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

Habs lines, 2021-22 season.


Recommended Posts

7 minutes ago, electron58 said:

Habs coach Dominique Ducharme says Jake Evans has an upper-body injury but that it’s not serious and it’s not a concussion.

Further,  Dominique Ducharme says that Jake Evans is questionable for Tuesday night's game.

Yeah I saw that later but if you look at the link below the lines it says he was given a therapy day.

https://www.nhl.com/canadiens/news/lines-defense-pairings-and-updates---october-18/c-326963766

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, campabee82 said:

Yeah I saw that later but if you look at the link below the lines it says he was given a therapy day.

https://www.nhl.com/canadiens/news/lines-defense-pairings-and-updates---october-18/c-326963766

Yes campabee82.  I read that in your post (that's why I quoted you) and I read it online.  I was just updating to it with more recent quotes from DD.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, BigTed3 said:

With Hoffman expecting to play tomorrow, we're making some progress with the lines today. At practice, the Habs had

Tofofli-Suzuki-Caufield

Drouin-Dvorak-Anderson

Hoffman-Brooks-Gallagher

Lehkonen-Perreault-Armia

 

Romanov-Petry

Chiarot-Savard

Kulak-Niku

The good:

- Hoffman back in gives us another much-needed weapon.

- Glad they didn't touch the Dvorak line just to try to get another line going

- Interesting to see Brooks at 3C, which is something I had suggested, albeit unclear if he will stay there or if he's only there because Evans took a therapy day. Would like to see Brooks stay between Hoffman and Gallagher and then Evans (who has played reasonably well so far this season) centering Lehkonen (whom he has chemistry with) and Armia.

- Paquette out of the top 12

- Niku also back.

The bad:

- Perreault still in (for now). Hopefully Evans takes his spot.

- Chiarot still partnered with Savard, perhaps the most egregious choice in the line-up and one that remains a constant despite other changes. Why not Kulak-Savard as 2nd pair and Chiarot-Niku as 3rd?

Chris Wideman still on the 2nd PP unit. Sami Niku not taking reps on PP.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/18/2021 at 9:20 AM, ramcharger440 said:

100% not sure where the idea that he was somehow much better in the postseason came from?

One of the reasons Petry had such a great season last year was Weber/Chariot had most of the heavy defensive assignments. Along with having Edmonson a strong defender.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, CaptWelly said:

One of the reasons Petry had such a great season last year was Weber/Chariot had most of the heavy defensive assignments. Along with having Edmonson a strong defender.

Actually that's just not true. According to data from PuckIQ, Petry played 47.6% of his ice time against elite competition vs. 47.7% for Weber, so basically identical. Petry played 23.1% against mid-level competition and 29.3% against lower-tier level, while Weber was at 26.1% and 26.2% respectively. If you look at Petry's Corsi against those 3 tiers of competition, he put 53.8%, 53.0%, and 60.8% (vs elite, mid-level, and lower-tier respectively) while Weber put up 49.1%, 54.4%, and 59.5%. Weber started 50% of his shifts in the D zone and Petry 48%.

So the numbers seem to bare out that Petry and Weber actually played the same level of competition at ES and had similar success against mid- and lower-tier players. Where Petry was superior was playing against the higher-level of competition. So not only did he face the same quality of competition as Weber, the stats show he did better than Weber specifically when the stakes were higher and his competition was superior. The notion that Weber is superior defensively and did the heavy lifting is a fallacy. Yes, Weber also played well for stretches and was a key member of the squad last year, but Petry was easily the better D man.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, BigTed3 said:

Actually that's just not true. According to data from PuckIQ, Petry played 47.6% of his ice time against elite competition vs. 47.7% for Weber, so basically identical. Petry played 23.1% against mid-level competition and 29.3% against lower-tier level, while Weber was at 26.1% and 26.2% respectively. If you look at Petry's Corsi against those 3 tiers of competition, he put 53.8%, 53.0%, and 60.8% (vs elite, mid-level, and lower-tier respectively) while Weber put up 49.1%, 54.4%, and 59.5%. Weber started 50% of his shifts in the D zone and Petry 48%.

So the numbers seem to bare out that Petry and Weber actually played the same level of competition at ES and had similar success against mid- and lower-tier players. Where Petry was superior was playing against the higher-level of competition. So not only did he face the same quality of competition as Weber, the stats show he did better than Weber specifically when the stakes were higher and his competition was superior. The notion that Weber is superior defensively and did the heavy lifting is a fallacy. Yes, Weber also played well for stretches and was a key member of the squad last year, but Petry was easily the better D man.

