The Habs won last night, and like most Habs faithful, I was pretty happy about it. Still, a couple of clear problems I've noticed since the beginning of the year propped up again, and to me, it's a lack of awareness by the coaching staff.
Hal Gill and Raphael Diaz are what should be the bottom pairing in the D corps. One is slow and not very physical, and the other is small and skilled, but quite inexperienced. Together they've been making plenty of gaffes, many of which have been leading to eventual goals. I single them out because they've made the most obvious mistakes since the beginning of the year, but the defense as a whole has struggled.
One of the biggest problem with this team since the beginning of the year has been defensive zone clearances and breakouts. I'd say 90% of the goals they've given up this year all stem from a simple zone breakout gone wrong. In the second in third period last night they were much better, but sadly it was the exception rather than the norm. A lot of it has to do with forwards coming back to help the D's out. They just don't do it on a consistent basis. When Diaz and Gill are on the ice its the most noticeable, because Diaz, who is young, gives the puck to Gill way too much. I assume it's because he's a rookie, and is probably being told by the coaches to use Gill more than he should be. Subban and Gorges were good with Gill because they knew not to let him handle the puck too much in his own zone.
Two things, thus, should be done about this (besides just changing the pairing).
1. Tell Diaz that it's his primary responsibility to get the puck up ice. Far too often have I seen Gill take it upon himself to chip the puck out or make the first breakout pass. He's good at neither. Diaz on the other hand is pretty good at both. This is why I think it's the coaches fault for not identifying this problem and rectifying it. Diaz probably knows he's better at zone clearances than Gill, but normally a rookie is waiting for a coach to tell him to take more charge of the situation. As of now he's expecting Gill to do as much or more of this task, a task he's simply not up for. How many times have you seen Gill receive a puck in his own zone and immediately look confused about why the puck was given to him, and what he should do next? Waaaayyyyy too often. Gill is good at one thing: playing without the puck. He plays so badly with it that he probably has puck-related nightmares. I'm not even kidding.
2. Force the forwards to recognize when this D pairing is on the ice, and make sure to always come back. Clearly, from how Martin explains it, the forwards are always supposed to come back, to be, as he puts it, five in the frame. Clearly, the forwards either don't listen to Martin, or they don't believe it's that necessary for them to all come back. It's almost as if half our team think that Hamrlik and Wisniewski are still back there, and that they'll have no problem getting the puck up ice. Maybe Martin ought to take baby steps with his team and say: "Try your best to get back on D. But when Diaz and Gill are on the ice, I'll bench your ass if you don't get back." Something like that anyway.
It's been two straight games where this pairing has made a careless mistake in their own zone that has cost us the team a goal. Both times it was a situation where one D-man had plenty of time, and simply decided that his only option was to make a lackluster pass back to his D partner. Basically a routine play gone wrong. I think that with a little bit of extra attention addressed to this situation by the coaches, these plays can be avoided altogether. As it stands I just don't see the proper adjustments being made, though.
It's really rather simple: when you consistently get the puck quickly out of your zone, the forwards are still fresh enough to make effective entrances into the other team's zone. This is why we seem to go through so many long stretches of offensive lethargy in a game. Defensive zone breakouts. Fix this problem, and suddenly your star forwards will start to shine. Maybe last night was a sign of things to come. One can only hope.
Thursday, October 27, 2011
Monday, October 24, 2011
The Good, the Bad, the Ugly, and the Habs
So it hasn't been the best start in the world. Okay, it's been maybe one of the worst starts in the world. But who's counting? Okay, basically everyone in the city is. But it's Les Glorieux! It's not like anyone has given up hope on them, right? Well maybe quite a few. As for myself, well I'm still trying my hardest to stay optimistic, as hard as that is to be at the moment. And believe me, it gets even more frustrating when you clearly see what adjustments the team should be making. Here's a few that I've compiled since the beginning of the Habs 2011-12 campaign.
1. Fixing the Powerplay
Aaaaaahhhh, the good ole' PP. When have we ever won anything without one? I can't remember myself, because well, I probably wasn't born yet. For a team that has relied so heavily on its special teams in the last decade or two, you'd think that they'd be flying in special consultants from around the globe to make it better. Or maybe, and here's a radical idea, watching tape of other team's powerplay. You know, the ones that actually work?
First thing I would do, and this is fairly obvious, is to get rid of the 4 forward alignment. Basically, in a word, duh. It just doesn't work. Plekanec and Kostitsyn make the same mistake time and time again, that being the mistake of thinking too much. There's no time to think on the PP, the thinking should have already been done in practice. When the point-men get the puck on the PP, the last thing they should be doing is holding on to it and thinking about what to do. The second they begin to think, is another second for the PK-ers to get back into position, and there-in lies the problem of the PP in general. Our PP is far too predictable. But I'll get back to that in a second.
First thing to do is replace Plekanec or AK with a d-man. Clearly Emelin is the choice here. Clearly Martin has no faith in him, but that's because Martin is to worried about giving up goals. Clearly, he should be worried about scoring them instead. Emelin played a lot of minutes in the KHL on the PP last year, and played very well. To have so much faith in Diaz and so little in Emelin is senseless in my opinion.
But what makes defensmen such a better option than forwards on the point you may ask? It comes down to regularity. Defensmen are simply more used to making offensive decisions from the blueline than forwards are. This makes them better at lateral passes, passes down-low, and an assortment of shots on net. And by being more accustomed with these maneuvers, they do them all much quicker, which is the key to any good PP.
