Red Fisher Conference Finals: Montreal Canadiens (1) vs. Chicago Shamrocks (3)

[Sturminator]

BEST OF SEVEN FORMAT:

Montreal Canadiens (1 Seed)

Captain: Ted Kennedy
Assistant: Dit Clapper
Assistant: Fern Flaman

HEAD COACH

Anatoli Tarasov
Arkady Chernyshev

ROSTER

Bobby Hull - Ted Kennedy (C) - Alex Maltsev
Busher Jackson - Mike Modano - Sergei Makarov
George Hay - Ryan Getzlaf - Corey Perry
Dave Andreychuk - Ken Mosdell - Bob Nevin

Sprague Cleghorn - Dit Clapper (A)
Hod Stuart - Fern Flaman (A)
Doug Mohns - Bob Goldham

Georges Vézina
Gump Worsley

Spares: Patrick Sharp, Moose Vasko

PP1: Andreychuk-Maltsev-Makarov-Hull-Cleghorn
PP2: Jackson-Modano-Getzlaf-Clapper-Stuart

PK1: Kennedy-Mosdell-Cleghorn-Clapper
PK2: Modano-Makarov-Stuart-Flaman
Goldham, Hay, Nevin


VS.

Chicago Shamrocks (3 Seed)​

Captain: Slava Fetisov
Assistant: Frank Nighbor
Assistant: Frank Boucher

HEAD COACH

Hap Day

ROSTER

Patrick Elias - Frank Nighbor (A) - Charlie Conacher
Vladimir Krutov - Frank Boucher (A) - Rod Gilbert
Zach Parise - Anze Kopitar - Cecil Dillon
Nick Metz/Giroux* - Claude Giroux* - Rick Tocchet

Slava Fetisov (K) - Drew Doughty
Herb Gardiner - Erik Karlsson
Ryan Suter - Jimmy Thomson

Clint Benedict
Harry Lumley

Spares: Tony Amonte, Ryan O'Reilly, John Carlson
*Giroux will also see time at LW on the 4th line

PP1
Krutov - Boucher - Conacher
Karlsson - Fetisov

PP2
Elias - Giroux - Gilbert
Doughty - Gardiner/Suter

PK1
Nighbor - Metz
Fetisov - Thomson

PK2
Kopitar - Dillon/Krutov
Suter/Gardiner - Doughty

Extra PK C: Boucher

Need A Goal
Krutov - Boucher - Conacher
Fetisov - Karlsson

Team Info/Highlights
- Defensive team with a defensive coach built around two-way centers Nighbor/Boucher/Kopitar with supporting wingers. We will likely do a lot of scoring on the counter attack
- Although Day was defensive he would allow his elite offensive players leeway, so we do not expect any issues with Conacher or Karlsson
- Speaking of Karlsson, we specifically built a 3rd pairing that was strong defensively in order to get him in the most favorable situations
- Given our defensive strength up front we will likely have less offensive power than some teams. This was addressed in 2 main ways:
1. Good ES scoring depth
2. Special teams: we have several low-penalty players (without sacrificing grit) which should give us more PP's than PK's, we have very strong PKers, and a strong 1st PP unit built to make the most out of our point men, Karlsson and Fetisov (Boucher is the half wall distributer, Conacher and Krutov will be a real handful down low/in the slot)

Click to read more...

 

[Hawkey Town 18]

@Sturminator + @zffssk Congrats on making the Conference Finals! Here's to a good series!

This is an interesting and somewhat unusual matchup in that Chicago's strength is at the Center position while Montreal's strength is on the wings.
(both Nighbor and Boucher are better than any center Montreal has, and both Hull and Makarov are better than any winger Chicago has).

 

[Sturminator]

@Sturminator + @zffssk Congrats on making the Conference Finals! Here's to a good series!

This is an interesting and somewhat unusual matchup in that Chicago's strength is at the Center position while Montreal's strength is on the wings.
(both Nighbor and Boucher are better than any center Montreal has, and both Hull and Makarov are better than any winger Chicago has).

Yeah, man. Congrats on making the final four.

This series should be an interesting test of concepts. What happens when a team designed to deny the middle of the ice meets an opponent focused on speed and puck-carrying on the wings?