I dont think the problem was Weber making Petry look better or vice versa. I think the problem is that Weber and Petry were our only 2 bonafide top 2-3 dmen.   We have plenty of NHL quality #4-6 who can be used next to a guy like Shea or Jeff but with only one of them, we're in tough... very very tough, this year. 

 

On a positive note, Im really rooting for Hoffman - Brooks - Gallagher to establish themselves.  If they do, not only does our top 9 become "set" but our 4th line can go back to the Lehkonen-Evans combination that worked so well & having Armia as your 4th line RW is something most teams could only dream of.

I just dont know how we're supposed to fix the defense.  I was hoping DD came up with some plan to mobilize our forwards to make up for that shortcoming in the transition game but so far i havent seen it... 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, maas_art said:

I dont think the problem was Weber making Petry look better or vice versa. I think the problem is that Weber and Petry were our only 2 bonafide top 2-3 dmen.   We have plenty of NHL quality #4-6 who can be used next to a guy like Shea or Jeff but with only one of them, we're in tough... very very tough, this year. 

 

On a positive note, Im really rooting for Hoffman - Brooks - Gallagher to establish themselves.  If they do, not only does our top 9 become "set" but our 4th line can go back to the Lehkonen-Evans combination that worked so well & having Armia as your 4th line RW is something most teams could only dream of.

I just dont know how we're supposed to fix the defense.  I was hoping DD came up with some plan to mobilize our forwards to make up for that shortcoming in the transition game but so far i havent seen it... 

X2 about Hoffman he should be a good boost and even out our lines a bit, I am also very interested to see Brooks in action he may be a very good pickup as T.O is strong at center and just had no room for him. if he pans out and Evans can be on our 4th with Armia and Lehky we will have much more balance to our forward group which should help with the goals. as for the D it needs some work I am sure once Edmundson gets back it will be serviceable but we still need what we have needed since Marky got the boot. No excuse to have a hole that big for this long!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, ramcharger440 said:

 as for the D it needs some work I am sure once Edmundson gets back it will be serviceable but we still need what we have needed since Marky got the boot. No excuse to have a hole that big for this long!

Agree on both counts.  

The crappy thing is that I *think* we have the horses to run the race but I think we're going to use them wrong.  Edmundson-Petry is a no brainer. It will be our top pair and thats set in stone.  But beyond that?  

We have Romanov, Chiarot, Savard, Kulak, Wideman and Niku.       Those are all nhl-caliber defensmen.  I think all of them find jobs on almost any team... but where?  Most likely 3rd pair.  Sure you can play many of them as your #4 if you could pair them up with a Weber or a Petry but we dont have that luxury on the 2nd pair.   Maybe there's an option to play 2 guys on each pair that work as a tandem though... im not convinced we will do it. 

Really curious to see how they end up trying to make this work. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, maas_art said:

Agree on both counts.  

The crappy thing is that I *think* we have the horses to run the race but I think we're going to use them wrong.  Edmundson-Petry is a no brainer. It will be our top pair and thats set in stone.  But beyond that?  

We have Romanov, Chiarot, Savard, Kulak, Wideman and Niku.       Those are all nhl-caliber defensmen.  I think all of them find jobs on almost any team... but where?  Most likely 3rd pair.  Sure you can play many of them as your #4 if you could pair them up with a Weber or a Petry but we dont have that luxury on the 2nd pair.   Maybe there's an option to play 2 guys on each pair that work as a tandem though... im not convinced we will do it. 

Really curious to see how they end up trying to make this work. 

Years ago,  for years,  we had horrible defense, and always had trouble getting it out of our zone. When we had good goalies, they would mask the severity of it. We were still terrible as a team. I can't really see how they can make it work in this new style fast NHL.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, BigTed3 said:

Actually that's just not true. According to data from PuckIQ, Petry played 47.6% of his ice time against elite competition vs. 47.7% for Weber, so basically identical. Petry played 23.1% against mid-level competition and 29.3% against lower-tier level, while Weber was at 26.1% and 26.2% respectively. If you look at Petry's Corsi against those 3 tiers of competition, he put 53.8%, 53.0%, and 60.8% (vs elite, mid-level, and lower-tier respectively) while Weber put up 49.1%, 54.4%, and 59.5%. Weber started 50% of his shifts in the D zone and Petry 48%.