Secondly, replace Desharnais on the first unit with Eller. This is not as obvious, but to me, critical. There's a reason why Gomez is not on the first PP unit, and it's quickly becoming the reason why Desharnais shouldn't be on it either: they're not a threat to score. Name me one good PP unit that has a player on it that isn't a viable shooter. Stop thinking, cuz' there isn't one.
You simply can't have a player on the ice for the biggest portion of your PP that refuses to shoot. How many times have we seen Desharnais try to force the puck inside to Darche or Pacioretty. A lot. How many times has it worked? Like never. Why? Duh, the other team knows it's coming, every bloody time. Put Eller in there, and a whole lot changes. Besides being able to make the quick in front-of-the-net pass, Eller is also capable of crashing the net and shooting the puck. He can do multiple things which makes him, yup, you guessed it: unpredictable.
Three, go and watch the Vancouver Canucks PP. Right, this will never happen because Martin and Pearn know it all, and after all it's not their fault: it's the players not doing what they're told. Or... maybe what they're told is garbage? What makes the Canucks PP effect? Pass and move. That's the system. What happens when you have five guys in perpetual motion? You have four guys in perpetual motion guarding them, which means, drum roll please, openings have a habit of being created. And that's just the beginning. Once you begin to move that much faster than the defence, you force them to commit errors in coverage, because they begin to scramble to retain their proper positioning.
What I've noticed since the beginning of the year is that our PP is the one scrambling to retain its position, and the opposing PK have been the ones moving quicker. Of course this makes no sense, right? How can our opponents who have less players be in better position than us? Wrong personnel on the ice is one. Wrong strategy is two. Wrong decision-making is three. And the Habs have made these mistakes game in, game out.
3. Giving Cole a role
A friend of mine came up with this headline yesterday, and I couldn't put it any better. In what world do you have your newest, big free agent signing playing 11 minutes in a game? In a game that went into overtime no less? In Jacques Martin's world of course. C'mon, Jacques. It's time to wake up. If your team is having difficulties in every facet of its game, is it really a good idea to keep a veteran player like Cole glued to the bench? For a veteran's coach like Martin, this should be the easiest thing for him to figure out on his own.
I don't care what line he's on. Leave him with Desharnais and Pacioretty if you like. But get him more involved in the game. Have him double shift on the 4th line every once in awhile. If all else fails, throw him on the PP to mix things up. Work him into the penalty kill. Bottom line: make him feel like he's an important part of the team. Just because he's a veteran doesn't mean he can't lose his confidence, too. But that would require our coach to be forward thinking. Whoops, wrong coach...
3. Time for Cunneyworth to become more Muller-like
I know, dream on. But somebody has to be talking to the players on the bench, motivating them, getting them going. Cunneyworth probably doesn't think it's his place yet, but he's going to need to start asserting himself a bit more back there. A lot can change in a game, and sometimes the game-plan can go out the window a bit. When that happens, and your head coach is a robot, someone else behind the bench has to help rally the troops. With Pearn being as silent if not more so than Martin, the role of communicator and motivator seems to rest heavily on Cunneyworth. I hope he's up for the challenge.
4. How to solve a problem like Weber, Emelin and Diaz
There's a lot of work to be done, and sadly I'm not completely sure if this coaching staff is capable of making it happen. If i were in their shoes, I would notice that my three new starting defensemen (Diaz, Emelin, and Weber) all like to get into the play offensively, and use it to my advantage. Their problems on defence become apparent when they're being stagnant in their own zone, when they lose their man due to poor communication and just overall inexperience.
But how many goals have been scored against them due to pinching up into the play and being unable to get back and cover in time? Very few. If anything, they all have a knack for getting back into the play defensively. Basically all I'm saying is let the players be themselves on the ice. You can't make them into veteran defensive stalwarts over night; it happens gradually if it happens at all (and in the case of these young d-men, probably never). Better to find a way to use them more efficiently, then to try to turn them into something that they'll never be...
Buckle up folks. It's going to be a rough ride.
1. Fixing the Powerplay
Aaaaaahhhh, the good ole' PP. When have we ever won anything without one? I can't remember myself, because well, I probably wasn't born yet. For a team that has relied so heavily on its special teams in the last decade or two, you'd think that they'd be flying in special consultants from around the globe to make it better. Or maybe, and here's a radical idea, watching tape of other team's powerplay. You know, the ones that actually work?
First thing I would do, and this is fairly obvious, is to get rid of the 4 forward alignment. Basically, in a word, duh. It just doesn't work. Plekanec and Kostitsyn make the same mistake time and time again, that being the mistake of thinking too much. There's no time to think on the PP, the thinking should have already been done in practice. When the point-men get the puck on the PP, the last thing they should be doing is holding on to it and thinking about what to do. The second they begin to think, is another second for the PK-ers to get back into position, and there-in lies the problem of the PP in general. Our PP is far too predictable. But I'll get back to that in a second.
First thing to do is replace Plekanec or AK with a d-man. Clearly Emelin is the choice here. Clearly Martin has no faith in him, but that's because Martin is to worried about giving up goals. Clearly, he should be worried about scoring them instead. Emelin played a lot of minutes in the KHL on the PP last year, and played very well. To have so much faith in Diaz and so little in Emelin is senseless in my opinion.
But what makes defensmen such a better option than forwards on the point you may ask? It comes down to regularity. Defensmen are simply more used to making offensive decisions from the blueline than forwards are. This makes them better at lateral passes, passes down-low, and an assortment of shots on net. And by being more accustomed with these maneuvers, they do them all much quicker, which is the key to any good PP.
