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

Habs Lines


Recommended Posts

22 hours ago, BigTed3 said:

Kulak-Petry is a lot better option than Chiarot-Weber as our top pairing. Among D pairings that have played at least 100 minutes together at 5v5 over the past 3 years, Kulak-Petry is the top-ranked duo with a Corsi For of 59.1%. They're also #1 if you rank our D combos by expected Goals For, at 60.0%. And before we argue that one of those players is driving the other as much as Petry is driving Edmundson this year, our top 8 pairings all feature one of those two players:

- #2 is Schlemko-Petry

- #3 is Kulak-Weber

- #4 is Reilly-Petry

- #5 is Kulak-Romanov

- #6 is Chiarot-Petry

- #7 is Petry-Weber

- #8 is Kulak-Benn

 

FWIW, Chiarot-Weber is #10 of 21 combos over the past 3 years, while Edmundson-Petry is #12. All these pairings are positive Corsi simply because the Habs have been a strong possession team under Julien, but it's clear that Petry and Kulak are the two players driving the Habs' success from the blue line more than anyone else. Kulak-Weber is better than Chiarot-Weber and Chiarot-Petry is also better than Chiarot-Weber. It's not to say either Chiarot or Weber can't be decent NHLers, they just shouldn't be playing together.

Similarly, at 4v5 over the past 3 years, our top D pairings at preventing scoring chances on the PK have been

1. Petry-Fleury

2. Petry-Scandella

3. Petry-Kulak

4. Weber-Benn

5. Petry-Benn

 

Our worst 3 pairings have been

 

3rd worst: Chiarot-Weber

2nd worst: Petry-Edmundson

Worst: Petry-Mete

 

This tells me that Petry has done well with a large number of partners including Kulak, but isn't doing that well with Edmundson on the PK (which would lead me to conclude Edmundson and Mete are less effective there), and Chiarot-Weber have also been bad as a duo on the PK. The common theme there is that none of these players get on loose pucks very quickly and thus clear the zone less effectively.

I've previously posted numbers about Kulak alone showing he's been our most efficient defenceman this year so far. The numbers over the past 3 seasons suggest he and Petry have been our best pairing at 5v5 and a good pairing n the PK too. Conversely, Chiarot and Weber have been mediocre at 5v5 and weak on the PK. All of those things are things you can see with the eye test watching games too.

I'll agree with you that neither Kulak nor Romanov are ideal top 4 players and would be better-served by being the 3rd pairing (where they are having great success thus far). But of all the options we have given that we have only one true top 4 defenceman right now, Kulak-Petry makes the most sense and the numbers strongly support that. It's abhorrent coaching to have pulled Kulak (one of our two strongest D men by the numbers this year) for Mete (statistically our worst). As for Romanov-Weber, I have no idea how it will work and we have no data on this duo to date. But in theory, they pairing makes more sense than putting Weber with Edmundson or Chiarot. Weber fails at moving the puck out of his own zone and getting on loose pucks. Romanov has better numbers but has made mental errors and needs help with positioning. It makes sense that these two players would complement each other, rather than pairing Weber with another player who has the same faults as him.

FWIW, I agree with you that we don't have a Werenski or Heiskanen or Makar, but Kulak-Petry as a duo is a strong pairing and better than the sum of their parts. By Corsi, they have been the 6th most-effective D pairing in the entire league over the past 3 years. So absolutely, it's worth going back to.

 

 

I would be interested to know the difference the pairings have with Allen in net on the PK..... Price has been pretty brutal this year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

52 minutes ago, ramcharger440 said:

I would be interested to know the difference the pairings have with Allen in net on the PK..... Price has been pretty brutal this year.

I don't know of a way to get that information, but again, this is data from a 3-year period, so it doesn't just include this season or one goalie or Price at his worst. I also put up data about the two goalies in a separate post, and you're right that Price has been grossly inferior on the PK this season. But I don't know how that correlates with different D pairings.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, habs1952 said:

If Price plays any possible trade value drops. If Price sits any possible trade value drops. $10,000,000 sink hole?

The trade value can really only go up. If he goes on a run and plays good or above another might take a look and think with our team our defense how much better he might be. Like he did with team Canada.(Though any goalie with that team and defense probably would of had great stats) Not playing shows we have no confidence in him and definitely his value continues to decline. The last 3 years he has become streaky where as he can put together a group of outstanding games and then have a stretch like now. Goal scorers will do that but a goalie it hurts a lot more. Not only rest but this along with injury is a good reason to have a second goalie that is solid. I say give Allen the next game let Price have the second of back to back. Go from there. If Price looks solid good then maybe you start to split games and he has to be the best to earn the spot back. Until he gets his focus back then Allen plays with Price inserted back to back or as Allen was originally. Price has to know it's a very short season all division games. The team has to do what's best. Maybe he gets hot when going into the playoffs. We have to make the playoffs first though. Then it'd be tough because I'm a fan of Price but he hasn't done a Halak and actually stolen a playoff series like Roy/Theodore or Dryden ect. The old saying teams need their best players to be their best players. ...............Come on Carey shake it off be Carey Price.!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, habs1952 said:

If Price plays any possible trade value drops. If Price sits any possible trade value drops. $10,000,000 sink hole?