So the numbers seem to bare out that Petry and Weber actually played the same level of competition at ES and had similar success against mid- and lower-tier players. Where Petry was superior was playing against the higher-level of competition. So not only did he face the same quality of competition as Weber, the stats show he did better than Weber specifically when the stakes were higher and his competition was superior. The notion that Weber is superior defensively and did the heavy lifting is a fallacy. Yes, Weber also played well for stretches and was a key member of the squad last year, but Petry was easily the better D man.

Actually it is true. Weber played a greater percentage of his ice time against stronger opponents than Petry did. The stats you provided support that. He also started in the D zone a greater percentage of his shifts than Petry did of his.  Petry also had Edmundson as his partner for most of the season. Edmundson is a arguably a stronger defender than the remainder of our D. So, Capt Welly, in posting his subjective opiniion, did not say anything that was untrue.

As for the theory that Weber played more poorly than Petry when the stakes were higher..... that is, for a lack of a more technical term, hogwash. You have no actual facts to support that statement other than dubious stats based on theoretical probabilities. I admire your determination to present information subjectively supporting a theory that you choose to believe but to call your selected numerical  projections the truth over other's opinions is a reach too far. Capt Welly did not say anything that was untrue, he offered a subjective opinion akin to your view that "Petry was easily the better D man", that is your opinion but not necessarily the truth.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, maas_art said:

I dont think the problem was Weber making Petry look better or vice versa. I think the problem is that Weber and Petry were our only 2 bonafide top 2-3 dmen.   We have plenty of NHL quality #4-6 who can be used next to a guy like Shea or Jeff but with only one of them, we're in tough... very very tough, this year. 

 

On a positive note, Im really rooting for Hoffman - Brooks - Gallagher to establish themselves.  If they do, not only does our top 9 become "set" but our 4th line can go back to the Lehkonen-Evans combination that worked so well & having Armia as your 4th line RW is something most teams could only dream of.

I just dont know how we're supposed to fix the defense.  I was hoping DD came up with some plan to mobilize our forwards to make up for that shortcoming in the transition game but so far i havent seen it... 

Right, I wasn't saying Weber was making Petry look better. The comment I was replying to was claiming Petry looked better because Weber played the tough minutes against better quality competition, and I was just showing that the stats show that statement is false.

The other point you made is bang on... it's not so much Petry or Weber that was the problem, it was that the rest of the defence is poorly-constructed. I'd personally say Petry is a #1 D man, albeit one who needs some support down the line-up to be able to hold up the entire season. And Weber in my view was a #3-4 guy who needed to have a specific type of partner to make up for his lack of speed. As for the rest, they're all #4-6 guys and as with Weber, many of them have the same skilset and deficiencies, and they simply don't complement each other well at all. It's just a horribly-built defence, and the blame essentially lies with Bergevin for continuing to sign the same type of player to multi-year deals over and over: Alzner, Schlemko, Chiarot, Edmundson, and now Savard. Savard was awful again tonight. Is it because he's bad or is it because he can't be paired with Chiarot? Similarly, last year, Chiarot's best games were when Weber went down with injury and he got paired with a more mobile partner at the end of the regular season.

Some of the blame also lies with Ducharme and Richardson, who stuck it out with Chiarot-Weber against all logic last year and have gone with Chiarot-Savard this season too. I think I've seen all kinds of fans and media predict that was going to be a tire-fire and it's been exactly that. Romanov has also been lost thus far, and Petry has been decent at times but far from the player he's been the past few years. Kulak has had some miscues but has also been our best defenceman as far as executing the breakout.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, RCAF48 said:

Actually it is true. Weber played a greater percentage of his ice time against stronger opponents than Petry did. The stats you provided support that. He also started in the D zone a greater percentage of his shifts than Petry did of his.  Petry also had Edmundson as his partner for most of the season. Edmundson is a arguably a stronger defender than the remainder of our D. So, Capt Welly, in posting his subjective opiniion, did not say anything that was untrue.