 

[BenchBrawl]

@Sturminator + @zffssk Congrats on making the Conference Finals! Here's to a good series!

This is an interesting and somewhat unusual matchup in that Chicago's strength is at the Center position while Montreal's strength is on the wings.
(both Nighbor and Boucher are better than any center Montreal has, and both Hull and Makarov are better than any winger Chicago has).

Thanks, HT. Congrats to you as well.

 

[Hawkey Town 18]

Some info from the earlier playoff series this year:

Chicago Reg Season TOI Chart and explanation of 4th line usage
(note: Nick Metz likely will get increased ice time this series - to be further explained later)

Drew Doughty's Defensive Game

 

[Hawkey Town 18]

Before getting into direct comparisons, team strategy, etc. I'd like to point out something that I think may be a fit/chemistry issue for Montreal:

Does Mike Modano Fit Well as Montreal's 2nd Line Center?
At first glance it seems like Modano is a good fit on Montreal, he is a strong/fast skater that can play a two-way game as Tarasov likes his centers to do, and Modano thrived under a strict coach and a strict system. However, I see 2 potential issues with Modano's fit here:

1. Throughout his career Modano was the driver of his line's offense, but he is being asked to play a different role on Montreal.

We all remember the Lehtinen - Modano - Hull line, generally it was Modano and Lehtinen creating turnovers, with Modano taking the puck-carrying/playmaking load and Hull as the elite finisher.

This also held true before the transition to a two-way player under Hitchcock
NHL.com article on the 96' World Cup

He [Ron Wilson] knew Modano needed big, physical wings to allow him to be at his best. Keith Tkachuk and Bill Guerin were those guys. They stayed together for the duration of the tournament and combined for 14 points, including five goals by Tkachuk in seven games.

"It was simple," Tkachuk said. "Mike is the guy with the puck, skating, and Billy and I were going to bring some physical presence, get around the net, work the corners, give Mike room to do his thing."

On Montreal's second line the offense will run through Makarov, and Modano will be in an unfamiliar secondary/supportive role.


2. When Modano was successful as a two-way Center in Dallas he was used as the first fore-checker, and had an elite defensive winger as backup. Tarasov's system does not have a heavy forecheck, it is more of a possession game, and the Center is asked to be the main forward responsible for defense.

SI article - 1997

But after bumping heads with the NHL's best centers every night, Modano, who was -34 in his career before this season, had a +40 rating, second-best in the league. Some credit belongs to Lehtinen, a smart, second-year right wing whose feel for his new center's style has let Modano be the front man in Dallas's aggressive 1-2-2 forechecking system.

On top of the above 2 points, Modano is playing a bit over his head as a second line center. In an 18-team draft Modano is likely a 3rd line center - even if you give him a generous ranking he'd be a bottom tier/below average 2nd line C. Considering this and the above fit issues, I think this is a significant weakness for Montreal, which is exacerbated by how strong Chicago is up the middle with Nighbor - Boucher - Kopitar

 

[Sturminator]

1) Chicago's main problem in this series is that its defense is set up to grind down teams that look to move the puck up the middle of the ice, as most teams do. Montreal has the speed and skill on the wing to blow up this checking scheme. Chicago has the better centers, but most of their value is defensive. Stopping Montreal by checking our centers is like trying to squeeze blood from a stone. Bad matchup for the Shamrocks.

2) In regards to playoff scoring, I'll just leave this here:

Playoff Scoring Relative to Expectations

We often see people say things like "Player X's per-game scoring dropped 15% in the playoffs, so he wasn't very good in the postseason". There are at least two reasons why these types of claims are misleading. First, it doesn't take into account which years the player made the postseason...

hfboards.mandatory.com

3) About Modano, it's interesting that you'd post that 1996 SI article. It describes how Ron Wilson (Ducks coach at the time) decided on a brand new concept of Modano-with-two-big-wings (amusingly, as opposed to putting Modano with Hull), and how it came together. The one-off success of that line in the 1996 World Cup is a testament to Modano's flexibility.

Modano's ability to fit his game to Hitchcock's scheme in Dallas is the reason he's a hall of famer. You just posted an article highlighting his ability to adapt quickly to new line concepts. Thanks.

 

[BenchBrawl]

Erik Karlsson is a major liability on Chicago's blueline in this series.

