The Hockey PDOcast - Episode 189: Yet Another Mailbag Episode

Episode Date: August 10, 2017

Andrew Berkshire joins the show to help answer your mailbag questions.  We discuss the Flyers timeline for winning and the sizeable gap in age and readiness between their forwards and defensemen (1:08), Matt Murray's legitimacy and how he stacks up against the other league's best goalies (12:07), which GMs are currently in the hot seat (16:40), how the 7 Canadian teams stack up against each other both in terms of this coming season and beyond (29:33), the main storylines we're keeping an eye on heading into 2017-18 (38:17), Nino Niederreiter vs. Mikael Granlund and whether the Wild can repeat their regular season success (44:31), what makes a good penalty killer and how much of it is dependant on the individual vs. the system (55:19), and which aging franchise players would be moved in an ideal world if teams were thinking with their heads instead of their hearts (1:01:41). If you'd like to get in on the fun for a future episode, feel free to send your questions in on either Twitter or via email and we'll try to get to them the next time we do a mailbag show. Every episode of the podcast is available on iTunes, Soundcloud, Google Play, and Stitcher. Make sure to subscribe to the show so that you don’t miss out on any new episodes as they’re released. All ratings and reviews are also greatly appreciated. Thanks for listening! See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices If you'd like to gain access to the two extra shows we're doing each week this season, you can subscribe to our Patreon page here: www.patreon.com/thehockeypdocast/membership If you'd like to participate in the conversation and join the community we're building over on Discord, you can do so by signing up for the Hockey PDOcast's server here: https://discord.gg/a2QGRpJc84 The views and opinions expressed in this podcast are those of the hosts and guests and do not necessarily reflect the position of Rogers Media Inc. or any affiliate.

Are you ready for the most ridiculous internet sports show you have ever seen? Welcome to React, home of the most outrageous and hilarious videos the web has to offer. So join me, Rocky Theos, and my co-host, Raiders Pro Bowl defensive end, Max Crosby, as we invite your favorite athletes, celebrities, influencers, entertainers in for an episode of games, laughs, and of course the funniest reactions to the wildest web clips out there. Catch React on YouTube, and that is React, R-E-A-X-X. Don't miss it. This podcast episode is brought to you by Coors Light.

These days, everything is go, go, go. It's non-stop hustle all the time. Work, friends, family. Expect you to be on 24-7? Well, sometimes you just need to reach for a Coors Light because it's made to chill. Coors Light is cold-loggered, cold-filtered, and cold-packaged. It's as crisp and refreshing as the Colorado Rockies. It is literally made to chill.

Coors Light is the one I choose when I need to unwind. So when you want to hit reset, reach for the beer that's made to chill. Get Coors Light and the new look delivered straight to your door with Drizzly or Instacart. Celebrate responsibly. Coors Brewing Company, Golden Colorado. Regressing to the mean since 2015, it's the Hockey PEDEOCast with your host, Dmitri Filipovich. Welcome to the Hockey PEDEOCast.

My name is Dimitri Filipovich. and joining me is my good buddy Andrew Berkshire. Andrew, what's going on, man? Not much, man. Just, you know, enjoying the summer weather. Enjoying the summer weather. Yeah, me too. You know what else I'm enjoying?

These mailbag questions that we got from our listeners. Yeah, I took a look through them. It looks like you guys have got some intelligent listeners to be expected with the intelligence level of the Hockey PDO cast. I'm looking forward to it as well. You don't have to be buttering them up, man. They're already downloaded. They're already listening.

It's fine. You can say anything you want about them and they'll still keep coming back. Yeah, for you, but you know, I've got to get them on my side too. It's true. It's true. No, the listeners are great. And this summer they've really been coming through with these mailback questions. And yeah, let's start with what I thought was kind of the most interesting one in terms of just a thought exercise.

And it's Mike Petty. And he asks, what's your move for what the Flyers next step should be? they have a loaded prospect defense corps that won't be ready in time as their top forwards entered the decline phase. And I think that's an interesting way to look at it because there definitely is a bit of a mismatch in terms of, as he alluded to, that loaded blue line that they've drafted and signed over the past few years that's, you know, on its way up. But then the forwards are showing some worrisome signs of decline.

Obviously, you've got guys like Travis Keneckney and stuff coming up as well, up front, but there is that sort of age gap there. Like, if you were running the Flyers, what would your goals be for both this coming season and how you'd act moving forward to set them up? Yeah, I found like this question was pretty good because not a lot of people are talking about what's going on with the Flyers. It seems like they've kind of been forgotten after being a perennial, like, mid-tier contender for, you know, I would say most of our lives pretty much.