As for the theory that Weber played more poorly than Petry when the stakes were higher..... that is, for a lack of a more technical term, hogwash. You have no actual facts to support that statement other than dubious stats based on theoretical probabilities. I admire your determination to present information subjectively supporting a theory that you choose to believe but to call your selected numerical  projections the truth over other's opinions is a reach too far. Capt Welly did not say anything that was untrue, he offered a subjective opinion akin to your view that "Petry was easily the better D man", that is your opinion but not necessarily the truth.

CaptWelly said that "Weber/Chiarot had most of the heavy defensive assignments." The data I presented show they didn't. Petry played 47.6% of his ES shifts against elite-level competition and Weber 47.7%. That's the same. That doesn't suggest one guy got "most of the heavy defensive assignments." D-zone starts within 2% of each other, also hardly supports that one guy did "most" of the heavy lifting. It's interesting that you're calling my stats hogwash, when at least I have data to support why I'm saying something.

If you'd like to bring up that Edmundson was the reason for Petry playing well, let's have a look at some more data:

 

- Petry with Edmundson: Corsi 54.8%, 53.4% expected goals

- Weber with Edmundson: Corsi 52.2%, 51.1% expected goals

 

- Petry with Chiarot: Corsi 57.8%, expected goals 69.5%

- Weber with Chiarot: Corsi 52.1%, expected goals 52.2%

 

So what does this show? That Petry playing with Edmundson yielded better results than Weber playing with Edmundson, and Petry playing with Chiarot yielded better results than Weber playing with Chiarot. If you want to look squarely at how Petry and Edmundson did with and without each other, the pairing as I said had a 54.8% Corsi. Petry without Edmundson was actually even better at 58.2% and Edmundson without Petry was at 53.3%. The expected goal stats mirror exactly the same thing. So here are real statistics that show Petry was the one who made Edmundson better and that Petry without Edmundson was not only fine, he was superior with other partners. And as I posted, Petry's numbers were better than Weber's with those same two partners.

Again, I think there's a role for a Weber or an Edmundson on the squad, and they both brought positive things to the line-up when employed properly. And I certainly agree with you and Welly that Weber got tough minutes. But Petry got the same tough minutes and did even better. To say that Petry only did well because Weber had tougher match-ups simply isn't true and to say Petry only did well because he was partnered with Edmundson also simply isn't true.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, BigTed3 said:

CaptWelly said that "Weber/Chiarot had most of the heavy defensive assignments." The data I presented show they didn't. Petry played 47.6% of his ES shifts against elite-level competition and Weber 47.7%. That's the same. That doesn't suggest one guy got "most of the heavy defensive assignments." D-zone starts within 2% of each other, also hardly supports that one guy did "most" of the heavy lifting. It's interesting that you're calling my stats hogwash, when at least I have data to support why I'm saying something.

If you'd like to bring up that Edmundson was the reason for Petry playing well, let's have a look at some more data:

 

- Petry with Edmundson: Corsi 54.8%, 53.4% expected goals

- Weber with Edmundson: Corsi 52.2%, 51.1% expected goals

 

- Petry with Chiarot: Corsi 57.8%, expected goals 69.5%

- Weber with Chiarot: Corsi 52.1%, expected goals 52.2%

 

So what does this show? That Petry playing with Edmundson yielded better results than Weber playing with Edmundson, and Petry playing with Chiarot yielded better results than Weber playing with Chiarot. If you want to look squarely at how Petry and Edmundson did with and without each other, the pairing as I said had a 54.8% Corsi. Petry without Edmundson was actually even better at 58.2% and Edmundson without Petry was at 53.3%. The expected goal stats mirror exactly the same thing. So here are real statistics that show Petry was the one who made Edmundson better and that Petry without Edmundson was not only fine, he was superior with other partners. And as I posted, Petry's numbers were better than Weber's with those same two partners.

Again, I think there's a role for a Weber or an Edmundson on the squad, and they both brought positive things to the line-up when employed properly. And I certainly agree with you and Welly that Weber got tough minutes. But Petry got the same tough minutes and did even better. To say that Petry only did well because Weber had tougher match-ups simply isn't true and to say Petry only did well because he was partnered with Edmundson also simply isn't true.