Secondly, replace Desharnais on the first unit with Eller. This is not as obvious, but to me, critical. There's a reason why Gomez is not on the first PP unit, and it's quickly becoming the reason why Desharnais shouldn't be on it either: they're not a threat to score. Name me one good PP unit that has a player on it that isn't a viable shooter. Stop thinking, cuz' there isn't one.
You simply can't have a player on the ice for the biggest portion of your PP that refuses to shoot. How many times have we seen Desharnais try to force the puck inside to Darche or Pacioretty. A lot. How many times has it worked? Like never. Why? Duh, the other team knows it's coming, every bloody time. Put Eller in there, and a whole lot changes. Besides being able to make the quick in front-of-the-net pass, Eller is also capable of crashing the net and shooting the puck. He can do multiple things which makes him, yup, you guessed it: unpredictable.
Three, go and watch the Vancouver Canucks PP. Right, this will never happen because Martin and Pearn know it all, and after all it's not their fault: it's the players not doing what they're told. Or... maybe what they're told is garbage? What makes the Canucks PP effect? Pass and move. That's the system. What happens when you have five guys in perpetual motion? You have four guys in perpetual motion guarding them, which means, drum roll please, openings have a habit of being created. And that's just the beginning. Once you begin to move that much faster than the defence, you force them to commit errors in coverage, because they begin to scramble to retain their proper positioning.
What I've noticed since the beginning of the year is that our PP is the one scrambling to retain its position, and the opposing PK have been the ones moving quicker. Of course this makes no sense, right? How can our opponents who have less players be in better position than us? Wrong personnel on the ice is one. Wrong strategy is two. Wrong decision-making is three. And the Habs have made these mistakes game in, game out.
3. Giving Cole a role
A friend of mine came up with this headline yesterday, and I couldn't put it any better. In what world do you have your newest, big free agent signing playing 11 minutes in a game? In a game that went into overtime no less? In Jacques Martin's world of course. C'mon, Jacques. It's time to wake up. If your team is having difficulties in every facet of its game, is it really a good idea to keep a veteran player like Cole glued to the bench? For a veteran's coach like Martin, this should be the easiest thing for him to figure out on his own.
I don't care what line he's on. Leave him with Desharnais and Pacioretty if you like. But get him more involved in the game. Have him double shift on the 4th line every once in awhile. If all else fails, throw him on the PP to mix things up. Work him into the penalty kill. Bottom line: make him feel like he's an important part of the team. Just because he's a veteran doesn't mean he can't lose his confidence, too. But that would require our coach to be forward thinking. Whoops, wrong coach...
3. Time for Cunneyworth to become more Muller-like
I know, dream on. But somebody has to be talking to the players on the bench, motivating them, getting them going. Cunneyworth probably doesn't think it's his place yet, but he's going to need to start asserting himself a bit more back there. A lot can change in a game, and sometimes the game-plan can go out the window a bit. When that happens, and your head coach is a robot, someone else behind the bench has to help rally the troops. With Pearn being as silent if not more so than Martin, the role of communicator and motivator seems to rest heavily on Cunneyworth. I hope he's up for the challenge.
4. How to solve a problem like Weber, Emelin and Diaz
There's a lot of work to be done, and sadly I'm not completely sure if this coaching staff is capable of making it happen. If i were in their shoes, I would notice that my three new starting defensemen (Diaz, Emelin, and Weber) all like to get into the play offensively, and use it to my advantage. Their problems on defence become apparent when they're being stagnant in their own zone, when they lose their man due to poor communication and just overall inexperience.
But how many goals have been scored against them due to pinching up into the play and being unable to get back and cover in time? Very few. If anything, they all have a knack for getting back into the play defensively. Basically all I'm saying is let the players be themselves on the ice. You can't make them into veteran defensive stalwarts over night; it happens gradually if it happens at all (and in the case of these young d-men, probably never). Better to find a way to use them more efficiently, then to try to turn them into something that they'll never be...
Buckle up folks. It's going to be a rough ride.
Wednesday, September 21, 2011
Panic on the streets of Habtown: Canadiens pre-preseason report
Yemelin's fat. Spacek's fit. Markov's dying. Gomez's is apparently a liar (how else could he get injured if he was supposedly in such good shape?). You get the picture. Montreal is dying for hockey news, and this is what they came up with. My Dad of all people asked me the other day why i hadn't written anything in a while, considering how there was suddenly so much in the news about the Habs, and more specifically, about Markov's injury woes. He assumed i had a plethora of information with which to draw from. My first response was one of laughter. "What news? All this is is sensationalism at its best, your typical making-a-mountain-out-of-a-molehill scenario." Then i thought about it further and realized i did have a wealth of information to draw from. I could talk about how ridiculous the media is here.
Take RDS for instance. The day the news came out that Markov had had water removed from his knee, and that he was no longer on schedule to begin the season like everybody thought he was, panic spread like wildfire. People questioned the Habs doctors, questioned the organization, questioned Markov himself. This went on for a day or two until finally it seemed to be put to rest a bit. Markov declared that he wasn't worried, that he was more worried about the media (can't blame him). Probably the best and at least the most well-known sports doctor in North America, James Andrews, explained that Markov's affliction was extremely common among sufferers of this injury, and it wasn't anything to be concerned about. Great, I thought, nothing really to worry about, Markov may not be fit for the season's debut, but would be back not too long after that. I slept easy that night.
