond a persons date of birth to gage their ability to contribute.

Look at Equipe de France at the Euro...imagine they started Olivier Giroud at striker instead of Kylian Mbappé, simply because Giroud is much more experienced.

or imagine the Chiefs 3 years ago would have stayed with Alex Smith as their starting QB instead of fresh faced Mahomes.

Look...I get the whole experience factor and I rate it to some degree.

But this idea that younger players are more mistake prone than veterans is just a lazy narrative.

Let's be honest and pinpoint what this is really about.

Coaches are just more tolerant with veterans than they are with younger ones. That's really all it's about.

Young players get their chance on this team, defence is just a fine tune game that veterans will 100% get over a rookie defence who still has problems communicating

I have no issue with how he's managed his Defensive pairings these playoffs.

I would have done the same thing considering the circumstances last night.

 

[Grand Admiral Thrawn]

The kid is fantastic! A real treat to watch.

Who have thunk this kid would have 6 points so far 5 of them assists?

Cray cray!

 

[417]

Kind of funny to scroll back and read all those posts by people suggesting he needed to spend the rest of the season in the AHL and not play any games with the Habs in order to not ruin his development.

Lol good times

 

[Theodore450]

Not sure I agree with that...let's leave regular jobs out of the equation (and even then, I work in HR for federal government, experience matters but not always).

But let's look at sports.

I'm a big NFL, NBA and European soccer fan...and I assure you, MANY teams/coaches, don't share the sentiment that you always give the benefit of the doubt to the guy with experience.

Some people look beyond a persons date of birth to gage their ability to contribute.

Look at Equipe de France at the Euro...imagine they started Olivier Giroud at striker instead of Kylian Mbappé, simply because Giroud is much more experienced.

or imagine the Chiefs 3 years ago would have stayed with Alex Smith as their starting QB instead of fresh faced Mahomes.

Look...I get the whole experience factor and I rate it to some degree.

But this idea that younger players are more mistake prone than veterans is just a lazy narrative.

Let's be honest and pinpoint what this is really about.

Coaches are just more tolerant with veterans than they are with younger ones. That's really all it's about.


I have no issue with how he's managed his Defensive pairings these playoffs.

I would have done the same thing considering the circumstances last night.

Fair I would agree that coaches have a higher level of tolerance for the vets but I would say that hockey has smaller margin for error that may lead coaches to go with what they fee is safer.

 

[lamp9post]

My point exactly.


All players are mistake prone, mistakes happen all over the ice, all the time.

Doesn't matter if you're a 16 year veteran like Shea Weber or a fresh faced rookie like Alexander Romanov.

Shea Weber had an awful turn over late in the 3rd period that Reilly Smith pounced on and had a great scoring chance that Price nullified.

It happens.

I assure you though, no matter who the Habs have on their bottom pair, whether it's veteran NHL dmen

- Erik Gustafsson
- Brett Kulak
- John Merrill

or rookie NHL dman

- Alexander Romanov

The Vegas Knights are going to try expose whoever is there...like EVERY team tries to exploit the bottom pair Dmen of their opponents.

To suggest there's less risk with the *those* veterans vs *that* rookie (Romanov) is just a lazy narrative.


I was being facetious...I fully understand the difference between a rookie winger and a rookie Dman.

I agree that veterans aren't necessarily less risky than rookies. Again, it depends on the individual. You can make the claim that Merrill is no more steady than Romanov directly. Not sure what Shea Weber's turnover has to do with it. Nor do I understand the logic behind this broader assertion that you're trying to make that all players are mistake prone and experience isn't a factor. So Shea Weber, 25 minute 1st pairing defenseman, makes a mistake against one of the best lines in the league, and that means that he's no more or less mistake prone than any random, sheltered, 3rd pairing defenseman? Is that the claim? If so, there is a lot of context being ignored here.

It is like saying, "Goals happen all the time, they happen in every game, often by several players. Even 14 year veteran Carey Price let in a goal last night. So goals can be scored on anyone, doesn't matter if you're Carey Price or Cayden Primeau." I hope you can see how ridiculous that sounds. (and yes, obviously being older doesn't necessarily make you a better goalie. Again, depends on the individual)

Also, we need to evaluate the other side of the scale, reward. It is well documented that the best players in the league who tend to have the puck on their stick most often, make the most number of turnovers (not that turnovers are the only risk factor - see below). Does that make them risky? What is it about those players that the coaches trust despite the accompanying turnovers? With Gustavson at least, the team seems willing to accept his defensive deficiencies because of his puck moving and PP abilities. It is always a trade off.