 

14 hours ago, CaptWelly said:

The trade value can really only go up. If he goes on a run and plays good or above another might take a look and think with our team our defense how much better he might be.

I think there's a few key problems:

1) Price has a NMC so any talk is 100% moot if he doesnt want to leave. He has complete control over where he plays for the duration of the contract. I should also add that I dont think MB would even consider moving him. 

2) Regardless of his play - whether he bounces back or doesnt, if a team is truly interested in him, they have to have a need for him and the cap room. By my estimation, there's likely less than 3 or 4 teams who would fit that bill.

3) $10.5m means we're going to have to take back substantial salary. Maybe a team has the cap space to only send back $6-7m but even that seems unlikely. So we're probably taking back a really bad contract - maybe not as long as Price's but the thing about a goalie is: there's always a chance he can turn it around.  Its highly unlikely a forward or defensman on a bad contract who is past his prime is anything more than a bottom roster player but goalies often do well into their late 30s.  Thomas won the Conn Smythe at 37 years old. If we have to have one bad contract, Id rather it be a goalie than a 4th line forward or 3rd pairing defensman.  For example, Vlasic makes 7m a year for the next 5 or 6 years still... 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, maas_art said:

I think there's a few key problems:

1) Price has a NMC so any talk is 100% moot if he doesnt want to leave. He has complete control over where he plays for the duration of the contract. 

2) Regardless of his play - whether he bounces back or doesnt, if a team is truly interested in him, they have to have a need for him and the cap room. By my estimation, there's likely less than 3 or 4 teams who would fit that bill.

3) $10.5m means we're going to have to take back substantial salary. Maybe a team has the cap space to only send back $6-7m but even that seems unlikely. So we're probably taking back a really bad contract - maybe not as long as Price's but the thing about a goalie is: there's always a chance he can turn it around.  Its highly unlikely a forward or defensman on a bad contract who is past his prime is anything more than a bottom roster player but goalies often do well into their late 30s.  Thomas won the Conn Smythe at 37 years old. If we have to have one bad contract, Id rather it be a goalie than a 4th line forward or 3rd pairing defensman. 

This is spot on. Carey has been on the hot seat for poor play in the past. While we can be dissatisfied with his value, he has bounced back before including the battle between him and Halak. If this becomes a prolonged slump then there is cause for further alarm. Funny thing - this is the first season we have had a half decent backup (Tokarski, Condon, Montoya, Kinkaid), and Price becomes complacent. The bigger current issue for me is that Luke Richardson does not have have the nuts to recommend splitting up Weber and Chiarot for a mid-season fix as all of us fans and the analytics indicate that a change here is necessary. I wonder how long that pairing will last 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, maas_art said:

 

I think there's a few key problems:

1) Price has a NMC so any talk is 100% moot if he doesnt want to leave. He has complete control over where he plays for the duration of the contract. I should also add that I dont think MB would even consider moving him. 

2) Regardless of his play - whether he bounces back or doesnt, if a team is truly interested in him, they have to have a need for him and the cap room. By my estimation, there's likely less than 3 or 4 teams who would fit that bill.

3) $10.5m means we're going to have to take back substantial salary. Maybe a team has the cap space to only send back $6-7m but even that seems unlikely. So we're probably taking back a really bad contract - maybe not as long as Price's but the thing about a goalie is: there's always a chance he can turn it around.  Its highly unlikely a forward or defensman on a bad contract who is past his prime is anything more than a bottom roster player but goalies often do well into their late 30s.  Thomas won the Conn Smythe at 37 years old. If we have to have one bad contract, Id rather it be a goalie than a 4th line forward or 3rd pairing defensman.  For example, Vlasic makes 7m a year for the next 5 or 6 years still... 