Karlsson plays RD, so he will be facing Bobby Hull and Busher Jackson all the time, and all the more since Montreal has the home ice advantage.

Given Chicago's concerning lack of firepower upfront, they will need Karlsson to be offensively aggressive, leading to even more defensive shortcomings. So Chicago is stuck with two strategies with Karlsson: 1) Allow him to go freely on the offensive, in which case this match-up becomes a game of exchanging scoring chances, which Montreal is way better equipped to win (and which goes against Hap Day's mentality), or 2) to reduce his TOI and/or have him play more conservatively, which goes against his nature and makes him a waste of an asset.

 

[Hawkey Town 18]

3) About Modano, it's interesting that you'd post that 1996 SI article. It describes how Ron Wilson (Ducks coach at the time) decided on a brand new concept of Modano-with-two-big-wings (amusingly, as opposed to putting Modano with Hull), and how it came together. The one-off success of that line in the 1996 World Cup is a testament to Modano's flexibility.

Modano's ability to fit his game to Hitchcock's scheme in Dallas is the reason he's a hall of famer. You just posted an article highlighting his ability to adapt quickly to new line concepts. Thanks.

Will address your other points later.

Putting Modano with two power forwards was a new concept yes, but the offense was still running through him, which was one of my two main points. That's how it was before the World Cup, during, and after in Dallas.

I don't see the need for your snarky reply, it doesn't make what you're saying carry any more weight, and tends to throw the discussion of course, but just once, here's one back for you :

You just helped point out that Wilson's line setup highlights that a guy who likes to be the main puck carrier/playmaker of his line (Modano) does even better when he has two big wingers creating more space for him. Thanks.
(That will be my last comment of that tone, let's have a more cordial debate)


My main points stand:
-We have not seen Modano have success playing a secondary role as far as puck carrying/playmaking, which is his role on Montreal's 2nd line (even when he changed from an offense-first game to a two-way game).

-Modano's type of role defensively on Montreal's 2nd line is different than the defensive role he had in Dallas

So, Modano is being asked to play both a different offensive style and different defensive style than he did during his career, and without even considering those two things (i.e. "in a vacuum"), Modano is already playing slightly over his head as a 2nd line C.

 

[BenchBrawl]

Jackson and Makarov would be above-average 1st liners at their respective position, and make the slightly out-of-rank Modano a none-issue.

Modano had a great slapshot, which he will be able to use profusely if asked to stay back. Playing with Jackson and Makarov will create more odd-man rushes than his IRL linemates could.

 

[Sturminator]

-We have not seen Modano have success playing a secondary role as far as puck carrying/playmaking, which is his role on Montreal's 2nd line (even when he changed from an offense-first game to a two-way game).

-Modano's type of role defensively on Montreal's 2nd line is different than the defensive role he had in Dallas

1) You think Modano with less puck-carrying responsibility would be worse defensively? How does that work, exactly?

Yeah, it's a different kind of unit: Jackson - Modano - Makarov is among the fastest lines you'll ever see. With those two as his linemates, how many more opportunities will Modano get to create odd-man rushes, or to use his slap shot as the trail man on breakouts? You focus on what's different without acknowledging the line's synergies, or the ways in which that difference makes it obviously superior to real-world units. Not to mention the fact that it constitutes a particularly difficult matchup for Chicago's center-heavy checking scheme.

2) Speaking of differences, who is going to move the puck on Chicago's 1st line? Charlie Conacher is the team's best offensive player, but he's no puck-carrier (that was Jackson's job), and Elias/Nighbor are similarly weak in that area. This line is lacklustre in transition, and will end up resorting to a lot of dump-ins in order to enter the zone. Good luck playing dump-and-chase against Montreal's defensemen.

Charlie Conacher is your best offensive player, but you've put him in a bad position to succeed. He's got minimal help bringing the puck up ice, and nobody to share the physical load with in the offensive zone. If Conacher is working the boards, who is going to the front of the net? Charlie Conacher is not Jaromir Jagr. Like most players, he needs linemates who can put him in position to make the best use of his talents. He doesn't have that here.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

IRL, I think that Elias was at his best when he was the primary puck carrier on his line, like he was when the "A line" was briefly in the running for the best line in hockey, or again after the 2005 lockout. I think he lost something when forced to play with Scott Gomez, during the period when the team had no other viable option as a triggerman for Scott (basically after losing Mogilny and before Gionta emerged after the lockout).