Then i woke up the next day and began to surf the net as i often do. Made the mistake of checking into RDS. The headline declared this: "Markov toujours dans la néant". Which roughly translates to "Markov still in the void." Obviously, like anyone reading this, I panicked, thinking that overnight Markov's little setback had turned into God knows what. The first paragraph of the article didn't exactly ease my worries, either. In a nutshell it basically said that Markov had not made any progress in his recovery in the last nine months. Cue more panic. Cue anguish. What does this mean? Is Markov going to have to begin his recovery process all over again? Will he be out till November? December? The whole year? But then i kept reading. Realized that there was no new news here. All it was was the same information from the last two days, just more scary sounding...
Welcome to Montreal. Welcome to hockey preseason. Welcome to madness.
Take RDS for instance. The day the news came out that Markov had had water removed from his knee, and that he was no longer on schedule to begin the season like everybody thought he was, panic spread like wildfire. People questioned the Habs doctors, questioned the organization, questioned Markov himself. This went on for a day or two until finally it seemed to be put to rest a bit. Markov declared that he wasn't worried, that he was more worried about the media (can't blame him). Probably the best and at least the most well-known sports doctor in North America, James Andrews, explained that Markov's affliction was extremely common among sufferers of this injury, and it wasn't anything to be concerned about. Great, I thought, nothing really to worry about, Markov may not be fit for the season's debut, but would be back not too long after that. I slept easy that night.
Then i woke up the next day and began to surf the net as i often do. Made the mistake of checking into RDS. The headline declared this: "Markov toujours dans la néant". Which roughly translates to "Markov still in the void." Obviously, like anyone reading this, I panicked, thinking that overnight Markov's little setback had turned into God knows what. The first paragraph of the article didn't exactly ease my worries, either. In a nutshell it basically said that Markov had not made any progress in his recovery in the last nine months. Cue more panic. Cue anguish. What does this mean? Is Markov going to have to begin his recovery process all over again? Will he be out till November? December? The whole year? But then i kept reading. Realized that there was no new news here. All it was was the same information from the last two days, just more scary sounding...
Welcome to Montreal. Welcome to hockey preseason. Welcome to madness.
Monday, July 18, 2011
Habs Summer Thus Far…
Cole
I’m not going to mince words here: The fact that GM Pierre Gauthier acquired Eric Cole, a fast-skating, big-bodied forward, pretty much makes this offseason a success. Anything Gauthier does from this point forward is figurative icing on the cake, because let’s face it: Cole was practically everything the Habs needed.
Cole, a 6’2 205 lbs power forward, is getting up there in age, 32, but after last year’s successful season (26-26-52-pts-82 games), doesn’t seem to be slowing down much. The Habs signed him to a 4-year contract that will take him to age 36, but it’s worth it when you factor in the intangibles he brings to the table. Though he may not be as physical a presence as he once was, Cole is not a player that is easily pushed around, a quality that the Habs clearly had the need for.
The team can defend the notion that they are not a small team all they want (their overall weight and height averages are on par with the rest of the league) but what’s important is the size of their top 6. Players like Gionta, Cammalieri, Plekanec and Gomez require strong, physical linemates to create space for them. Unfortunately, just being big is not quite good enough, as we saw with last year’s Travis Moen project.
When Moen lined up on numerous occasions with either the Plekanec or Gomez line, it quickly became clear that it’s hard to create space for your linemates if the defence doesn’t care that you’re on the ice. Moen’s inability to put the puck in the net (along with fellow Martin pet projects such as Tom Pyatt, Maxime Lapierre, Lars Eller and Benoit Pouliot) made it very hard for our small talented forwards to distinguish themselves offensively.
The addition of Cole, a proven 25-30 goal scorer, thus makes the team exponentially better. For not only did Gauthier acquire a top 6 forward, he acquired a top 6 forward that will make every player in the top 6 more dangerous, something I’d argue would not have been the case if they had signed Ville Leino instead, a potentially more skilled player, but not nearly as big and physical as Cole.
Budaj, Willsie, Blunden, and Trotter
Compared to Cole, these signings were not exactly what you would call exciting. Peter Budaj is a bit of a weird one, simply because I don’t think he’s that great. That said, maybe (hopefully) the Habs did their homework on this one and discovered that he plays better in a back-up role than as a starter. Budaj has played as a clear backup only once in his career, in the 09-10 season behind Craig Anderson, and his numbers in 15 games were decent (5-5-2, 2.64, .917).
It’s hard to really judge his performance last year since the entire Avalanche team mailed it in, in the last few months. I’ll hesitantly say that this is, for now, a decent signing. I think Budaj is an upgrade on Auld from last year, but unlike Auld, who’s been a backup for many years, Budaj will have to prove that he’s capable of withstanding the mental rigors of sometimes going 10-15 games between starts.
I think he’ll be fine, but just would have assumed that Gauthier would acquire a goalie more akin to being a backup, someone like Johan Hedberg, for instance.
Willsie, Blunden, and Trotter are basically depth/AHL moves. Willsie and Trotter were brought in to replace the offence lost with Dustin Boyd and Nigel Dawes leaving for the KHL. Blunden will probably start the year in the AHL as well, but may also have very real chances of playing many games with the big club.
Blunden is a big boy (6’3 207), and could be useful on the 4th line to add some physicality and grit. He also appears to have more potential scoring punch than say Tom Pyatt and Ryan White, who just yesterday signed a one-year, one-way deal with the club.
Though most of the team is pretty much set in stone, there will be some solid competition in training camp for the 6-7 D-man spot, along with bottom-6 duties.
