Habs Defense

[scrubadam]

So the out of town thread got taken over, so lets move it to a new thread.

This will be a good debate as there are some entrenched views. To me the narrative of the summer that this D is horrible is coloring some peoples view.

So lets discuss in here and we can bring all the advance stats. some of these stats are way to advance for me when we start talking about expected GF and GA and SV% etc...

When I look at the team they are 7th best in SA and 3rd in HDCA(high dangerous chances) and 5th in HDCA in all situations.

This shows that as a team the habs are doing the job defensively. They are preventing shots. There is only so much more they can do to limit shots. They are not letting more juicy changes or prime chances than 26 teams in the league. The goaltending has been bad and again I don't think it can be pointed to allowing more chances then other teams. I don't know how many odd man rushes we let but if someone has that stat I would like to see where the habs rank.

Other myth would be that we are hemmed in or only do bad dump outs. Again if we are allowing so few shots, yet taking 3rd most shots and 3rd most dangerous shots I don't think that can be true either. 3rd best team in Corsi so the habs are a possession team. If we extrapolate the team has the puck more than other teams, limiting how many shots and thus how long the other teams are in their zone. Another myth will be that the habs take point shots all game, well habs are 3rd best in HDCF so they are one of the best teams of taking dangerous chances. This doesn't have to do with the D, but will tie into the breakout being bad. If habs have horrible breakouts from the D how are they taking so many dangerous shots?

Its not a sexy D. There aren't a ton of PMD's on it. Outside of Weber there aren't any big scorers. But as a team they are playing better than the sum of their parts. CJ probably has a bit to do with that. But its been doing its job IMO. Now I do think this D is missing depth and needs reinforcements to make a playoff run.

And finally the players that MB lost by dismantling the D? Beau has 2 points and is already being scratched in BUF. Emelin has 2 points and was the biggest scapegoat on this team after DD. Neither would be bringing any offense to this D. Markov I will say is being somewhat missed. He would probably be solid as 5D better than Davidson/Morrow/Streit etc... and would be helpful on the PP. But after his hot start in the KHL he has cooled down and has 15 points now. To put it in perspective Darren Dietz has 18 points in 19 games while Markov has played 27 games. Dietz is nearly a PPG.

Long post but let the debate begin. Is the habs D horrible or hyperbole?

Click to read more...

 

[Garbageyuk]

The defense is not that bad, not sexy, like you said, but they can get the job done. The problem is the lack of skill and finish up front, and league worst center depth. Most of all though, it's goaltending. Mr 10.5M needs to stop "chilling out", he is literally worse than Andre "Red Light" Racicot right now.

 

[Kudo Shinichi]

The biggest problem of our defense is that they often do bad pinches in the offensive zone, which leads to 2 on 1.
Most of those bad pinches come from Benn tho...

 

[Michelangelo]

Would be a lot better with Subban, Markov and Sergachev

 

[admiralcadillac]

The biggest problem of our defense is that they often do bad pinches in the offensive zone, which leads to 2 on 1.
Most of those bad pinches come from Benn tho...

This would make sense if the team isn't 2nd in the league for the least high danger scoring chances given. Can't be that big a problem. The golies aren't making saves when high danger scoring chances are happening. That's the problem.

 

[Tyson]

Not enough PMD’s for sure. Benn has played better of late. Alzner starting to come around. I was surprised Morrow was used in OT which tells me Julien sees something in him. Petry still playing below the level we have seen.
Habs forwards are starting to gel, lines are developing chemistry.

Now the Goalies need to step up. No more allowing 2 goals in under 30 seconds.

 

[admiralcadillac]

Not enough PMD’s for sure. Benn has played better of late. Alzner starting to come around. I was surprised Morrow was used in OT which tells me Julien sees something in him. Petry still playing below the level we have seen.
Habs forwards are starting to gel, lines are developing chemistry.

Now the Goalies need to step up. No more allowing 2 goals in under 30 seconds.

Morrow played well. He is a potentially decent puck mover. He needs to work on being less soft in our zone though. OT makes sense as fewer players makes for more space for him. He does move the puck well.

 

[Tyson]

Morrow played well. He is a potentially decent puck mover. He needs to work on being less soft in our zone though. OT makes sense as fewer players makes for mire space for him. He does move the puck well.

Excellent skater

 

[Habs100]

Morrow played well. He is a potentially decent puck mover. He needs to work on being less soft in our zone though. OT makes sense as fewer players makes for more space for him. He does move the puck well.

Yeah I'm starting to see the potential Julien spoke about regarding Morrow.

He's a good skater. That's clearly important in today's NHL. Plus, we have Alzner, Benn, and Weber who aren't the fleetest of foot. When we let Emelin and Beaulieu go, we gave up erratic, unstable play, but also lost speed. We need to replace that lost speed.