 

True enough Skinner in Buffalo.....ouch! Also if the team keeps playing hard and we get a few bounces and all of a sudden we start scoring 4 or so a game Carey may be able to ride out a bad spell and come back. He actually doesn't have to be spectacular just solid. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Price will be fine. Lol. Silly talk. Just two weeks. It happens. He was the best goalie in the bubble last season. Not even close. It’s all good. 
 

as for Corsi - does it factor in who is played against. Best remember Webber and Chariot play more minutes against the best. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, dreegking said:

as for Corsi - does it factor in who is played against. Best remember Webber and Chariot play more minutes against the best. 

it doesnt (QoC is the advanced stat that does that) which certainly has an impact.  Its why i think, watching Chairot, i feel comfortable with him on the 3rd pair, but on the first he's being asked to handle opposition he's ill-suited to manage. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, maas_art said:

it doesnt (QoC is the advanced stat that does that) which certainly has an impact.  Its why i think, watching Chairot, i feel comfortable with him on the 3rd pair, but on the first he's being asked to handle opposition he's ill-suited to manage. 

Hockey is a game of ebb and flow and games within the games. From match ups to when and where the match ups are at. If you're starting in the defensive zone or offensive zone , even the time of the game defending in the first half of the game compared to late in the game. What the score is at different points of the game holding a close lead being up 2-3 or down one or down 2-3. Corsi and most of the advanced stats, I don't think work well in hockey. Baseball I can see it because it's more of an stop and reset game without quick momentum  change. Corsi is also based mostly towards offense and scoring chances. It doesn't factor into the role each individual player may be asked to play within his team or coach or even from game to game. I'm sure different players are asked to defend first keep it simple where as others may be granted to have more lee way and take more chances. Advanced stats definitely don't take into each players "hockey smarts" or willingness to do what ever is needed to win. Advanced stats probably weren't considered when Bowman told Yzerman if he wanted to win a cup he'd have to learn to play defense first. Or when he told Federov he was going to have him play as a defenseman at different times. I'm not trying to start a debate on this , just stating that in my opinion that I don't get overly concerned with advanced stats with hockey. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

43 minutes ago, jennifer_rocket said:

Jonathan Drouin - Nick Suzuki - Tyler Toffoli
Tomas Tatar - Jesperi Kotkaniemi - Josh Anderson
Artturi Lehkonen - Phillip Danault - Brendan Gallagher
Michael Frolik - Jake Evans - Corey Perry

??? :D

Douin, Suzuki, Anderson have been consistent I would leave that line alone. 

Tatar, JK (?) , Gallagher , I've seen flashes maybe give JK a shot since Danualt hasn't had any offense , but why demote Gallagher he has been consistent all year?

Lehk,Danualt, Toffoli, I could see still have Toffoli for PP 

Byron,Evans, Perry/Armai Armia has played well this year he's just getting back from injury , hard to keep Perry out though because he has been good on the PP. I can't see sitting Byron though because he has been good on the PK and a good forechecker. Is Frolik going to bring more than Byron really? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Drouin-Suzuki-Anderson has worked, yes, but Suzuki has tailed off in recent weeks. Just not as good as he was and this was even before the Anderson injury. I think when Anderson returns, it's a chance to shake things up. The key things for me about any line-up changes should be

1. Danault has to be out of the top 6. Give him Lehkonen as a linemate, whom he has always worked well with, but stop giving him top 6 wingers and big ice time.

2. Kotkaniemi, conversely, needs to play with better wingers than Lehkonen and Armia. It's enough. He's been one of our better skaters this season and his creativity is being lost.

3. My top 6 wingers are 4 of Tatar, Anderson, Gallagher, Drouin, and Toffoli. So Suzuki and JK should each be getting 2 of those guys. Pick who you want with each in whatever combination, but those are the top wingers.

4. The 4th line is Byron-Evans-Armia. Perry isn't strong enough at 5v5 to be in the line-up every night.

 

I'd personally favor trying

 

Toffoli-Suzuki-Anderson

Drouin-Kotkaniemi-Gallagher

Tatar-Danault-Lehkonen

Byron-Evans-Armia

 

My reasoning for this:

- Toffoli is playing off-wing, which means you need to use his right-handed shot on the left for one-timers. This works better if you have a right-handed center feeding him on the rush.

- I've liked what Drouin and JK did together in the past. I'd like to see Gallagher as a complement to that line. The top two lines now have one guy each (Anderson and Gallagher) who go hard to the net.

- As mentioned, Danault-Lehkonen is another pairing I've always liked. Tatar's a bit of the odd man out here but he also has experience with Danault.

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Apparently the Habs didn't do specific line drills at practice today, but reporters there have suggested that the lines looked like they would be

Drouin-Suzuki-Anderson

Toffoli-Kotkaniemi-Gallagher

Tatar-Danault-Armia

Byron-Evans-Perry

 

From my end, a positive move is seeing Danault get Armia instead of Armia in the top 6. The negatives are seeing JK lose Anderson so quickly (albeit I think Gallagher also works there) and seeing Lehkonen still left out when he's been better than Byron and Perry.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, BigTed3 said:

Apparently the Habs didn't do specific line drills at practice today, but reporters there have suggested that the lines looked like they would be

Drouin-Suzuki-Anderson

Toffoli-Kotkaniemi-Gallagher

Tatar-Danault-Armia

Byron-Evans-Perry

 

From my end, a positive move is seeing Danault get Armia instead of Armia in the top 6. The negatives are seeing JK lose Anderson so quickly (albeit I think Gallagher also works there) and seeing Lehkonen still left out when he's been better than Byron and Perry.