On offense, look for Ryan White, David Desharnais, Mike Blunden, Matthieu Darche, Travis Moen, Lars Eller and most probably another soon-to-be signed forward (big winger or center) to fight it out for potential ice-time.
You could even throw Andrei Kostitsyn and Max Pacioretty into that mix, seeing as though there are no guarantees that either will be in the top 6 (Though you’d assume Pacioretty has the inside track on that spot).
On defense it will be particularly dicey for the bottom spots in the rotation. Yannick Weber seemed to improve leaps and bounds last year, but he’ll be fighting for ice with newly signed draft pick Alexei Yemelin (who goes back to the KHL if he doesn’t stick) and veteran Yaroslav Spacek, who, though clearly on the down-slope of his career, will probably not be riding the pine with a veteran’s coach like Jacques Martin at the helm.
Even with this potential logjam shaking up, don’t be surprised to see Gauthier go out and acquire another d-man just to be on the safe side, something along the lines of an Alexandre Picard (low-cost, low reward type).
I’ll do another Habs post the second we get another key player (yes, we could be waiting a while…).
Peace out
Thursday, July 7, 2011
Trades!
Or maybe more precisely in this case, theft! Because what else could you call the highway robbery that took place on July 1st, when The Washington Capitals traded goalie Semyon Varlamov to the Colorado Avalanche for a first rounder in 2012 and either a 2012 or 2013 second rounder. On the surface it seems like a somewhat fair deal.
Varlamov is after all an-ex 1st rounder himself, going 23rd overall in 2006, and has been nothing if not consistently good thus far in his career, with a record of 30-13-12, a G.A.A of 2.39 and SV% of .917. No the problem here is not that I think Varlamov isn't a promising young talent. The problem is that Colorado traded a 1st rounder to get him, a 1st round pick that should translate into at least a top 10 pick next year. Because let's face facts: Colorado hasn't gotten a whole lot better so far this off-season, and this coming off a year where they had the second-worst record in the entire NHL.
Colorado will argue that Varlamov will put them in the winning column on a more consistent basis. To that i say: is he at this point in his career much better than last year's Avalanche starter, Craig Anderson? Anderson you'll remember is only a year removed from posting a career year, playing 71 games and recording 38 wins.
They obviously see something in Varlamov, something worth giving up a potential lottery pick for. I don't see it, and few hockey minds out there do either. But what makes this trade so absurd is that the most coveted goalie on the free agent market, Tomas Vokoun, was available before this trade went down. Sure Vokoun is getting old (he just turned 35), but he's shown no sign of slowing down, his G.A.A. and SV% not wavering from 2.5 and .920 over the last 5 years (and that on a piss-poor team). And the Avalanche could have gotten him without giving away anything!
When Free Agency began, Colorado were among maybe 2-3 teams max in the league that needed a goalie. With a ton of money at their disposal (and a need to get to the cap floor) Vokoun and Colorado seemed like an obvious match. But, no. That would have apparently been too easy for their brain dead GM. Instead they went out of their way to trade for a goalie who still hasn't come close to playing a full NHL season, and traded away what should be huge picks next year. Adding injury to insult, Washington turned around and signed Vokoun to a one year deal for, get this, 1.5 million$!!! Literal chump change considering his pedigree and numbers over the years.
This could literally turn out to be one of the worst deals since Brian Burke signed Phil Kessel to an offer sheet, sacrificing two first rounders in the process. Colorado is nowhere near good enough to be anything better than a middling team next year at best, and at worst a basement dweller. Washington will be licking their chops all year long, salivating at the thought of drafting maybe 3rd, 2nd, or even... yes its very possible the Avs will finish dead last...
So who won this trade? WASHINGTON. It's not even close...
Another key trade that went down was between the Nashville Predators and the Toronto Maple Leafs, and again, I'm a little blown away by what went down. On the surface the trade looks bad, and when you dig a little deeper, it still looks like a steal. Here's the tale of the tape: Nashville sent Matthew Lombardi and Cody Franson to the Leafs for Brett Lebda and Robert Slaney and a conditional draft choice. It looks bad at first glance. Clearly Nashville gave up the two best players in the deal. So why did they do it?
Lombardi is coming off a year where he basically didn't play due to post-concussion syndrome, and his career going forward is in doubt. Nashville desperately wanted to get out from under a contract where they would have to pay him 7 million over the next 2 years, and in order to have someone take on this contract, they had to add Franson to the deal to sweeten the pot. This actually makes perfect sense. What makes no sense, to me anyway, is that Nashville were unable to get anything back besides a journeyman defenseman and a minor league player.
What happened here was one team (the Leafs) taking advantage of a desperate team (the Preds). Nashville, a small market team, needed to free up money to sign RFA superstar D-man Shea Weber this year, and make sure there was still money left over to re-sign Ryan Suter and Pekka Rinne next year. Toronto was more than willing to take on the extra salary, seeing Franson as a potential stalwart on D for years to come.
Sadly, this is one of those trades you don't want to see happen as a hockey fan, a trade that is made possible due to the relative poorness and richness of two teams. Nashville basically had to sacrifice one of their good young players because they felt that they couldn't afford not to. Toronto clearly wins the trade, and you can't really blame them from figuratively stealing candy from a baby. They too, are in desperation mode. Not financially speaking, but the pressure to get better in Toronto is palpable, felt only as much in maybe a handful of sports markets today. In the end, it's just too bad that this all happened to Nashville.
