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

Galchenyuk traded for Domi


BigTed3
 Share

Recommended Posts

18 hours ago, CaptWelly said:

I don't like the trade. That said -31 no matter how many goals you score if the other team scores more while you're on the ice you will lose.

Galchenyuk isn't good defensively but him being -31 doesn't really mean anything, nor is it a very accurate picture of his net impact in goal differential. At 5v5 Galchenyuk was -14, not good but not exactly surprising or particularly concerning when you consider how bad the Habs goaltending was this year, and the remaining -17 is made up of garbage like empty net and shorthanded goals that nobody thinks about when they criticize a guy for being a bad two way player. 


Players like Galchenyuk are really hurt by the garbage in +/- and how it's calculated. Galchenyuk plays on the PP and not on the PK, that means his special teams minutes will exclusively give him extra minuses. Over the course of a full season your team is simply just going to give up a few shorties and Galchenyuk would be on the ice for a lot of those simply because he's always on the PP. Same with late game EN goals, Galchenyuk is always going to be on the ice when the Habs pull the goalie down a goal, and he's going to get a bunch of meaningless minuses simply for being on the ice for an EN goal against.  In contrast, guys that play on the PK are only going to get a few free pluses from the handful of shorthanded goals they're on the ice for, and they'll get a bunch of meaningless pluses just from being on the ice when their team scores an EN goal. 


Good example is Alzner-Petry as the team's top D pair. Alzner finished -7, and Petry finished -30. Does that paint an accurate picture of their net impact to the team? Of course not. All it tells us is the Habs suck this year, Petry was the main defender on the PP, and would be one of the guys always used in a 6 on 5 situation to score a goal. In contrast, Alzner would never be on the PP, and his PK time doesn't give any minuses. Same with EN situations, he will never be on the ice when the Habs pull their own goalie to score late, but he'll be out defending against an empty net and get a bunch of pluses for EN goals that he has little to do with. This is why the worst +/- in the league is usually always a pretty solid defenseman on a bad team that gets used on the PP and in 6v5 situations.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, ramcharger440 said:

i wonder if the plan is to pick at #3 to get that good scoring winder to replace chucky and make some other trade for a center? it is pretty messy to go about it this way no real sense of direction it seem like he is just reacting instead of following a plan. scary!

 

After everything we've witnessed in the past two years, I'm genuinely convinced that there simply is no plan. The dude has some weird notion on how a hockey team should look like and is essentially throwing paint at the wall at this point. I'm sure we'll all have a lot more to talk about during the offseason, Marc is just getting started.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, ramcharger440 said:

i wonder if the plan is to pick at #3 to get that good scoring winder to replace chucky and make some other trade for a center? it is pretty messy to go about it this way no real sense of direction it seem like he is just reacting instead of following a plan. scary!

 

 

12 minutes ago, ChiLla said:

After everything we've witnessed in the past two years, I'm genuinely convinced that there simply is no plan. The dude has some weird notion on how a hockey team should look like and is essentially throwing paint at the wall at this point. I'm sure we'll all have a lot more to talk about during the offseason, Marc is just getting started.

This. 

To me, the Subban trade - and what didnt happen after that - made it crystal clear.    

Had MB, for example, traded Subban for multiple vets like Weber + Neal and/or FIsher  - guys who were still useful but getting close to their expiry date - and gone "all in" then i get the move.  But to get older, downgrade - and most importantly - not do anything else to address our big holes at centre and left d (at that time DD was our #1 and 37 year old Markov was our #1LD) shows there was no plan. 

Its just tinker, tinker, tinker.
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Noob616 said:

Galchenyuk isn't good defensively but him being -31 doesn't really mean anything, nor is it a very accurate picture of his net impact in goal differential. At 5v5 Galchenyuk was -14, not good but not exactly surprising or particularly concerning when you consider how bad the Habs goaltending was this year, and the remaining -17 is made up of garbage like empty net and shorthanded goals that nobody thinks about when they criticize a guy for being a bad two way player. 