That's not me taking an opinion on his role for Chicago, just stating how he did in the NHL.

 

[Hawkey Town 18]

1) You think Modano with less puck-carrying responsibility would be worse defensively? How does that work, exactly?

I did not say this. I said he's being used in a different role both offensively and defensively.

Throughout his career he was the primary puck-carrier/playmaker of his line. On Montreal he will not be, so it's unknown how he will perform offensively.

In his best defensive years he was used as the front man in an aggressive fore-checking system. That is not the system being played by Montreal, and his defensive role will not be first man on the fore-check, so it's unknown how he will perform defensively.

You can and have argued that he'll be able to perform well in these new roles, but at the end of the day it's an unknown, and up to the voters to decide how they feel about it.


I'm pretty busy at work this week, but wanted to post this quick reply, which I think buttons up this topic in a fair way. I will try my best to get some thoughts posted on some of the other aspects of this series in the next few days.

 

[Hawkey Town 18]

Apologies for being away for a while, I'm just very busy at work and with real life stuff. I will do my best to make some more posts on this series. Here's one to address comments from Montreal questioning the effectiveness of Chicago's centers on the defensive side of the puck:

The Effectiveness of Chicago's Centers Defensively

Montreal has claimed that their own team setup, specifically the speedy wings of their top 2 lines will lead to Chicago's centers being less effective and/or involved defensively. I would like to make 2 points on why I don't think this is correct.

1. Montreal is coached by Tarasov and therefore will be playing a Soviet system. Some of the main differences that observers pointed out when comparing the Soviet style vs. the North American style back in Tarasov's day was that the Soviet style had a lot more of an East-West aspect to it whereas the North American system was a lot more linear. Getting a little more specific, the Soviet style had a lot more weaving and passing, focusing on possession. It seems highly unlikely that the center of the ice would not be utilized/important in a system like this.
With the Soviet system being such a free-flowing/east-west/frequent passing style of play, the Center of the opposing team (i.e. the player who has the green light to be anywhere on the ice) is an extremely important defensive player.


2. Even if you don't agree with my above, and think that Montreal will be able to focus on carrying the puck up the wings only instead of a more East-West style, having a strong defensive Center will still have a large impact on team defense. Strong defensive Centers allow Dmen to focus more on the wings, as they know the Centers will have the middle of the ice covered. When playing with Centers that are not strong defensively, Dmen cannot cheat as much to the wings as they need to make sure the center of the ice is accounted for.
Should Montreal focus on carrying the puck up the wing, with Chicago's strong defensive centers covering the middle of the ice, Montreal's wingers will have less space to work with, allowing Chicago's Dmen focus more on the wings when needed and making it easier for them to defend.


For both of the above reasons, I not only think that Chicago's centers will have a large defensive impact against Montreal, but I think that they are one of the keys to how Chicago will win the series.

 

[Hawkey Town 18]

Erik Karlsson is a major liability on Chicago's blueline in this series.

Karlsson plays RD, so he will be facing Bobby Hull and Busher Jackson all the time, and all the more since Montreal has the home ice advantage.

Given Chicago's concerning lack of firepower upfront, they will need Karlsson to be offensively aggressive, leading to even more defensive shortcomings. So Chicago is stuck with two strategies with Karlsson: 1) Allow him to go freely on the offensive, in which case this match-up becomes a game of exchanging scoring chances, which Montreal is way better equipped to win (and which goes against Hap Day's mentality), or 2) to reduce his TOI and/or have him play more conservatively, which goes against his nature and makes him a waste of an asset.

This was addressed in my Team Info in the OP and discussed last series vs. IE:

Team Info/Highlights
- Defensive team with a defensive coach built around two-way centers Nighbor/Boucher/Kopitar with supporting wingers. We will likely do a lot of scoring on the counter attack
- Although Day was defensive he would allow his elite offensive players leeway, so we do not expect any issues with Conacher or Karlsson
- Speaking of Karlsson, we specifically built a 3rd pairing that was strong defensively in order to get him in the most favorable situations

As it says in my Team Info, we constructed a 3rd pairing that is strong defensively (R. Suter - Thomson) so it's likely that Jimmy Thomson may be seeing more of Ovechkin (at least in defensive zone situations) than Karlsson will. Thomson's bio is littered with quotes about his strong defensive play and physicality. When looking at the late 40's/early 50's Leafs that won 4 Cups in 5 years, Thomson was their best Dman over that span.