Despite their small market status, Nashville almost always fields a winning team, and just came off a very successful season where they not only made it to the playoffs, but took Stanley Cup finalist Vancouver to 6 games in the second round. Just goes to show that no matter how good you draft and manage a team, attendance numbers and TV revenues are even more important. All this begs the question: why the heck is their even a hockey team in Nashville? Gary Bettman says hi...
Varlamov is after all an-ex 1st rounder himself, going 23rd overall in 2006, and has been nothing if not consistently good thus far in his career, with a record of 30-13-12, a G.A.A of 2.39 and SV% of .917. No the problem here is not that I think Varlamov isn't a promising young talent. The problem is that Colorado traded a 1st rounder to get him, a 1st round pick that should translate into at least a top 10 pick next year. Because let's face facts: Colorado hasn't gotten a whole lot better so far this off-season, and this coming off a year where they had the second-worst record in the entire NHL.
Colorado will argue that Varlamov will put them in the winning column on a more consistent basis. To that i say: is he at this point in his career much better than last year's Avalanche starter, Craig Anderson? Anderson you'll remember is only a year removed from posting a career year, playing 71 games and recording 38 wins.
They obviously see something in Varlamov, something worth giving up a potential lottery pick for. I don't see it, and few hockey minds out there do either. But what makes this trade so absurd is that the most coveted goalie on the free agent market, Tomas Vokoun, was available before this trade went down. Sure Vokoun is getting old (he just turned 35), but he's shown no sign of slowing down, his G.A.A. and SV% not wavering from 2.5 and .920 over the last 5 years (and that on a piss-poor team). And the Avalanche could have gotten him without giving away anything!
When Free Agency began, Colorado were among maybe 2-3 teams max in the league that needed a goalie. With a ton of money at their disposal (and a need to get to the cap floor) Vokoun and Colorado seemed like an obvious match. But, no. That would have apparently been too easy for their brain dead GM. Instead they went out of their way to trade for a goalie who still hasn't come close to playing a full NHL season, and traded away what should be huge picks next year. Adding injury to insult, Washington turned around and signed Vokoun to a one year deal for, get this, 1.5 million$!!! Literal chump change considering his pedigree and numbers over the years.
This could literally turn out to be one of the worst deals since Brian Burke signed Phil Kessel to an offer sheet, sacrificing two first rounders in the process. Colorado is nowhere near good enough to be anything better than a middling team next year at best, and at worst a basement dweller. Washington will be licking their chops all year long, salivating at the thought of drafting maybe 3rd, 2nd, or even... yes its very possible the Avs will finish dead last...
So who won this trade? WASHINGTON. It's not even close...
Another key trade that went down was between the Nashville Predators and the Toronto Maple Leafs, and again, I'm a little blown away by what went down. On the surface the trade looks bad, and when you dig a little deeper, it still looks like a steal. Here's the tale of the tape: Nashville sent Matthew Lombardi and Cody Franson to the Leafs for Brett Lebda and Robert Slaney and a conditional draft choice. It looks bad at first glance. Clearly Nashville gave up the two best players in the deal. So why did they do it?
Lombardi is coming off a year where he basically didn't play due to post-concussion syndrome, and his career going forward is in doubt. Nashville desperately wanted to get out from under a contract where they would have to pay him 7 million over the next 2 years, and in order to have someone take on this contract, they had to add Franson to the deal to sweeten the pot. This actually makes perfect sense. What makes no sense, to me anyway, is that Nashville were unable to get anything back besides a journeyman defenseman and a minor league player.
What happened here was one team (the Leafs) taking advantage of a desperate team (the Preds). Nashville, a small market team, needed to free up money to sign RFA superstar D-man Shea Weber this year, and make sure there was still money left over to re-sign Ryan Suter and Pekka Rinne next year. Toronto was more than willing to take on the extra salary, seeing Franson as a potential stalwart on D for years to come.
Sadly, this is one of those trades you don't want to see happen as a hockey fan, a trade that is made possible due to the relative poorness and richness of two teams. Nashville basically had to sacrifice one of their good young players because they felt that they couldn't afford not to. Toronto clearly wins the trade, and you can't really blame them from figuratively stealing candy from a baby. They too, are in desperation mode. Not financially speaking, but the pressure to get better in Toronto is palpable, felt only as much in maybe a handful of sports markets today. In the end, it's just too bad that this all happened to Nashville.
Despite their small market status, Nashville almost always fields a winning team, and just came off a very successful season where they not only made it to the playoffs, but took Stanley Cup finalist Vancouver to 6 games in the second round. Just goes to show that no matter how good you draft and manage a team, attendance numbers and TV revenues are even more important. All this begs the question: why the heck is their even a hockey team in Nashville? Gary Bettman says hi...
Tuesday, July 5, 2011
Free Agency 2011: Trades and Signings
Free agency is a real shit show. Everyday there's a new signing or trade, so there is no good day to really start analyzing what is transpiring. So what I'll do is everyone once in awhile update you on the happenings around the league. I thought today would be as good a day as any, seeing as though a rather colossal trade went down last night: Dany Heatley of the Sharks for Martin Havlat of Wild.
Instant analysis: Both guys have their issues, which is no surprise when big name players are traded. Heatley is allergic to big games, aka The Playoffs. Why does a two-time 50 goal scorer always seem to disappear in the playoffs? After watching Heatley pot a measly 5 goals in 32 games, Sharks GM Doug Murray was clearly tired of trying to figure it out.