First off Corsi is terrible way to rate defenseman. It focuses mostly on scoring for and not preventing scoring which is actually a defenseman's job first and foremost. That said Weber did play a lot of penalty killing which Petry does also. When Weber was here though it did reduce the number of minutes Petry had to kill penalties which gives him minutes in other situations. Late in the games when defending Weber was utilized a lot. However you look at it when they were both here it lessened the load on the other one. When Petry was utilized with Edmonson he had a strong defensive defenseman to rely on to be able to be more offensive. Edmunsons +/- was one of the highest in the league last year. How ever you want to "spin" it the team is missing Weber a lot. A great defenseman doesn't have to skate the puck up the ice. To be great. There have been a lot of offensive defenseman that have flash in the pans because defending is the first priority. Players like Gainey Carbaneau ect. advanced stats probably wouldn't look favorable to but they help win championships. It also takes team defense to win. The forwards need to be back to take the short passes and make another pass to advance the puck. We actually need to tighten team defense at this time because when you aren't scoring good defense leads to scoring opportunities. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, CaptWelly said:

First off Corsi is terrible way to rate defenseman. It focuses mostly on scoring for and not preventing scoring which is actually a defenseman's job first and foremost. That said Weber did play a lot of penalty killing which Petry does also. When Weber was here though it did reduce the number of minutes Petry had to kill penalties which gives him minutes in other situations. Late in the games when defending Weber was utilized a lot. However you look at it when they were both here it lessened the load on the other one. When Petry was utilized with Edmonson he had a strong defensive defenseman to rely on to be able to be more offensive. Edmunsons +/- was one of the highest in the league last year. How ever you want to "spin" it the team is missing Weber a lot. A great defenseman doesn't have to skate the puck up the ice. To be great. There have been a lot of offensive defenseman that have flash in the pans because defending is the first priority. Players like Gainey Carbaneau ect. advanced stats probably wouldn't look favorable to but they help win championships. It also takes team defense to win. The forwards need to be back to take the short passes and make another pass to advance the puck. We actually need to tighten team defense at this time because when you aren't scoring good defense leads to scoring opportunities

I feel like your last sentence is the direct answer to your first.  If your team defence is good then you're going to be able to get the puck out of your end and get some scoring opportunities.  If your team defence is bad then you're going to be either hemmed in your own zone or giving the puck away in the neutral zone, either way leading to scoring opportunities against.  Which is exactly what Corsi measures.

You make a good point, I think, about the forwards playing a big role in this - the team needs to change it's system to match the defencemen that we do have, not the ones we wish we had.  If Petry is the only D-man that we have who can regularly connect on a stretch pass, then our forwards aren't doing themselves any favours by moving up instead of coming back in support.

But regardless, I think we both would agree that a lot of these stats (whether something is 46% or 47%, etc.) are nitpicky and not really important in the big picture.  I don't think there's anybody here who is saying that we don't miss Weber.  Whether someone ranks him as the best or the second best D-man on the team is kind of not relevant; the fact remains that we're missing one of our top defencemen and we don't really have any good options to fill in his spot.  It's a pickle.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Manatee-X said:

You make a good point, I think, about the forwards playing a big role in this - the team needs to change it's system to match the defencemen that we do have, not the ones we wish we had.  If Petry is the only D-man that we have who can regularly connect on a stretch pass, then our forwards aren't doing themselves any favours by moving up instead of coming back in support.

This cannot be overstated.  Everyone is blaming Bergevin for this team (and he certainly deserves accountability) but Ducharme knew what we had going into this season. Back in the 90s the devils didnt just "luck" into the trap. They looked at the players they had & said "we cant do this. we cant do that but we can do ____"  This team has questionable centres, questionable defense but one of the deepest winger depths in the league. We have a terrific goaltending tandem (albeit Price is out for now). Thats what you have to work with.

I have no idea what that system would look like (im not an nhl coach!) but its obvious DD just went into this season the same way he did last.  Same basic box out strategy but now without Weber and Edmundson and most importantly, Price. 