Morrow needs to perfect his play with the puck and his defensive zone coverage. If he can do those things he could be a quality NHL dman.

 

[admiralcadillac]

Yeah I'm starting to see the potential Julien spoke about regarding Morrow.

He's a good skater. That's clearly important in today's NHL. Plus, we have Alzner, Benn, and Weber who aren't the fleetest of foot. When we let Emelin and Beaulieu go, we gave up erratic, unstable play, but also lost speed. We need to replace that lost speed.

Morrow needs to perfect his play with the puck and his defensive zone coverage. If he can do those things he could be a quality NHL dman.

Agreed but to be fair, I have rarely seen Weber get caught by speed. His relative quickness lead to the goal in overtime yesterday.

 

[nhlfan9191]

There’s a lot of confusion amongst our defenders and centers on assignments. It looks very messy and has led to quite a few goals. The fact we don’t have anyone good at making an outlet pass the backend is hurting us a lot too and leading to way to many turnovers. Add that in with how slow they are and you get a pretty undesirable D core.

 

[Sorinth]

I've missed a lot of games this season so I can't comment too much on how well/bad they are playing.

But you do have to be a little cautious about things like Scoring Chances since it's a subjective term. I'm not sure which website you used, but for example http://www.naturalstattrick.com/teamtable.php which has us taking 383 shots, out of which 319 were considered scoring chances. I'm not sure about you but I don't consider virtually every shot to be a scoring chance, in fact I don't even think there has to be a shot on net for there to be a scoring chance. For example a two on one where the guy misses the net on a one timer is still a scoring chance in my mind. I didn't see an explanation on that website but my guess is they consider every shot taken when inside the offensive zone to be a scoring chance, and then classify them as High/Medium/Low based on distance to the net.

There's certainly value in that kind of stuff, but it doesn't give the whole story and can give a false impression. For example a cross ice one timer is much more dangerous then a shot from up close but to the side of the net when the goalie is already in position. But in this case the actual dangerous chance would be classified as a Medium or Low, and the less dangerous one classified as a High.

Like I said I haven't seen enough games this season to really know if that's been the case or not with the Habs, but since we seem to be 9th worst in shooting percentage for high danger chances it would seem to indicate that our high danger chances aren't actually as dangerous as other teams.

The reason things like this were brought up in the past when we were doing bad in the stats and are not being brought up now that we are doing good is because the stats matched the eye tests. People watched the game saw we were getting dominated and the stats also showed it, so it was "proof" for the eye test. In cases where the stats and the eye test don't match, I think most people would still go with the eye test, so if they think we are being outplayed but the stats show us doing well, then the obvious answer is the stats have an issue with them.

 

[scrubadam]

There’s a lot of confusion amongst our defenders and centers on assignments. It looks very messy and has led to quite a few goals. The fact we don’t have anyone good at making an outlet pass the backend is hurting us a lot too and leading to way to many turnovers. Add that in with how slow they are and you get a pretty undesirable D core.

yet with all the conusion 5 th best team in limiting dangerous chances. same can be said about turnovers. even if its true and habs turn it over alot it still doesnt lead to alot of chances for the other team.

if the d cant make outlet passes how are the habs out possesing other teams has the 3rd most shots and 3rd most dangerous shots. so its not just shooting from center ice somehow the team is managing to get the pcuk to the best areas of the ice bettet than almost all other NHL teams.

to me so far the narrative of slow bad D that was propogated all summer is coloring the view of this team. they allow some of the fewest chances and generate some of the best but somehow its a bad or undesirable D? its just not sexy but they are doing the job. let the goalies follow and the habs will jump back to a top GA team

 

[scrubadam]

I've missed a lot of games this season so I can't comment too much on how well/bad they are playing.

But you do have to be a little cautious about things like Scoring Chances since it's a subjective term. I'm not sure which website you used, but for example http://www.naturalstattrick.com/teamtable.php which has us taking 383 shots, out of which 319 were considered scoring chances. I'm not sure about you but I don't consider virtually every shot to be a scoring chance, in fact I don't even think there has to be a shot on net for there to be a scoring chance. For example a two on one where the guy misses the net on a one timer is still a scoring chance in my mind. I didn't see an explanation on that website but my guess is they consider every shot taken when inside the offensive zone to be a scoring chance, and then classify them as High/Medium/Low based on distance to the net.

There's certainly value in that kind of stuff, but it doesn't give the whole story and can give a false impression. For example a cross ice one timer is much more dangerous then a shot from up close but to the side of the net when the goalie is already in position. But in this case the actual dangerous chance would be classified as a Medium or Low, and the less dangerous one classified as a High.

Like I said I haven't seen enough games this season to really know if that's been the case or not with the Habs, but since we seem to be 9th worst in shooting percentage for high danger chances it would seem to indicate that our high danger chances aren't actually as dangerous as other teams.