Players like Galchenyuk are really hurt by the garbage in +/- and how it's calculated. Galchenyuk plays on the PP and not on the PK, that means his special teams minutes will exclusively give him extra minuses. Over the course of a full season your team is simply just going to give up a few shorties and Galchenyuk would be on the ice for a lot of those simply because he's always on the PP. Same with late game EN goals, Galchenyuk is always going to be on the ice when the Habs pull the goalie down a goal, and he's going to get a bunch of meaningless minuses simply for being on the ice for an EN goal against.  In contrast, guys that play on the PK are only going to get a few free pluses from the handful of shorthanded goals they're on the ice for, and they'll get a bunch of meaningless pluses just from being on the ice when their team scores an EN goal. 


Good example is Alzner-Petry as the team's top D pair. Alzner finished -7, and Petry finished -30. Does that paint an accurate picture of their net impact to the team? Of course not. All it tells us is the Habs suck this year, Petry was the main defender on the PP, and would be one of the guys always used in a 6 on 5 situation to score a goal. In contrast, Alzner would never be on the PP, and his PK time doesn't give any minuses. Same with EN situations, he will never be on the ice when the Habs pull their own goalie to score late, but he'll be out defending against an empty net and get a bunch of pluses for EN goals that he has little to do with. This is why the worst +/- in the league is usually always a pretty solid defenseman on a bad team that gets used on the PP and in 6v5 situations.

+/- Is only calculated 5 on 5 it doesn't take special teams into account.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, CaptWelly said:

+/- Is only calculated 5 on 5 it doesn't take special teams into account.

it does take short handed goals for and against into account

But honestly I hate this trade and MB as much as anyone else... but I don't agree with all this love for Chucky. I wanted to trade him. I'll miss Sergachev a hell of a lot more than I'll miss him. I highly doubt that he will excel in Arizona. There's a chance but I give it about 5% that he becomes a star (about the same as Domi). I still don't like the trade because it didn't address our needs at all and made it worse, but I don't get why we have suddenly deify Chucky. He can't play defense and was inconsistent and is unlikely to make major strides. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, habsisme said:

it does take short handed goals for and against into account

But honestly I hate this trade and MB as much as anyone else... but I don't agree with all this love for Chucky. I wanted to trade him. I'll miss Sergachev a hell of a lot more than I'll miss him. I highly doubt that he will excel in Arizona. There's a chance but I give it about 5% that he becomes a star (about the same as Domi). I still don't like the trade because it didn't address our needs at all and made it worse, but I don't get why we have suddenly deify Chucky. He can't play defense and was inconsistent and is unlikely to make major strides. 

I always liked the potential chucky showed but im ok with moving him after 6 years. It was pretty clear he was never going to break out on this roster, on this team.

What annoys me is the return we got.  I understand that some insiders have suggested this is the best we could get because his substance abuse was well known throughout the league and MB and Co had continually downplayed him, but that doesnt change the fact that he's been out of our plans for years and we continued to devalue him. 

So Im ok with moving on from Chucky. I am not ok with the return we got.  I would have rather flipped him for 5th overall or a highly touted prospect to be honest. At least then we could get a centre or PMD. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, habsisme said:

it does take short handed goals for and against into account

But honestly I hate this trade and MB as much as anyone else... but I don't agree with all this love for Chucky. I wanted to trade him. I'll miss Sergachev a hell of a lot more than I'll miss him. I highly doubt that he will excel in Arizona. There's a chance but I give it about 5% that he becomes a star (about the same as Domi). I still don't like the trade because it didn't address our needs at all and made it worse, but I don't get why we have suddenly deify Chucky. He can't play defense and was inconsistent and is unlikely to make major strides. 