The Chicago forward lines also have plenty of players who can support Karlsson joining the rush when he gets the opportunity. The strong defensive centers have already been discussed, but there is also good to strong secondary defensive support from their wingers.

 

[BenchBrawl]

This was addressed in my Team Info in the OP and discussed last series vs. IE:





The Chicago forward lines also have plenty of players who can support Karlsson joining the rush when he gets the opportunity. The strong defensive centers have already been discussed, but there is also good to strong secondary defensive support from their wingers.

Sure, you have a strong 3rd pairing, but none of them are #3 defensemen. Reducing Karlsson's TOI in favor of Suter-Thomson is still a downgrade.

The main problem isn't the relationship between Hay and Karlsson, or the strength of your 3rd pairing, but the fact that Karlsson will get match up against Bobby Hull and Busher Jackson (and George Hay). Montreal has the strongest LW line in the league, by far (I double-checked every lineup), and Karlsson is not the type of defenseman I'd want at RD facing Montreal, especially when MTL has home ice advantage.

You mentioned this:

- Speaking of Karlsson, we specifically built a 3rd pairing that was strong defensively in order to get him in the most favorable situations

From my point of view, Karlsson will be forced to spend all his time facing Hull and Jackson. This is not a favorable situation for him and not something an above-average 3rd pairing can fix, except if you limit Karlsson' TOI, which is a waste of asset.

If you want to play Jimmy Thomson as your #3D, it's your call.

 

[Hawkey Town 18]

Sure, you have a strong 3rd pairing, but none of them are #3 defensemen. Reducing Karlsson's TOI in favor of Suter-Thomson is still a downgrade.

The main problem isn't the relationship between Hay and Karlsson, or the strength of your 3rd pairing, but the fact that Karlsson will get match up against Bobby Hull and Busher Jackson (and George Hay). Montreal has the strongest LW line in the league, by far (I double-checked every lineup), and Karlsson is not the type of defenseman I'd want at RD facing Montreal, especially when MTL has home ice advantage.

You mentioned this:



From my point of view, Karlsson will be forced to spend all his time facing Hull and Jackson. This is not a favorable situation for him and not something an above-average 3rd pairing can fix, except if you limit Karlsson' TOI, which is a waste of asset.

If you want to play Jimmy Thomson as your #3D, it's your call.

Favorable situations were mainly referring to offensive zone starts vs. defensive zone starts.

As far as this series is concerned, we will try to avoid having Karlsson out against Bobby Hull. I'm fine with him being out against Busher Jackson if that has to happen sometimes. Jackson isn't a player that deserves special attention in an 18-team draft. Yes, he is a lower end 1st liner playing on a 2nd line, but Makaraov is the driving force of that line, he's the main concern. Also, while Karlsson's defensive game wasn't very good for his first Norris, he had turned into a good (not great) defensive player for his second Norris win and 2 runner-up finishes. He also has good support from his forwards.

I don't have a lot of time to research, but here's at least something to back it up from a 2017 article found on nhl.com

Karlsson is the engine that powers the Senators and is the biggest reason they are a playoff team.

The Ottawa captain is a long shot to win the Hart Trophy this season as the player judged most valuable to his team, but that criteria fits Karlsson perfectly. He has 27 points (nine goals, 18 assists) in his past 25 games and has turned it on when the Senators needed him most.

Karlsson's value to the Senators is immeasurable, and Boucher was able to implement a more defensively responsible system in Ottawa because Karlsson bought in so convincingly.

To see Karlsson put up 71 points (17 goals, 54 assists) in 77 games is not surprising, because he has been among the NHL's best offensive defensemen for years. What is surprising is to see him second in the NHL with 201 blocked shots, surpassing his career high of 175 set last season.

