Player Discussion Tyler Motte Appreciation
- Thread starter HockeyWooot
- Start date
vanuck
Now with 100% less Benning!
- Dec 28, 2009
- 16,800
- 4,019
Looking at the 4C's on some recent Cup winners in terms of expected goals for...
Kruger 2014-15 (CHI): 50%
Cullen 2015-16 (PIT): 55%
Cullen 2016-17 (PIT): 52%
Beagle 2017-18 (WSH): 39%
Sundqvist 2018-19 (STL): 52%
Beagle 2018-19 (VAN): 42%
Beagle 2019-20 (VAN): 42%
Beagle's numbers improved slightly here but the Caps were right to let him go to free agency. You just don't give money/term to 4th liners.
Svencouver
Registered User
We definitely shouldn't fall into the trap of overpaying Motte, a la Pens signing Brandon Tanev to 3.5mil x 6 LOL. And I get that any kind of term may be risky with a player of Motte's style being prone to injuries. But if we see him bringing the same element to the team, 1.5mil x 3, why not?
Caveat...... his linemates were Kyle Connor and J.T.Compher.
But I do see it a positive how Motte has managed to transform his game.
The thing is that guys you can win with eventually get too expensive to keep. But if let them go you might have trouble winning. The Capitals have had Panik or Hagelin play on the 4th line throughout the year so it's not like the Capitals are rolling a cheap 4th line and succeeding.
Washington’s 4th line this year was generally Leipsic-Dowd-Hathaway at a combined $2.9 million, less than we’re paying for Beagle alone.
Who were playing on their 4th line come playoff time and how did they do in the playoffs?
Fire Benning
diaper filled piss baby
No term, this is what killed the Kings giving term to depth players like Trevor Lewis and Kyle Clifford who they fell in love with after playoff runs. Work ethic is the bare minimum for any job lol, what matters is how consistently you can translate that work ethic and energy into results, not necessarily just points or goals but just applying pressure to the opposition and not getting caved in, what we seem to see with Motte is that for every performance like we saw the other night, he turns into 3 or 4 games where he hustles super hard but accomplishes nothing, the Canucks were outscored at a 2 to 1 margin with Motte this season. No term no big money, move on and find someone else if that's your only option.
Their 4th line looked different in the playoffs because :
a) The Kovalchuk deadline rental pushed a LW down the depth chart
b) Brendan Leipsic unexpectedly decided to commit career suicide and was released.
c) They had several injuries, especially at C, and were forced to play guys like Brian Pinho and Travis Boyd.
The whole team looked like absolute garbage in this playoffs. The point remains that they were a top-5 team in the NHL during the regular season running a 4th line consisting of 3 castoffs at combined $2.9 million.
4th lines are very unimportant. You find three warm bodies that don't hurt you, and the biggest positive they can bring is that they're cheap. Running a cheap 4th line frees up money to spend on players that actually matter. Replace Beagle and Schaller with two $800k scrubs and Benn with Biega on our roster last year, and you free up $5 million to spend on an actual difference-maker at the top end of your roster. And the replacement depth players would actually have been better than what we had.
Diamonddog01
Diamond in the rough
I get what you're saying...but 3 800k scrubs on your 4th line is still 2.4M. And most teams' 4th lines usually come in a bit more expensive than that. A 5M 4th line it's not abnormally or outrageously high - the main issue is the horrific Beagle contract. What's incredibly annoying about that contract is that they signed a similar, better contract (Roussel, and I know we disagree but I definitely feel it's nowhere near as bad as Beagle) at the same time but the better contract is much easier to buyout.
Finally, the return of the Biega hype! Been awhile. Wasn't he better than Tyler Myers for awhile?
You'd think the one lesson that 2011 could drill into Vancouver Canucks' fans' minds would be the importance of a fourth line versus this pure malarkey. In terms of impact on the series, the Bruins' role players of Thornton, Paille and Campbell annihilated Vancouver's of Oreskovich, Tambellini and Hodgson. Yet, here a poster is advocating Vancouver's 2011 fourth line as his dream! I guess you'd have to throw Brendan Gaunce on there though to make the dream complete.
One of the main differences between St. Louis last year and St. Louis this year is their fourth line. Last year in the Finals, they were starting their games with their fourth line! This year, it's being caved in. Ask Craig Berube if fourth lines are "very unimportant." Ask Pete Deboer who said fourth lines have been integral to all his playoffs runs: DeBoer talks the importance of a strong 4th line in the playoffs. Fourth lines help establish the identity of a team, and are actually incredibly important to team success through intangibles known to those have been part of the game.
Hi again there, brand new account that somehow is intricately familiar with my entire posting history!
You ignored my previous questions to you, but I'll ask you two more :
1) Who performed better for Vancouver, $700k Alex Biega or $4 million Erik Gudbranson?