I don't like the trade basically for the same reasons. It didn't get us what we needed and I think Chucky has more talent and a higher ceiling. That said if Domi is better defensively it could end up even. It sounds like maybe him and Gallager may have some chemistry we'll see. At this point I do hate losing a pure goal scorer and we will miss him on the PP. It just depends what else happens. I do think Chucky will do good with a fresh start. How great I'm not sure.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, CaptWelly said:

I don't like the trade basically for the same reasons. It didn't get us what we needed and I think Chucky has more talent and a higher ceiling. That said if Domi is better defensively it could end up even. It sounds like maybe him and Gallager may have some chemistry we'll see. At this point I do hate losing a pure goal scorer and we will miss him on the PP. It just depends what else happens. I do think Chucky will do good with a fresh start. How great I'm not sure.

2 summers ago it probably would have been seen as a fair trade.  Since then both guys have shown regression so its tough.  They have the same PPG but on a goal-starved team like ours  AG's higher goal output seems like a strange thing to get rid of. With the bigger sample size and the fact that some GMs view him as a centre, I think AG's value should be a lot higher but MB has done irreparable damage to that. 

I do think Domi will do well here and i do think people will like him. It just seems foolhardy to trade the biggest trade chip we have (or, actually, the biggest trade chip we are likely to actually move) for a guy that plays a position we are insanely deep at.  C, LD - heck even RW would have been better. But another LW?  Its pretty ludicrous.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know some are curious why Chucky didn't get a shot at centre for the last 20 games at the end of the year but if he would have struggled again that would have been an even bigger problem and after 6 years I don't think we owed him any favours other than the nice contract he got. I think Gally may struggle in the west especially if he is going head to head with some of the big centres in LA, SJ, WPG and Col. 

I am looking forward to having a team with Weber and Price in the line-up for a full season and only time will  tell how this works. At first I  thought we took too much risk and should have got at least a 2nd-4th round pick, but the more time goes by I think the Yotes are also assuming some risk, and this may turn out costly for them as they are in need of offense (they were worse than us in GF last year and Gally's defensive zone coverage may cost them some GA's where the y were only slightly bettter than us)  and I think Galchenyuk was surrounded by better forwards than they currently have in Arizona. Keller may find his second year in the league is a little tougher as teams key on him a little more. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To comment on some of the posts above, I think a large part of the hatred towards Bergevin on this trade is 1. fans don't trust his judgment and 2. he and the team devalued Galchenyuk prior to trading him. As with Subban and others, Bergevin, Therrien, and/or Julien spent much of the past few years ripping into Galchenyuk about his lack of work ethic or his inability to play defence or his lack of hockey IQ to be able to play center or so on. Not one person in Habs management focused on his offensive output or the fact he was really dangerous when he got moved to the top of the right circle on the PP and how that simple move made the PP 10x better than it was with Pacioretty in that role. No one talked about his skill with the puck or the fact he had great numbers playing with Gallagher. Whenever he had a good game it was "Chucky did well tonight, he's making some of the improvements we asked of him, but he's got a long way to go." Eerily similar to how the team refused to admit PK did anything well.

As I and others have mentioned, when you have a completely lost season, a smart team would be using it to evaluate young talent and give those players a chance to play bigger roles. You'd be using it to evaluate potential line combinations and try guys at things you might have been nervous to do otherwise. Sure, Chucky's defensive game needed work, but the potential offensive upside to his playing center on a team with no top 6 centers and no goal scoring coming from anywhere was more significant. The Habs could have easily put Galchenyuk at center for 30-40 games and played him with Gallagher and see how that worked. Heck, they stuck it out with Drouin at center for an entire season and he played lazy hockey some nights and he played poorly defensively some nights and he produced less well than Chucky did as a center, and yet he stayed there. We know they also stuck it out with the defensively-inept David Desharnais.