I was on the fence about the DD extension. I mean i know you had to, after the SCF run but I felt like most of that run had to do with Price and Weber playing the best they have in years and a little luck. Im not sure coaching was a huge factor outside of a couple of key matchups.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, CaptWelly said:

First off Corsi is terrible way to rate defenseman. It focuses mostly on scoring for and not preventing scoring which is actually a defenseman's job first and foremost. That said Weber did play a lot of penalty killing which Petry does also. When Weber was here though it did reduce the number of minutes Petry had to kill penalties which gives him minutes in other situations. Late in the games when defending Weber was utilized a lot. However you look at it when they were both here it lessened the load on the other one. When Petry was utilized with Edmonson he had a strong defensive defenseman to rely on to be able to be more offensive. Edmunsons +/- was one of the highest in the league last year. How ever you want to "spin" it the team is missing Weber a lot. A great defenseman doesn't have to skate the puck up the ice. To be great. There have been a lot of offensive defenseman that have flash in the pans because defending is the first priority. Players like Gainey Carbaneau ect. advanced stats probably wouldn't look favorable to but they help win championships. It also takes team defense to win. The forwards need to be back to take the short passes and make another pass to advance the puck. We actually need to tighten team defense at this time because when you aren't scoring good defense leads to scoring opportunities. 

I agree with much of what you wrote here. I think it's clear that we're relying very heavily on Petry this year because we plain don't have anyone else to rely on as a top 3 D man option. We have Petry and then we have a bunch of stay-at-home pylons, inexperienced youngsters, and journeymen fill-ins. I know Kulak isn't well-liked on this forum, but he's the only other guy bringing something positive to the table thus far and even then, he's not a great option on special teams. But I 100% agree with you that we miss being able to throw Weber out as a stabilizing force and that we miss having a stable partner for Petry with Edmundson out. In fact, as bad as I think Chiarot has played, my suggestion a few games ago was to put Chiarot and Petry together as your top pairing. Romanov has been all over the ice and out of position and that doesn't help Petry, so give Petry a guy who takes care of his own end and more importantly give Chiarot the one guy on the team who can move the puck and make up for Chiarot's deficiencies.

On the subject of Corsi, I'll disagree with you and echo what Manatee said below: Corsi is not a reflection of offence alone, it's a statistic that reflects a team's shot attempts for with a given player on the ice as a percentage of total shot attempts. What it doesn't tell you is whether you're playing low-event or high-event hockey, which is what I think you mean by your statement. For example, Player A could be on for 10 shot attempts for and 10 against and Player B could be on for 2 for and 2 against, and they would each have a Corsi of 50%. You can do the same thing looking at scoring chances for and against and then expected goals for and against, which takes into account relative strength of chances. I believe what you're saying is that you value the team and defenceman who is playing low-event hockey (2 for, 2 against) more. I'm saying that with respect to the two players, there's no difference really. At the end of the day, you're getting the same share of chances.

The only difference here then becomes the save percentage of the two teams' goalies. How is this important? If you believe your goalie can stop a higher percentage of chances than the other team's, then you want to play high-event hockey. Let's say Carey is playing well and stopping 95% of shots against and the other team has an AHL level goalie stopping 85%, to provide an extreme example. That means for every 10 shots you trade off, you get one more goal than the other team. Conversely, if you only trade 2 shots each, the chances you end up with an extra goal is small. On the other hand, if you don't have confidence in your goaltending, you want to play low-event hockey and not trade chances. You also want to play low-event hockey at even strength if you believe your special teams are dominant and you can make up goals there and high-event hockey if your special teams are bad and you know you need to score goals at ES. From the perspective of the Habs roster this year and in recent years, I'd argue that any shot they have at winning is if their goalies are out-playing the other teams, and our special teams (especially the PP) are not dependable.

Then we get to players where the Corsi values are not even. A guy like Chiarot or Romanov, for example, might be giving up 6 shots for every 4 we get with them on the ice. A guy like Kulak or Edmundson or Petry might be getting 6 shots for for every 4 against. Now maybe if you look at a given time on ice, the absolute numbers are different. Maybe there's a defensive D man who in 20 minutes of ice time gives up 6 shots and has his team get 4. And maybe the more flashy D man is giving up 8 shots but his team gets 12. So one way to look at that, as you're doing, is to say the flashy guy is giving up more shot attempts per ice time (8 vs 6) but you need to consider the team is getting 3 times as many for (12 vs 4). This is essentially what's happening to some degree if you compare a player like Chiarot or Romanov vs a player like Kulak or Wideman. And while I haven't looked at the data yet this year, in recent years, a guy like Kulak was actually giving up fewer shot attempts against per ice time than players like Chiarot, so not only was he generating more attempts more, he was also allowing less against. I get that there's a perception Chiarot is big and tough and blocks shots and makes hits and that people correlate that to playing good D, but getting on loose pucks and keeping the puck out of your own end helps to save goals against just as well.