2) What would have been a better idea ... a) keeping Biega around at $700k for 19-20 and then having no salary commitments for 20-21? or b) Spending $2 million on Jordie Benn to be a healthy scratch and then being stuck with his garbage contract for 20-21?
I'm pretty sure you didn't follow the Canucks in 2011, but let me help you a bit there :
1) Max Lapierre was supposed to be the team's 4th line center, and was a very solid player comparable to Paille types on a very nice $900k contract ... but because Manny Malhotra lost an eye ended up playing as our 3rd line center and we had to fill in with AHLers. Additionally, with everyone healthy Jannik Hansen or Raffi Torres (both under $1 million) was also on that line. But when Mikael Samuelsson got hurt, a winger had to move up the lineup. So the intended 4th line was something like Hansen-Lapierre-Glass at ~$2.2 million. Implying that what was actually on the ice was the intended plan is intellectually dishonest.
2) Nobody is saying that you should just fill your roster with bad bottom-6 AHLers like Oreskovich. Oreskovich was a terrible player who had no business on an NHL roster and would be like us dressing Vincent Arseneau for NHL games right now.
Also, Boston's 2011 4th line of Campbell-Paille-Thornton made ... $2.9 million combined. They didn't stupidly splurge on bad old players to build that line, which is exactly in line with what I'm saying. As usual, you're not even understanding the argument.
Also, St. Louis' 4th line has a positive goal differential in these playoffs. If you're highlighting them as a major problem, uhhhhh.
Fire Benning
diaper filled piss baby
4the lines are important insofar as you need them not to be a liability and keep their heads above water, anything more is a bonus.
It’s absolutely critical that your 4th line is cheap, the stupidest thing NHL teams keep doing is allocating large portions of their budget to non-elite players who can be replaced if you’re smart.
It’s absolutely critical that your 4th line is cheap, the stupidest thing NHL teams keep doing is allocating large portions of their budget to non-elite players who can be replaced if you’re smart.
Exactly.
Nobody is saying 'Just throw any 3 crap AHLers in there and it's all good!'
What's being said is that there are plenty of cheap warm bodies who can hold their own in a 4th line role and with even passably OK pro scouting or system development you should be able to fill that line competently for under $4 million, and probably around $3 million combined. If you're spending $6 million on a bad 4th line that sucks, you've screwed up.
You're confusing the argument. Again, nobody is saying 'oh, it's OK to have a terrible 4th line!' Obviously you want to have the best 4th line possible, while keeping it as cheap as possible.
Boston's 4th line in 2011 is an argument for what I'm saying. They had little invested in that line in terms of assets or money - Paille cost a mid-round pick which was the most expensive asset cost, and they made a combined $2.9 million. They were able to easily find competent depth players at a cheap price to ice a good 4th line. They didn't build that line by signing $3 million Jay Beagles to perform terribly. And if they had, they wouldn't have had the money to sign Dennis Seidenberg to come in and be a rock on their blueline playing a far more important role than any 4th liner does.
And, again, comparing them to Vancouver's in 2011 is an extremely false equivalency. Because we were so injured (and Boston basically completely healthy) what we were playing on our 4th line was not representative and it was basically a bunch of AHLers. If our intended 4th line of Hansen-Lapierre-Glass/Tambellini was playing, that is comparable with Boston's and - again - put together for little asset cost and a whopping $2.2 million in salary.
In 2020, obviously if we iced something like Bailey-Graovac-Lind that line would be absolutely killed. But nobody is suggesting that.
vanuck
Now with 100% less Benning!
- Dec 28, 2009
- 16,800
- 4,019
I still have dreams about us throwing a 4th line of Higgins-Lapierre-Tambellini over the boards somewhere in an alternate universe where we stayed healthy. Having 4 lines that attack in waves and can overwhelm opponents by hemming them in their own end is the kind of thing that wins you Cups.
Diamonddog01
Diamond in the rough
I've said before and will say it again, that Malhotra injury in March was the most significant factor in why we didn't win it all.
Lonny Bohonos
Registered User
Lonny Bohonos
Registered User
Ours played much better tonight. Much more focus on possession.
Kudos to Beagle for finally stepping up.
Kudos to Beagle for finally stepping up.
Lonny Bohonos
Registered User
You are confusing the argument. In 2011, Boston's 4th line actually cost more than most other teams. In 2011 the Canucks didn't have an established 4th line. Lapierre was a deadline acquisition. Clearly Hansen was better than a 4th line player.
Horvat was once a 4th line player. Hansen was in his last year of a one year bridge contract in 2011. If you happen to have a 4th line that outperformed their contracts it may not be sustainable. At some point you got to decide whether to pay more for your 4th line or go cheap and start over. In previous seasons, Washington had Beagle as their 4th line anchor and had a revolving door of wingers on the 4th line.
krutovsdonut
eeyore
- Sep 25, 2016
- 16,848
- 9,520