So no, I don't believe for one minute that the Habs couldn't have tried AG at center. I don't believe for one minute that they thought DLR or McCarron or some of the other guys they tried as top 9 centers were better options. I think they disliked Chucky just as they disliked Subban. I think they were scared to know if he could have success as a center because it might mean admitting they were wrong or might mean continuing to use him there. I think they didn't want the player to prove himself and have to eat it the way PK made them when Molson stepped in and told Bergevin to give him the money. Funny stuff that PK's new team seems to like him. Funny and interesting that John Chayka says Galchenyuk will get a shot at center and that they wouldn't have made the trade if they didn't think he could play there. Funny that his new coach Rick Tocchet said today that when you have talented players like Galchenyuk, you put them at center and you live with some of the mistakes because of how good they are. In Tocchet's own words, he said "look at Malkin" and stated he wasn't that great at certain things (like defence and face-offs) but that he remained a center because of how dominant he was there offensively.

The Habs are so behind the times in terms of disallowing any type of personality on the team and in terms of thinking that defence is the only thing that matters. It's a younger, faster player's game than it was when Bergevin and company played, and they simply haven't adapted their thinking. I can live with trading anyone on the team if the return is right, but the Habs if they had been smart would have played Galchenyuk at center and given him more ice time and lauded him in the media for all the things he did right and talk him up as a 30-goal 1st line 1C and then dealt him at peak value. Instead, they talk him down and trade him at one of his lowest points, after a season when he spent time on the 4th line and playing with bums and even getting sat on the PP while Shaw and Byron and a struggling Pacioretty played ahead of him. If they had dealt Galchenyuk as a 1C, maybe they fill their hole for a 1 LHD, the way Ryan Johanssen fetched Seth Jones. Maybe they get another center back in return or a top 10 draft pick. Instead, we end up getting a guy who is a lesser player and who simply doesn't score goals, the one thing the Habs need more than anything else. Hence, the big giant F for the trade grade.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, CaptWelly said:

+/- Is only calculated 5 on 5 it doesn't take special teams into account.

Yes it does. Shorthanded goals count as a plus for the team that scores them. If you are on the PP and allow a SHG you get a minus, and scoring a SHG gets you a plus. 

"A player is awarded a "plus" each time he is on the ice when his Club scores an even-strength or shorthanded goal. He receives a "minus" if he is on the ice for an even-strength or shorthanded goal scored by the opposing Club. The difference in these numbers is considered the player's "plus-minus" statistic.

http://www.nhl.com/ice/page.htm?id=26374

The empty net goal portion of it is also the more important part and why Galchenyuk and Petry had +/- ratings 25-35 below their career averages. Or why Alzner is -7 and his partner is -30.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Noob616 said:

Yes it does. Shorthanded goals count as a plus for the team that scores them. If you are on the PP and allow a SHG you get a minus, and scoring a SHG gets you a plus. 

The empty net goal portion of it is also the more important part and why Galchenyuk and Petry had +/- ratings 25-35 below their career averages. 

I've been explaining the SH and EN minuses contributing to Chucky and Petry's numbers all season long, but thank you for actually looking up the 5v5 numbers. Just further supports the notion that the +/- figures were grossly exaggerated. There are also all those times where a player just jumps on or off the ice and gets hit with or misses out on a +/- stat; sometimes guys get something when they don't deserve it and sometimes they don't get one when they were significantly involved or responsible for the goal-scoring play. It's just a bad stat.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, BigTed3 said:

I've been explaining the SH and EN minuses contributing to Chucky and Petry's numbers all season long, but thank you for actually looking up the 5v5 numbers. Just further supports the notion that the +/- figures were grossly exaggerated. There are also all those times where a player just jumps on or off the ice and gets hit with or misses out on a +/- stat; sometimes guys get something when they don't deserve it and sometimes they don't get one when they were significantly involved or responsible for the goal-scoring play. It's just a bad stat.

Yeah if the stat was just at 5v5 it would be somewhat useful over long sample sizes like multiple sizes. But with the SHG and EN goals included it's just full of so much garbage that completely ruins what the stat is ostensibly supposed to describe. When people rag on Galchenyuk or Kessel or Petry or Karlsson or whatever for being bad defensively because of +/- they aren't thinking about empty netters and shorthanded goals.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You know in all this time watching hockey that's the first time I've ever had it brought to my attention how and why empty net goals contribute so much to +/-, but it makes so much sense.  Thanks for the lesson, folks!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've never understood the reasoning that we couldn't play Galchenyuk at Centre because of his defensive liabilities.  We went out and acquired a stalwart defender at great cost and are paying a goaltender over ten million dollars.  If that doesn't allow us the ability to play a little fast and loose with an offensively minded player how does any team in the league justify it?  We were literally starved for goal scoring and Bergevin didn't just look his gift horse in the mouth, he boiled it down to glue and sold it on sale.