I think in Romanov's case, the risk isn't so much with turnovers as it is with positioning, which still needs some refinement at the NHL level, and this is particularly an issue given that the Habs want to rotate the 3rd pairing in with the top 4. That means that Romanov won't have a steady partner to settle in with. If I were to guess what Ducharme is thinking, its to prioritize 'predictability' in the bottom pairing and sees Merrill or Kulak as easier to slot in with rotating partners than Romanov. Could even be a communication/language issue at this point.

 

[417]

Fair I would agree that coaches have a higher level of tolerance for the vets but I would say that hockey has smaller margin for error that may lead coaches to go with what they fee is safer.

Hmmm...fair, I'd have to really drill down.

I think in soccer the margin for error is the smallest because of how difficult it is to score.

But fair point.

And don't get me wrong, I get why coaches do it.

I just think it's a bit of an outdated way of coaching.

 

[417]

I agree that veterans aren't necessarily less risky than rookies. Again, it depends on the individual. You can make the claim that Merrill is no more steady than Romanov directly. Not sure what Shea Weber's turnover has to do with it. Nor do I understand the logic behind this broader assertion that you're trying to make that all players are mistake prone and experience isn't a factor. So Shea Weber, 25 minute 1st pairing defenseman, makes a mistake against one of the best lines in the league, and that means that he's no more or less mistake prone than any random, sheltered, 3rd pairing defenseman? Is that the claim? If so, there is a lot of context being ignored here.

So a couple of things.

I never said experience is NOT a factor.

Clearly experience is a big factor when you're talking about Shea Weber vs Alexander Romanov.

But it is not as much of a factor when you're talking about Jon Merrill vs Alexander Romanov.

I took issue with someone suggesting that experience was the driving factor as to why Merrill played over Romanov and how because Romanov is a rookie, he's going to be mistake-prone like Sandim/Dermott were against the Habs in the 1st round and that somehow, playing Merrill eliminates the fear of mistakes happening.

It is like saying, "Goals happen all the time, they happen in every game, often by several players. Even 14 year veteran Carey Price let in a goal last night. So goals can be scored on anyone, doesn't matter if you're Carey Price or Cayden Primeau." I hope you can see how ridiculous that sounds. (and yes, obviously being older doesn't necessarily make you a better goalie. Again, depends on the individual)

That's great and all...except I never argued this.

Also, we need to evaluate the other side of the scale, reward. It is well documented that the best players in the league who tend to have the puck on their stick most often, make the most number of turnovers (not that turnovers are the only risk factor - see below). Does that make them risky? What is it about those players that the coaches trust despite the accompanying turnovers? With Gustavson at least, the team seems willing to accept his defensive deficiencies because of his puck moving and PP abilities. It is always a trade off.

Of course...I totally get why Gustafsson and Merrill are playing and Romanov isn't.

If this was regular season, i'd probably have different thoughts, but right now...makes complete sense.

I think in Romanov's case, the risk isn't so much with turnovers as it is with positioning, which still needs some refinement at the NHL level, and this is particularly an issue given that the Habs want to rotate the 3rd pairing in with the top 4. That means that Romanov won't have a steady partner to settle in with. If I were to guess what Ducharme is thinking, its to prioritize 'predictability' in the bottom pairing and sees Merrill or Kulak as easier to slot in with rotating partners than Romanov. Could even be a communication/language issue at this point.

No doubt...that's also what i'm thinking.

Right now, Ducharme's job is to win games and to be prepared for all eventualities.

our typical PK D-unit is Weber/Chiarot...Petry/Edmunson.

With Petry banged up, Ducharme has to dress another Dman who he can rely on on the PK - correct me if i'm wrong, but I don't think Romanov has played much PK at all this year.

Merrill has...

Same with Gustafsson being dressed for the PP.

Trust me...I get it.

 

[Habs 4 Life]

CC is really something special, very skilled and smart out there. I was scared he would have been a turnover machine but it's completely the opposite. Very smart with the puck, quick decisions and never get caught in a bad situation to get a big hit against.

 

[Saundies]

His line with Suzuki and Toffoli is just *chefs kiss*

They compliment each other so well.