The reason things like this were brought up in the past when we were doing bad in the stats and are not being brought up now that we are doing good is because the stats matched the eye tests. People watched the game saw we were getting dominated and the stats also showed it, so it was "proof" for the eye test. In cases where the stats and the eye test don't match, I think most people would still go with the eye test, so if they think we are being outplayed but the stats show us doing well, then the obvious answer is the stats have an issue with them.

i have no problem with the eye test but ure last paragraph is basically when stats agree with my concluaion use them when they dont disregard them.

SF SA HDCA and HDCF unless shown otherwise were tracked the same 3 and 4 years ago as they are today so i dont think it fair to say they counted then because they supported my argument but not today becuase they run counter my argument.

 

[admiralcadillac]

yet with all the conusion 5 th best team in limiting dangerous chances. same can be said about turnovers. even if its true and habs turn it over alot it still doesnt lead to alot of chances for the other team.

if the d cant make outlet passes how are the habs out possesing other teams has the 3rd most shots and 3rd most dangerous shots. so its not just shooting from center ice somehow the team is managing to get the pcuk to the best areas of the ice bettet than almost all other NHL teams.

to me so far the narrative of slow bad D that was propogated all summer is coloring the view of this team. they allow some of the fewest chances and generate some of the best but somehow its a bad or undesirable D? its just not sexy but they are doing the job. let the goalies follow and the habs will jump back to a top GA team

Absolutely agree, the reality is no d is perfect and ours seems to be doing well. It's not flashy that's for sure and there's always room for inprovement

 

[LaP]

But you do have to be a little cautious about things like Scoring Chances since it's a subjective term. I'm not sure which website you used, but for example http://www.naturalstattrick.com/teamtable.php which has us taking 383 shots, out of which 319 were considered scoring chances.

You can have a scoring chance without having a shot. This said having 80% as much scoring chances as shots is simply ridiculous. But it's been going on for years now. You have teams having 20 scoring chances in a game where they have only 25 shots. It's not that rare. Scoring chances is as reliable as giveaways. I mean 319 scoring chances in only 14 games is simply not realistic. It's 22 scoring chances every games. No team is that good. It's a scoring chances every 3 minutes for 14 games. The problem with scoring chances is like giveaways they are highly subjective. To be reliable the same guy would need to keep track of all teams.

A goal is a goal. An assist is an assist. There's no subjectivity in those. And ultimately it's what win games.

 

[Sorinth]

i have no problem with the eye test but ure last paragraph is basically when stats agree with my concluaion use them when they dont disregard them.

SF SA HDCA and HDCF unless shown otherwise were tracked the same 3 and 4 years ago as they are today so i dont think it fair to say they counted then because they supported my argument but not today becuase they run counter my argument.

Except even when the stats were brought up no one has argued they were infallible. If for example they provide an "accurate" representation 60% of the time, it's relevant to bring up when they corroborate the eye test. It's just one more piece of evidence that supports your argument.

Let's not forget this is a debate not a scientific assessment. People are going to bring up whatever helps support their argument. It's up to the other side of the debate to bring up whatever counter-evidence there is.

 

[nhlfan9191]

yet with all the conusion 5 th best team in limiting dangerous chances. same can be said about turnovers. even if its true and habs turn it over alot it still doesnt lead to alot of chances for the other team.

if the d cant make outlet passes how are the habs out possesing other teams has the 3rd most shots and 3rd most dangerous shots. so its not just shooting from center ice somehow the team is managing to get the pcuk to the best areas of the ice bettet than almost all other NHL teams.

to me so far the narrative of slow bad D that was propogated all summer is coloring the view of this team. they allow some of the fewest chances and generate some of the best but somehow its a bad or undesirable D? its just not sexy but they are doing the job. let the goalies follow and the habs will jump back to a top GA team

We have good wingers. And they do a nice job at getting the pucks threw the side walls and winning the battles to gain poccession. You can’t tell me they’re good at transitioning the puck because they’re not. I may be a bit hard on them for looking lost on certain plays because they are learning a new system, but to honest, most of these guys didn’t play under Therrien anyways. Weber, Alzner, Petry, Benn, Davidson are all pretty awful skaters which is why I called them slow. If you want me to say something positive about this D, when they’re following the game plan and in position, they’re very dependable at winning puck battles and breaking up plays.

 

[bobbythebrain]

Was hoping to see more offense from Mete

 

[LaP]

Let's not forget this is a debate not a scientific assessment. People are going to bring up whatever helps support their argument. It's up to the other side of the debate to bring up whatever counter-evidence there is.