It was personal, it was ego driven and it was wrong.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

52 minutes ago, Litany said:

I've never understood the reasoning that we couldn't play Galchenyuk at Centre because of his defensive liabilities.  We went out and acquired a stalwart defender at great cost and are paying a goaltender over ten million dollars.  If that doesn't allow us the ability to play a little fast and loose with an offensively minded player how does any team in the league justify it?  We were literally starved for goal scoring and Bergevin didn't just look his gift horse in the mouth, he boiled it down to glue and sold it on sale.

It was personal, it was ego driven and it was wrong.

I believe Bergevin has this "old man" mentality about how a young player is supposed to conduct himself. Unfortunately, that is not the reality of the world we live in and it's not a reality of the NHL.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Litany said:

I've never understood the reasoning that we couldn't play Galchenyuk at Centre because of his defensive liabilities.  We went out and acquired a stalwart defender at great cost and are paying a goaltender over ten million dollars.  If that doesn't allow us the ability to play a little fast and loose with an offensively minded player how does any team in the league justify it?  We were literally starved for goal scoring and Bergevin didn't just look his gift horse in the mouth, he boiled it down to glue and sold it on sale.

It was personal, it was ego driven and it was wrong.

+1, this is all true.  I'll add to it that coaching is a thing.  Just because you use Galchenyuk as your top offensive centre doesn't mean you have to put him out there in all situations.  Give him sheltered minutes, throw his line on the ice for O-zone face-offs or when we're down late in the game.  We did this for Desharnais for years, why not for our #3 overall draft pick?  Yeah it would be nice to have a complete two-way centre who can play in all situations, but just because Galchenyuk wasn't that doesn't mean he couldn't have a place as a centre on our roster.

It's just bonkers.  On a team whose biggest weaknesses are that we have nobody to play centre and that we can't score goals, we traded away a guy who can do both for a guy who can do neither.  There is no explanation other than "it's personal" that even comes close to making sense.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

44 minutes ago, Manatee-X said:

+1, this is all true.  I'll add to it that coaching is a thing.  Just because you use Galchenyuk as your top offensive centre doesn't mean you have to put him out there in all situations.  Give him sheltered minutes, throw his line on the ice for O-zone face-offs or when we're down late in the game.  We did this for Desharnais for years, why not for our #3 overall draft pick?  Yeah it would be nice to have a complete two-way centre who can play in all situations, but just because Galchenyuk wasn't that doesn't mean he couldn't have a place as a centre on our roster.

It's just bonkers.  On a team whose biggest weaknesses are that we have nobody to play centre and that we can't score goals, we traded away a guy who can do both for a guy who can do neither.  There is no explanation other than "it's personal" that even comes close to making sense.

I like Julien a lot. I think he's a great coach but i dont think he's the right coach for the team he inherited.   Now, thats on Bergevin (first for building it and second for making it worse) but its also on Julien for not adapting.  Maybe having Ducharme will help. 

Alzner is the perfect example.  He's not worth nearly as much as his salary but he's not as much of a complete disaster on defense as it seemed last year.  It was clear from day one that he couldnt wrap his head around zone defense.   There are ways to get around that & Julien could have implemented them (especially with a good PMD like Petry as his partner) but he didnt. He let them flounder & time and again he was out of position or too late for the play.  I get the arguement that "we pay him a lot so he needs to adapt" but its not happening so what is the best course for the team?? Be stubborn and lose lots of games? or make it work?  If that means changing a few things then so be it.  