I don't mind these lines. I do like Lehk's though and he always plays hard. I'm guessing that Perry stays in because of his use on the PP. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, CaptWelly said:

I don't mind these lines. I do like Lehk's though and he always plays hard. I'm guessing that Perry stays in because of his use on the PP. 

I would guess the same thing as you. But I'd rather have a 3rd line of Tatar-Danault-Lehkonen and then have Armia on the 4th line. To me, the decision on who sits should be more between Byron and Perry.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, BigTed3 said:

I would guess the same thing as you. But I'd rather have a 3rd line of Tatar-Danault-Lehkonen and then have Armia on the 4th line. To me, the decision on who sits should be more between Byron and Perry.

I don't disagree and would rather have Bryon for his speed and overall game. Perry has been good on the PP though. Also in the shoot outs we used to use Byron a lot and he was good. I know in a game breakaway he's not but he was good in shoot outs. As we're going I say give him a shot again , it's not like others are scoring. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, BigTed3 said:

Apparently the Habs didn't do specific line drills at practice today, but reporters there have suggested that the lines looked like they would be

Drouin-Suzuki-Anderson

Toffoli-Kotkaniemi-Gallagher

Tatar-Danault-Armia

Byron-Evans-Perry

 

From my end, a positive move is seeing Danault get Armia instead of Armia in the top 6. The negatives are seeing JK lose Anderson so quickly (albeit I think Gallagher also works there) and seeing Lehkonen still left out when he's been better than Byron and Perry.

I actually think that when Anderson came back he was playing on JK's wing more to give him time to get back into the game (Suzuki draws slightly tougher matchups) and i actually always assumed he'd be back on Nick's wing within a few games.

I am also glad to see Gallagher next to JK. We saw that a little last game. Im not sure if Toffoli or Tatar is better on the other side (specifically who works better next to JK and Danault) especially since Tatar has looked rejuvenated the last couple of games, but I think we're splitting hairs at this point since they are both quality players. 

I am somewhat concerned about the 4th line.  Originally it seemed like it was going to be a quality line but right now it just seems like its designed to eat minutes. Which i guess is fine, we have good depth of quality in our top 9 but I was hoping for more from the 4th line. 


Defense pairs remain unchanged I imagine? :(
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, dreegking said:

You got your wish. 

Not really what I would have wanted. It would still have been nice to have Chiarot as either a trade chip or as an option to bring back onto the 3rd pairing, for example. Losing him completely for a prolonged period of time was not the ideal scenario and I worry it'll prompt MB to overpay in a trade and bring in yet another player similar to him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, BigTed3 said:

Not really what I would have wanted. It would still have been nice to have Chiarot as either a trade chip or as an option to bring back onto the 3rd pairing, for example. Losing him completely for a prolonged period of time was not the ideal scenario and I worry it'll prompt MB to overpay in a trade and bring in yet another player similar to him.

Exactly. No one wanted Chairot injured. Its not like Mete is some great upgrade - in fact, I think id almost rather have Chairot on the 3rd pair than Mete at this point.

The point wasnt to have the coaches forced to make that change it was for them to be able to see it was the right one. Its like when Desharnais got injured & we'd see a young centre like Eller or Galchenyuk get a chance - which was great - but then as soon as DD was back, everything would go back to status quo. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, BigTed3 said:

Not really what I would have wanted. It would still have been nice to have Chiarot as either a trade chip or as an option to bring back onto the 3rd pairing, for example. Losing him completely for a prolonged period of time was not the ideal scenario and I worry it'll prompt MB to overpay in a trade and bring in yet another player similar to him.

This. Now Bergy will be dealing from a position of weakness,  if he was dealing at all. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted this in GDT but I would look at pulling Evans and calling up Poehling for a stint. He's playing well right now and Evans could use a break in the press gallery... I like the top 6, so I'd go

 

Drouin-Kotkaniemi-Anderson

Toffoli-Suzuki-Gallagher

Tatar-Danault-Lehkonen

Byron-Poehling-Armia

 

Have always liked Drouin-Kotkaniemi, as well as Drouin-Anderson. Have always liked Danault-Lehkonen. This keeps the top 6 forwards in the top 6 (albeit an argument can be made for Tatar).

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...