 

[Hawkey Town 18]

Also, to follow up on Karlsson, in a vacuum he's good enough to be a #2 Dman in an 18 team draft. Most, including myself, would play him as a #3 on the second pairing due to his style of play and difficulty to partner with the guys who are #1 Dmen.

 

[BenchBrawl]

Favorable situations were mainly referring to offensive zone starts vs. defensive zone starts.

As far as this series is concerned, we will try to avoid having Karlsson out against Bobby Hull. I'm fine with him being out against Busher Jackson if that has to happen sometimes. Jackson isn't a player that deserves special attention in an 18-team draft. Yes, he is a lower end 1st liner playing on a 2nd line, but Makaraov is the driving force of that line, he's the main concern. Also, while Karlsson's defensive game wasn't very good for his first Norris, he had turned into a good (not great) defensive player for his second Norris win and 2 runner-up finishes. He also has good support from his forwards.

I don't have a lot of time to research, but here's at least something to back it up from a 2017 article found on nhl.com

Busher Jackson is not a low-end 1st liner, he's right on average for what you'd expect a 18-teams 1st line LWer to be. Karlsson won't be able to avoid Bobby Hull, given MTL has home ice advantage. Plus, when he faces Busher Jackson, he will get below-average support from his center, who will be occupied in helping on the right side of the ice to defend against Sergei Makarov.

Posting a quote about Erik Karlsson from the 2017 playoffs will not be representative of his career. That was his absolute peak, and the contrast of his defensive play from one year to the next was significant.

 

[Hawkey Town 18]

Karlsson is well insulated on this team. The Chicago centers are very strong defensively and they have good secondary support from the wingers, and the other two D pairings on the team are strong defensively, and he's a #2 playing as a #3. I know you didn't say this, but it's as if you're implying an ATD team with Karlsson can't beat an opponent with a strong LWs like Hull and Jackson, which can't be correct.


Regarding Jackson, calling him low-end was too harsh, he's slightly below average.
The problem is that there's some big jumps at that position:
Joliat, Denneny (maybe Mahovlich instead of one of these two) are the 7th/8th best LWers
Then you have Abel and Blake a step down from them.
And then Jackson is somewhere in the next tier below that.

So, if you're going purely by the numbers, average is 7-12, but as we often see, the tiers don't align well with that. Anyway, Jackson is definitely a 1st liner.

 

[Sturminator]

Hull and Jackson are a nightmare matchup for Karlsson, with the speed to counterattack behind him, and the strength to shove him around in the offensive zone. Herb Gardiner is a fine all-around #4, but nothing special in terms of covering for his partner.

Karlsson is who he is, and I'd expect a lot of end-to-end hockey when he's on the ice. That suits Montreal's game plan better than it does Chicago's.

----

It's worth noting that in addition to the 1996 World Cup victory for team USA (discussed above) when Mike Modano skated mostly with Tkachuk and Guerin, his line also performed very well in the 2002 Olympics (in which team USA got silver) when he skated with LeClair and Hull. He didn't need a Lehtinen-type wing to be an effective two-way player, and Sergei Makarov is a better open-ice checker than any of the wings Modano played with on the national team, anyway.

Offensively, Modano has more and better options in transition than he had in real life. That's what he has to adapt to...better line mates. He had a big shot, but Modano was still a pass-first center, and the fast-counterattacking style of the unit suits his skill set quite well.

----

Montreal is obviously a difficult matchup for a team built to cut off transition up the middle of the ice. The Habs have the ability to skate around Chicago's hook-checkers rather than through them, and the coaching staff to organize such an attack.

 

[Hawkey Town 18]

Congrats @Sturminator and @BenchBrawl

Wish I would've had time to post a little more, but at least we had some good discussion. Good luck in the Final!

 

[Sturminator]

You took a particular team concept to its logical extreme in a really appealing way this year, HT. Congrats on once again making the final four of this tournament, and thanks for a good debate in this series.

 

[BenchBrawl]

Congrats @Sturminator and @BenchBrawl

Wish I would've had time to post a little more, but at least we had some good discussion. Good luck in the Final!

Thanks!

I liked the fact you took a big gamble on starting your team with Nighbor and Boucher, and I thought you brought it in the playoffs this year, not just in this series but also your other series.

Always a pleasure to debate with you. Cheers!