Havlat's problems are different. Playoff scoring? Well for starters, you have to participate in the playoffs to have a problem like that. Havlat has only made it to the big dance once in the last 5 years. The last time he did play though, in 08-09 with the Blackhawks, he performed well enough, recording 15 points in 16 games. Where Havlat errs is in his effort level from game to game. Known league wide for being a dominant one-on-one player, you'd think his stats would reflect his talent-level, but it rarely does. It's not that he's not productive: his .84 ppg is nothing to scoff at. He's just always a player that has left you wanting more, which is probably why he'll be on a 3rd team in 6 years.
So who wins the trade? I'd say both teams win. Heatley has shown me that he plays well when there's little to no pressure, and Minnesota, though packed each and every night, is far less a pressure cooker than San Jose, where finishing amongst the leaders in the regular season is clearly not good enough for their fans. Minnesota is dying to just play a playoff series, and getting a proven top end scorer is a smart move by the Wild.
As far as San Jose is concerned, I think getting rid of Heatley and his big contract is a good start, as they will save 2.5M a year with this deal. With the addition of Havlat, they got an asset they needed, speed, and lost an asset they maybe had enough of, goal scoring. Havlat is a better match with speedier centers like Couture or Pavelski, who Heatley had a hard time clicking with. In a sense, Heatley's fate was sealed when he failed to fit with Thornton, the ideal, east/west and cerebral center for Heatley.
For GM Doug Wilson, this trade is probably secondary to the one he made a week earlier with the same Wild. Wilson sent Devin Setoguchi, 2010 1st rounder Charlie Coyle and a 2011 1st rounder for defenseman Brent Burns. Though it may appear to be a large bounty to pay, Burns was truly the missing piece in San Jose's playoff run last year, a big bruising d-man who's also an offensive threat.
This is the kind of trade I've been expecting for a long time from the Sharks, a team that has always had a Stanley Cup contending offense, but never the proper balance defensively. Brent Burns is basically a younger version of Rob Blake, and there's no reason not to believe that Burns' presence will pay dividends in the playoffs this coming year.
Will getting Burns and Havlat be enough to put them over the top? Hard to say. I'm still not crazy about Niemi in nets, despite his inspired play last year, and Joe Thornton still doesn't scream "leader" to me. Definitely like the moves the Sharks made, but not calling them the champs just yet.
Tomorrow i'll talk about another big trade, this time between the Avs and Caps. Don't worry, this time i'll have a clear winner and loser for y'all...
Instant analysis: Both guys have their issues, which is no surprise when big name players are traded. Heatley is allergic to big games, aka The Playoffs. Why does a two-time 50 goal scorer always seem to disappear in the playoffs? After watching Heatley pot a measly 5 goals in 32 games, Sharks GM Doug Murray was clearly tired of trying to figure it out.
Havlat's problems are different. Playoff scoring? Well for starters, you have to participate in the playoffs to have a problem like that. Havlat has only made it to the big dance once in the last 5 years. The last time he did play though, in 08-09 with the Blackhawks, he performed well enough, recording 15 points in 16 games. Where Havlat errs is in his effort level from game to game. Known league wide for being a dominant one-on-one player, you'd think his stats would reflect his talent-level, but it rarely does. It's not that he's not productive: his .84 ppg is nothing to scoff at. He's just always a player that has left you wanting more, which is probably why he'll be on a 3rd team in 6 years.
So who wins the trade? I'd say both teams win. Heatley has shown me that he plays well when there's little to no pressure, and Minnesota, though packed each and every night, is far less a pressure cooker than San Jose, where finishing amongst the leaders in the regular season is clearly not good enough for their fans. Minnesota is dying to just play a playoff series, and getting a proven top end scorer is a smart move by the Wild.
As far as San Jose is concerned, I think getting rid of Heatley and his big contract is a good start, as they will save 2.5M a year with this deal. With the addition of Havlat, they got an asset they needed, speed, and lost an asset they maybe had enough of, goal scoring. Havlat is a better match with speedier centers like Couture or Pavelski, who Heatley had a hard time clicking with. In a sense, Heatley's fate was sealed when he failed to fit with Thornton, the ideal, east/west and cerebral center for Heatley.
For GM Doug Wilson, this trade is probably secondary to the one he made a week earlier with the same Wild. Wilson sent Devin Setoguchi, 2010 1st rounder Charlie Coyle and a 2011 1st rounder for defenseman Brent Burns. Though it may appear to be a large bounty to pay, Burns was truly the missing piece in San Jose's playoff run last year, a big bruising d-man who's also an offensive threat.
This is the kind of trade I've been expecting for a long time from the Sharks, a team that has always had a Stanley Cup contending offense, but never the proper balance defensively. Brent Burns is basically a younger version of Rob Blake, and there's no reason not to believe that Burns' presence will pay dividends in the playoffs this coming year.
Will getting Burns and Havlat be enough to put them over the top? Hard to say. I'm still not crazy about Niemi in nets, despite his inspired play last year, and Joe Thornton still doesn't scream "leader" to me. Definitely like the moves the Sharks made, but not calling them the champs just yet.
Tomorrow i'll talk about another big trade, this time between the Avs and Caps. Don't worry, this time i'll have a clear winner and loser for y'all...
Thursday, June 30, 2011
Habs Draft Recap
Well we knew we weren't going to get a player that was going to play anytime soon. In fact, almost every team save 3 or 4 were going to land such a player, so the goal in the first round was to pick someone that was loaded with potential, and one that played the brand of hockey that fit the Canadiens mold. In Nathan Beaulieu, the Habs snagged such a player, and maybe got a little lucky in the process.
