Jump to content
The Official Site of the Montréal Canadiens
Canadiens de Montreal


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by BeanCountingHab

  1. Hopefully 21,000 people chanting his name scored a couple of points in our favour as well
  2. This is going to seem nit-picky but I think maybe it's justified given the topic we're discussing. Where is age 39 coming from? I'm going to write this out laregely for my own benefit as well. His birthday is in January, so if we offer him a 7 year contract we're looking at: Year 1 - He's 30 for half the season, 31 for the second half Year 2 - He's 31 for half the season, 32 for the second half Year 3 - He's 32 for half the season, 33 for the second half Year 4 - He's 33 for half the season, 34 for the second half Year 5 - He's 34 for half the season, 35 for the second half Year 6 - He's 35 for half the season, 36 for the second half Year 7 - He's 36 for half the season, 37 for the second half So if we offer him 7 years, at worst we're getting half of the last season where he's 37. There's risk in any long term contract that pushes a player past 35 but a contract that ends a few months after a guy turns 37 doesn't scare as much, especially in today's NHL for this type of player. I think it's becoming less the exception and more the norm for these types of skilled offensive players to keep playing at a pretty high level into their mid/late 30s. The 7 years above would actually take him to a very similar age that the Erik Cole contract does, and most of us were willing to accept the risk despite the fact Cole had a ton of red flags in terms of injuries and production inconsistencies. 8 years starts to scare me more, but even then it's only a few months of a 38 year old player.
  3. I don't really disagree much with your assessment of Vanek, I think I'm more questioning what that assessment is worth contract-wise. Yes, the last 5 years he's been a 30 goal / 68 point guy. But even that isn't something that hits the market very often. I understand the hesitation to call him a 40 goal guy when he's only done it twice, but then there's so few out there who can really make the claim of being a perenial 40+ goal scorer. Ovechkin and Stamkos currently, maybe Kessel, Iginla until very recently (though he still looks good to push 30). Crosby's only done it once. Perry's only done it once. Tavares has yet to score 40. So basically, I think if what we're signing is basically a 30 goal 70 point guy, it might still be worth the risk depending on what the final numbers looked like.
  4. Some seem pretty certain he's already declining, but I don't know. I look at Vanek's production to date and I'm just seeing the natural ebs and flows of a guy who has played with a variety of linemates on varying levels of quality teams.
  5. It's hard to ever love a contract that pays someone $7M into their late 30s. In Vanek's case, I'd lean towards making it happen if it's possible though. He's about as proven a goal scorer as you'll find. In his 8 seasons in this league he's scored at least 25 goals in every season except last year (but I think 20 goals in 38 games makes it safe to say the streak would have been kept intact). He's never played less than 70 games (obviously again last year bein the exception). With him and Patches in the line-up you'd have a pair of guys who are going to average around 30+ goals every year for probably the next 5-6 years. And that's only to help as Galchenyuk keeps developping. Having said all of this, he does seem really set on making it to July 1st. If he's dead set on that and we really feel he wants Minny, as I've said before I would be seeing about swapping rights with Chuck Fletcher to talk to Moulson.
  6. I didn't get to see much of the second half of the game but the first period was one of the best periods we've played all year. Lots of controlled zone entries, aggression in the neutral zone etc.
  7. No practice and and he'd been awake forever so he could fly in, I really wasn't expecting much of anything.
  8. Ya, I usually use extra skater. Warning: prepare to be depressed when you look up our team. We're 26th in the league in both Corsi and Fenwick.
  9. For CHL import players I believe it has something to do with when they came to the CHL/how many years they played there. I can't remember though.