 

1 hour ago, Manatee-X said:

I feel like your last sentence is the direct answer to your first.  If your team defence is good then you're going to be able to get the puck out of your end and get some scoring opportunities.  If your team defence is bad then you're going to be either hemmed in your own zone or giving the puck away in the neutral zone, either way leading to scoring opportunities against.  Which is exactly what Corsi measures.

You make a good point, I think, about the forwards playing a big role in this - the team needs to change it's system to match the defencemen that we do have, not the ones we wish we had.  If Petry is the only D-man that we have who can regularly connect on a stretch pass, then our forwards aren't doing themselves any favours by moving up instead of coming back in support.

But regardless, I think we both would agree that a lot of these stats (whether something is 46% or 47%, etc.) are nitpicky and not really important in the big picture.  I don't think there's anybody here who is saying that we don't miss Weber.  Whether someone ranks him as the best or the second best D-man on the team is kind of not relevant; the fact remains that we're missing one of our top defencemen and we don't really have any good options to fill in his spot.  It's a pickle.

I think the general point here is that team defence and team offence are largely connected. If a team always has the puck, they're not going to allow a lot of goals. If a team is always hemmed in, they're not going to score. As I went through above, it's largely a question of

1. What share of goals or chances you're getting

2. Whether you're playing low-event or high-event hockey

But I'll take the players who give us the best ratio of chances for to against.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, BigTed3 said:

Chiarot-Savard has been split up at practice today... pairings now:

 

Kulak-Petry

Romanov-Savard

Chiarot-Wideman

Its about time but begs the question: how did basically every fan, media member and armchair coach know it was a bad move from the start but DD and Richardson didnt? 


On another note, I would consider flipping Dvorak and Suzuki just to see if it sparks something.  Your lines would be:

Drouin - Suzuki - Anderson
Toffoli - Dvorak - Caufield

Why?  Well the one thing I didnt love about CC/Suzuki is that Nick is a right shot - so passing to his RW means he's making backhand passes.  Not the worst (and Caufield tend to float all over the ice anyway) and not something i would have even tried if they were clicking but right now id be willing to attempt it.  Its not like you're giving either centre less skilled linemates. All 4 of those guys are talented.  Id keep Drouin/Anderson together as a winger unit obviously. 
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The 0-4 Montreal Canadiens juggled up their line combinations at practice on Wednesday, a day after losing a 5-0 rout to the San Jose Sharks at home. 

Third-year player Nick Suzuki, who has yet to record a point this season, now centres a line in between wingers Mike Hoffman and Brendan Gallagher

Meanwhile 20-year-old rookie right winger Cole Caufield, who is also pointless over four games this season, has moved down to the third line where he'll play with Tyler Toffoli and Mathieu Perreault. Perreault will play centre after serving as a winger for the first three games and a healthy scratch Tuesday against the Sharks. 

The defensive pairing of Ben Chiarot and David Savard was broken up a practice as well with Chiarot now playing with Chris Wideman and Savard teaming up with Alexander Romanov.

TSN's John Lu notes that Jake Evans will likely return on Thursday against the Carolina Hurricanes after sitting out Tuesday with a minor upper-body injury. 

Habs' Practice Lines - John Lu, TSN 

F

Drouin - Dvorak - Anderson
Hoffman - Suzuki - Gallagher
Toffoli - Perreault - Caufield

Lehkonen - Evans/Brooks - Paquette/Armia

D

Kulak - Petry
Chiarot - Wideman
Romanov - Savard
Niku

G

Allen
Montembeault

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Those D lines make more sense they are not super but they are much better in my opinion. I think Zuke will do better on this new line with a couple of vets to help him get going. CC could probably use a couple of games on a lower line to get his legs again too he is a rookie after all! and if the 4th line is Evans Armia and Lehky it will work well. this looks like a better balanced lineup for sure. Once Eddy gets back the D will be a bit better too as we can drop the next weakest link.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, ramcharger440 said:

Those D lines make more sense they are not super but they are much better in my opinion. I think Zuke will do better on this new line with a couple of vets to help him get going. CC could probably use a couple of games on a lower line to get his legs again too he is a rookie after all! and if the 4th line is Evans Armia and Lehky it will work well. this looks like a better balanced lineup for sure. Once Eddy gets back the D will be a bit better too as we can drop the next weakest link.

Eddy is not coming back any time soon look at the injury thread update I just posted

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

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