Similar to Louis Leblanc two years ago, Beaulieu was ranked by many in and around the top 10-12 picks, and Gauthier was more than happy to select the big, slick, offensive defenseman. Compared to players such as PK Subban, Keith Yandle and Mike Green, you could probably guess why. And with a name like Beaulieu, he'll probably be getting even more hype over the next couple of years, despite the fact that he doesn't actually speak much French. What he does do is play a savvy, up tempo styled game, sees the ice remarkably well, and has improved in his own end every year in the Q. His first big test on the world stage will probably come this fall in the World Junior tourney. It will be a first glimpse for most Habs fans to see how he measures up against the rest of the top picks in this and last year's draft. Its still fairly difficult at the moment to really say how good this pick is, but its hard not to like it from what I've heard and read.
As for the rest of Canadiens' picks, well it's pretty much a crap shoot when you draft from the 4th round on, but I'll try my best to analyze them as a whole. What i took out of the Pierre Gauthier interview was that each selection feels a bit like a homerun type pick. They will all take a while to develop (3-4 years) but there may be a gem or two among them.
Their selection of defenseman Magnus Nygren from Sweden really has that feel. An overager (21 years old), He was a relative unknown commodity up until this past year when he was called up by Fajerstad of the Swedish Elite league. His stellar play (especially from an offensive standpoint) caught the eye of Canadiens euro scout Crister Rockstrom (ex Rangers scout), and after finishing the playoffs with the second highest point total amongst D-man, he got Timmins on board as well. After recently signing Rafael Diaz form the Swiss league and having prior success drafting then overage prospect Mark Streit, we shouln't be too surprised with this pick, nor should we be surprised if it works out well for the Habs.
Say what you will about Timmins' draft success, one thing is certain; he has a knack for finding good mid to late round picks in recent years. Names like Halak, Streit, D'agostini, Kostitsyn, Ryder quickly come to mind, all drafted after the 6th round.
The most intriguing pick by Timmins at this point is Daniel Pribyl of the Czech Republic, a tall lanky center (6'3 190) that could be a steal if he fills out and continues to improve. At last year's World Juniors, Pribyl posted an impressive 7 points (3g, 4a) in 8 games. His development may have taken a step sideways however, as he was not selected by a CHL team in the import draft. He'll continue to play in the Czech Elite league, where he'll most probably receive much less time than he would have otherwise.
Other draftees were Josiah Didier, An American d-man who fits Gauthier's profile of a rapid climber in the draft; Quebecois Olivier Archambault, who was the 1st pick overall in QMJHL draft two years ago; Darren Dietz from the Saskatoon Blades, a rugged D-man who impressively climbed the depth chart on a very deep squad; and Colin Sullivan, a smooth skating d-man that has been on Timmins' radar for a while as a potential late round steal.
Similar to Louis Leblanc two years ago, Beaulieu was ranked by many in and around the top 10-12 picks, and Gauthier was more than happy to select the big, slick, offensive defenseman. Compared to players such as PK Subban, Keith Yandle and Mike Green, you could probably guess why. And with a name like Beaulieu, he'll probably be getting even more hype over the next couple of years, despite the fact that he doesn't actually speak much French. What he does do is play a savvy, up tempo styled game, sees the ice remarkably well, and has improved in his own end every year in the Q. His first big test on the world stage will probably come this fall in the World Junior tourney. It will be a first glimpse for most Habs fans to see how he measures up against the rest of the top picks in this and last year's draft. Its still fairly difficult at the moment to really say how good this pick is, but its hard not to like it from what I've heard and read.
As for the rest of Canadiens' picks, well it's pretty much a crap shoot when you draft from the 4th round on, but I'll try my best to analyze them as a whole. What i took out of the Pierre Gauthier interview was that each selection feels a bit like a homerun type pick. They will all take a while to develop (3-4 years) but there may be a gem or two among them.
Their selection of defenseman Magnus Nygren from Sweden really has that feel. An overager (21 years old), He was a relative unknown commodity up until this past year when he was called up by Fajerstad of the Swedish Elite league. His stellar play (especially from an offensive standpoint) caught the eye of Canadiens euro scout Crister Rockstrom (ex Rangers scout), and after finishing the playoffs with the second highest point total amongst D-man, he got Timmins on board as well. After recently signing Rafael Diaz form the Swiss league and having prior success drafting then overage prospect Mark Streit, we shouln't be too surprised with this pick, nor should we be surprised if it works out well for the Habs.
Say what you will about Timmins' draft success, one thing is certain; he has a knack for finding good mid to late round picks in recent years. Names like Halak, Streit, D'agostini, Kostitsyn, Ryder quickly come to mind, all drafted after the 6th round.
The most intriguing pick by Timmins at this point is Daniel Pribyl of the Czech Republic, a tall lanky center (6'3 190) that could be a steal if he fills out and continues to improve. At last year's World Juniors, Pribyl posted an impressive 7 points (3g, 4a) in 8 games. His development may have taken a step sideways however, as he was not selected by a CHL team in the import draft. He'll continue to play in the Czech Elite league, where he'll most probably receive much less time than he would have otherwise.
Other draftees were Josiah Didier, An American d-man who fits Gauthier's profile of a rapid climber in the draft; Quebecois Olivier Archambault, who was the 1st pick overall in QMJHL draft two years ago; Darren Dietz from the Saskatoon Blades, a rugged D-man who impressively climbed the depth chart on a very deep squad; and Colin Sullivan, a smooth skating d-man that has been on Timmins' radar for a while as a potential late round steal.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)