  10. I don't disagree with anything specific your saying, and I agree you could watch a game where one team takes bad shots from the outside while the other team has there way with them and cycles in the zone all day. Generally though, shots are used as a metric for possession in the form of something like Fenwick because you have to have the puck to attempt a shot. If you're getting off a low quality shot and the other team takes it back right away then goes and cycles the puck forever in your end as in the scenario described above, it's going to be tough to wrack up too many total shots. Now I mentioned Fenwick because it records all shots directed towards the net that make it through (including those that miss or hit a post). I think you'd agree a narrow miss of the net (or especially a post) can be just as good or better of a chance than a shot on net, especially if it's an easy shot that hits the goalie square. It's not a perfect/infallible way of measuring possession but over a large sample size it's pretty decent. It's been shown to be a pretty good predictor of future success. If you look at the best Fenwick teams halfway through the season, the best ones usually make the playoffs. It's why some of the advanced stats guys were able to predict LA would be such a force the year they won the cup and that Minnesota would have their collapse. Honestly, the best stat would probably be scoring chances for/against, but it's such a subjective stat. A guy at Eyes on the Prize counts them every game and basically counts any shot from a certain area in front of the net (kind of a baseball diamond shape sprouting out from the net). It's not perfect but at least it's a methodology that can be followed consistently without bias.
  11. I do care if we're giving up 35 shots versus 20 because it usually means we have the puck less than the other team and aren't putting ourselves in position to score more than them. Now, I can watch a specific game (I'll use your example of the NY game) and not let it worry me, perhaps for the same reasons you noted (ie: alot of shots to the outside, not a lot of scoring chances, and maybe there were more shots coming once we had our two goal lead). A big factor with stats is sample size. One game, no problelm, there could be certain circumstances that explain why it's deceiving. Over the course of a season though, if we're getting outshot 35-20 on average, it's probably worth being concerned. Anyway, stats work best when they're used together with other stats to get a clearer picture.
  12. I feel like that opens a can of worms since your skate obviously leaves the ice as you take strides. Alternative idea: any puck off the skate is legal outside the blue paint, illegal inside the blue paint. Still accomplishes the safety thing.
  13. I really nee to clarify the kicking rule. It's one of the most subjective rules in there that wouldn't be too hard to make black and white. Watch this, add one line: 'A kicking motion will be defined as the entire skate leaving the ice when contact is made with the puck'. The whole point of this rule was to ensure player/goalie safety. If part of your skate is touching the ice you're not going to cut anybody.
  14. +1. And as important as the eye test is (and it is important), it's impossible not to have built in biases. As closely as you watch a game, you're not going to notice every play every player makes, and even you do, only a handful are going to stick out and be retained. You may only remember a couple of bad plays or vice versa. There's also the fact that some players just don't look as good even when doing the same good things as other players.
  15. Just to give an example of the subjective nature of a giveaway and how it can be misleading. The NHL defines a giveaway as follows: Giveaway - A giveaway is when a player's own actions result in a loss of possession to the opposing team. Now, in context of Subban. One of the more useful plays he routinely makes is to simply flick the puck out of the zone. It's basically a crafty alternative to icing the puck when we're under a ton of pressure. He flips it up over the defenseman and it will land and rest somewhere, usually between the red line and oponents blue line. It let's us get a much needed line change and set up while the other team retrieves the puck. It's a simple yet great/underused defensive play that PK has in his tool box. Yet when you think about what he's doing, would it not fit the above definition of a giveaway?
  16. It's also a reflection of Montreal stats guys loving to record giveaways. We always have a few defensemen near the top of the league in giveaways, regardless of personnel, system, coaches etc.
  17. Ya it goes up $25K every year to get to $750K by the end of the CBA. So I think $550K next year, $575K the year after.
  18. He's pretty much making the minimum.
  19. His contract and MB's comments make me believe he'll be a 7-8 guy who spends most of his time in the pressbox. You need one or two guys like this; a veteran making near league minimum who will keep practicing and sit in the pressbox without complaining, who can give you a few games when injuries pile up if you need him to.
  20. True, although he did OK on NHL sized ice in the NHL this year
  21. Not that Drewskie really has any sort of leverage, but most guys like him are more readily willing to accept less (ie: at or around league minimum) if it's a one way contract, because of the security. It certainly doesn't bother me whether he makes $600K vs $100K while he's in the minors.
  22. After their exit against Chicago, it's pretty clear to me he was the missing ingredient to LA's prior year success.
  23. Update: Annual cap hit of $637,500.
  24. At least we can stop worrying about our defense core . I have to think it's a two-way contract, or a one way at around league minimum so we can have him play in Hamilton and/or leave in in the pressbox all year without hesitation.
  • Create New...