Personally there's only one thing i care about. Wins and goals. Everything else is just "pour la gallerie". If you don't score you wont win. If you give lot of goals you'll lose. And if you're not scoring and are allowing lot of goals you're not playing that well. The "but they are working hard" excuse is just that as far as i'm concerned. If you're working, if you're playing well, if you're bleeding, you win. Here and there luck will **** you but this is just here and there. Luck is the most inconsistent player ever.

As an amateur player there's very few times where i thought we played better tonight but lost. I simply never accepted that moto. If you play better you win more often than not. End of story. Rarely blamed the goalie too btw. If you protect your goalie he'll do the job.

 

[scrubadam]

Except even when the stats were brought up no one has argued they were infallible. If for example they provide an "accurate" representation 60% of the time, it's relevant to bring up when they corroborate the eye test. It's just one more piece of evidence that supports your argument.

Let's not forget this is a debate not a scientific assessment. People are going to bring up whatever helps support their argument. It's up to the other side of the debate to bring up whatever counter-evidence there is.

Sure the stats aren't infallible and don't tell the entire story, and of course stats can be used to interpret whatever point you want sometimes. I don't forget the Weber arguments where stats were trotted out.

I won't say our defense is the best in the league or something, we can improve it and another PMD that can add offense would be a nice addition. But they aren't horrible or a dumpster fire on the other hand. If there job is to prevent scoring chances well they are doing it no matter how much % of error we want to apply to the stats. With the same stats habs are top 10/5/3 in those things so I think even with putting minimal value in those numbers we can say that the D is executing.

I think someone could say the D's as individuals are not impressive (outside of Weber), but as a group and under this coach and with these forwards they are playing as a top unit in the league. Come playoff time they are going to need reinforcements so I think MB will have to make a trade but maybe MB wasn't that far off when he said the D is better than last year

 

[scrubadam]

We have good wingers. And they do a nice job at getting the pucks threw the side walls and winning the battles to gain poccession. You can’t tell me they’re good at transitioning the puck because they’re not. I may be a bit hard on them for looking lost on certain plays because they are learning a new system, but to honest, most of these guys didn’t play under Therrien anyways. Weber, Alzner, Petry, Benn, Davidson are all pretty awful skaters which is why I called them slow. If you want me to say something positive about this D, when they’re following the game plan and in position, they’re very dependable at winning puck battles and breaking up plays.

If the point is to move the puck out of the zone to the offensive zone and generate shots and high danger shots then they are transitioning just fine. Sure they won't pull end to end rushes and no one will mistake these guys for Bobby Orr, but as far moving from D to Offensive habs are statistically one of the best team in the league. I prefer effective over sexy.

 

[CrAzYNiNe]

If the point is to move the puck out of the zone to the offensive zone and generate shots and high danger shots then they are transitioning just fine. Sure they won't pull end to end rushes and no one will mistake these guys for Bobby Orr, but as far moving from D to Offensive habs are statistically one of the best team in the league. I prefer effective over sexy.

You're not watching. So many turnovers in the D zone by the Habs D that end up in the back of the net. One example from last night was Mete behind the net with the puck, Weber being big brother and going behind the net to help (never ever have two D behind the net). Puck gets loose, finds the man in the slot, easy goal.

The defense is a mess, just watch the games.

 

[nhlfan9191]

If the point is to move the puck out of the zone to the offensive zone and generate shots and high danger shots then they are transitioning just fine. Sure they won't pull end to end rushes and no one will mistake these guys for Bobby Orr, but as far moving from D to Offensive habs are statistically one of the best team in the league. I prefer effective over sexy.

You're not watching. So many turnovers in the D zone by the Habs D that end up in the back of the net. One example from last night was Mete behind the net with the puck, Weber being big brother and going behind the net to help (never ever have two D behind the net). Puck gets loose, finds the man in the slot, easy goal.

The defense is a mess, just watch the games.

Call me an old fashioned kind of guy, but I like to use my eyes. If I can use my eyes instead of having to go to advanced stats, I will every time. We are a mess moving the puck. Looking at the players we have, it’s not surprising. Saying we’re one of the best at transitioning is a joke. Not trying to be rude Scrubadam cause you’ve always been respectful when we debate. Sportsnet had a really nice piece on it during their panel last week. It really did a good job illustrating how much our D struggle to pass the puck in our own end.

 

[scrubadam]

I think a sexy D is being confused with an effective D. Habs D has been effective, stats bear it out. One of the top teams at limiting chances, especially the dangerous ones.

The D is never going to do end to end rushes. Yes that is true. We don't have a D that will carry the puck and deke out a bunch of players. But the D is keeping the other team from having good chances.

If you want to see Bobby Orr style rushing out there from the backend then you probably think this D isn't great. If you want to see fewer shots for the opponent especially from the best spots then this D is doing their job. Its a group that is doing better than the sum of its parts.