This team has been ruined by stubbornness, antiquated thinking and asinine decisions. For about 6 years now we've been trying to fit square pegs in round holes.  Its time to end the madness. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Manatee-X said:

On the bright side, this trade has given me one more team to cheer for this year while I'm not watching Montreal flounder.  I'm now up to three with Washington, Nashville and Arizona.

Hah! Was going to post the same thing. I be following AG closely.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, Habberwacky said:

I know some are curious why Chucky didn't get a shot at centre for the last 20 games at the end of the year but if he would have struggled again that would have been an even bigger problem and after 6 years I don't think we owed him any favours other than the nice contract he got. I think Gally may struggle in the west especially if he is going head to head with some of the big centres in LA, SJ, WPG and Col. 

I am looking forward to having a team with Weber and Price in the line-up for a full season and only time will  tell how this works. At first I  thought we took too much risk and should have got at least a 2nd-4th round pick, but the more time goes by I think the Yotes are also assuming some risk, and this may turn out costly for them as they are in need of offense (they were worse than us in GF last year and Gally's defensive zone coverage may cost them some GA's where the y were only slightly bettter than us)  and I think Galchenyuk was surrounded by better forwards than they currently have in Arizona. Keller may find his second year in the league is a little tougher as teams key on him a little more. 

That's like saying we have a 6 year old Mercedes which we traded for a 5 year old Ford because ours wasn't a new Bugatti.  And then saying well, the carplay feature on the Mercedes is confusing and the Ford one is much simpler.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Disillusioned1 said:

That's like saying we have a 6 year old Mercedes which we traded for a 5 year old Ford because ours wasn't a new Bugatti.  And then saying well, the carplay feature on the Mercedes is confusing and the Ford one is much simpler.

The analogy is ok (and funny) but Domi isnt a ford.  There's still a chance he ends up being a terrific player. The problem is that this would be him exceeding expectations - and no matter how you cut it, we sold way too low. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, maas_art said:

The analogy is ok (and funny) but Domi isnt a ford.  There's still a chance he ends up being a terrific player. The problem is that this would be him exceeding expectations - and no matter how you cut it, we sold way too low. 

Well, a Ford is a lot better these days than before...

Also, we can argue all we want about the relative value of Galchenyuk vs. Domi, but there's another reason why I used the Mercedes vs. Ford analogy.  With a Mercedes you konw you're getting a car that goes pretty fast (scores goals), handles pretty well (good hands), is pretty luxurious and comfortable (skilled) but perhaps isn't as safe as a Volvo (average defence) or as reliable as a Honda (consistency).  But at the end of the day you're getting a pretty darn good car.

On the other hand, a Ford is not necessarily a bad car, but it is first of all, very utilitarian.  Secondly, it's not necessarily weak in any area but also excels at none.  Lastly but certainly not the least, it is far more replaceable.  That's what we did here.  It's not just that we replaced a Mercedes (better car, however much better we can talk about) with a worse one, it's also the fact we got something that to me personally, doesn't stand out.  It's better than a Dodge or a Chrystler but it doesn't excel.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Interesting article here from Andrew Berkshire:

What Max Domi brings to Canadiens over Alex Galchenyuk

 

As always, Berkshire delivers some good points and while, like almost all of us, does not love the trade, he notes some of the reasons why the team may have acquired Domi vs. some of the other offers they had.  Speciifically:

he [Domi] is a borderline elite playmaker in terms of passing the puck into the slot both at even strength and on the power play, an area that the Canadiens have been sorely lacking for years now.

The playmaking ability Domi displays is absolutely something the Canadiens are trying to address here, and I think they’re banking on adding that playmaking ability to a group of shooting forwards making a bigger impact on team goals than Galchenyuk’s style of play would.

In making that bet, they almost certainly gave up the better, more talented, more dynamic player, and they sold on Galchenyuk when his value was extraordinarily low. I don’t think it was good asset management by any stretch of the imagination, but I kinda see the logic, and I wouldn’t be overly shocked if it works out.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...