it's a tough one for them because I think they're in a situation right now where if those defensemen were ready right now they would probably want to compete for a Stanley Cup but it's clearly a couple years away from you know prime time yeah I think they've got to look at moving out a couple guys at forward and you know investing in the future uh I think at forward their future is probably or at least should be built around Sean Couturier uh for whatever reason nobody really pays much attention to Couturee either. Maybe his offensive numbers aren't as spectacular as people think, but he doesn't get the chances to produce that some other young stars do. His possession numbers are always good, bordering on a phenomenal. He's been,

you know, the straw that stirs the drink for the Flyers at even strength for a couple years now, I think they've got to build around him. And I think part of the tough decision going forward is they might have to move on from Clod Giroux. And I think that that is much as, you know, in terms of identity, that might be a tough decision for them. And, you know, it's a big contract to move. But he is clearly not the player that he used to be. And, you know, maybe that's part of the, the hip injury that he has been suffering through

the last couple of years. But you look at, you know, the gap between him and Jake Voracek and those two years of age seem to be pretty heavy. And like, I wouldn't, I don't think I'd move Jake Voracek. I think that he's a guy that, you know, maybe he'll be 32 or something when they're in their prime. I think that he's a veteran guy that can really help them at that point. He probably won't be too bad, even though he's expensive. But Jeru, I'm not confident in three, four years from now.

Yeah, the Jeru thing is a problem. I believe he's 29 years old and he has five years and 41 million dollars left on his deal, which I don't know. I'd be very curious to see. what the trade market would even be like. I feel like coming off of the year he just had, it's probably non-existent at that price. But, you know, he does carry some name cache and name value,

and he is capable of still being an immensely useful player, at least on the Powerboy, which has value, but I'm just, he definitely seems like he's on the downswing. I mean, the team as a whole last year at 5-on-5 was alarmingly bad. Yeah. You know, Sean Couturee, he played 66 games, and he led the team in 5-on-5 points, and he only had 27 of them. And, you know, you go on down the line, and it's especially that, Giroux, I mean, having 18, 5-1-5 points in, like, 1,100 minutes at 5-1-5 is a bit mind-blowing. And I thought that, you know, Ryan Stimson and Corey Schneider have done some great work in terms of highlighting some of the flaws the Flyers had last year, 5-1-5, in terms of, it seemed like, I don't know if this was by design, but.

by Dave Hacksdal or what, but most of their offense and the offensive zone centered around getting the puck up to the point and just bombing shots from deep. And it clearly wasn't working. And I wonder if maybe if they go back to the drawing board and reassess that and maybe try to create some better opportunities and maybe, you know, go about attacking in a different way, maybe that could rejuvenate some of these guys a little bit. But, yeah, it was completely night and day between how effective their power play was and how effective they were at even strength.

Yeah, they're a really weird team. And, you know, like, they've got, you know, if they were in a position to compete for a Stanley Cup, they're kind of that sort of forward group that you like in a lot of ways. And they have a lot of middle six guys who are capable of stepping up in short term. But as you look down in the lineup, they've got a lot of guys who are in that, like, 28 to 30-something range who are making a fair amount of cast.

like Valtari Philpola, Yori Latera, Couture is not, and he's 24, but Wayne Simmons, as much as I love Wayne Simmons, Matt Reed, Dale Weiss. Dale Weiss has three more years. Dale Weiss has three more years on his contract, and he's making over two million. Like, he's making over two and a quarter. That's per season. Yeah, that's, as Bob McKenzie would say. And, you know, like, people think I'm a Dale Weas hater because I was always very harsh on him in Montreal, but he's a guy who has speed. and a shot and not much else.

If you don't allow him to cheat out of the defensive zone like crazy, which I don't think the Flyers allowed him to do as much last year. He's not going to contribute much. He's not a possession driver. He's not a defensive player. He doesn't create offense on his own. He kind of just finishes plays that are made for him. He's a fourth-line guy, and he's getting paid like a third-liner.

It's not an ideal situation. And even, you know, Matt Reed's only signed for one more year, but he's 31, 3.65 million. It's just wasted space for a lot of these guys that, you know, Matt Reed used to be really, really good. And then he fell off the cliff and he doesn't seem to really be able to capture what he used to have. He kind of goes up and down every season.

Is he really better than Travis Kineckney? I highly doubt it. I guess Nolan Patrick will infuse some youth into that lineup, so we'll see how that works out. But I don't think Patrick is supposed to be. considered like an elite offensive guy right he's more of a a balanced player a two-way guy yeah i think it'll be a good all-around player i mean the the one well the good okay the saving grace here for the flyers is that i do believe they've drafted pretty well over the past few years and they have accumulated some young talent i mean most of it is on the blue line but it there is this next wave of

young players for for fans of the team to get excited about um yeah maybe the next year or two will be sort of that weird transition phase where they move on from some of these guys and look ahead to that next wave of Flyers talent that's going to lead this team back to the playoffs. But I don't know. I mean, they're going to be exciting to watch at least. I mean, they're entertaining. It's good that, I mean, they're only paying $5.2 million for Elliott and Neubert combined next season, which I'm always a big fan of getting goalies on the cheap like that.

they're going to be hard-pressed in that division to make a run just because there's like five other teams you can seeably see being ahead of them in the standings. But they could be surprisingly kind of feisty and competitive next season if some of these young guys come up and start producing right away. Yeah, I totally agree. And, you know, something I'm just looking at now because I've got their cat-friendly page open because, of course, you have to when you're talking about a team, right? Yep. They've only got five defensemen signed for next year, eh, unless another guy is breaking in from the minors. I guess maybe Sam Moran, but I thought that he was a guy

who hasn't really filled out the way that they wanted him to. Yeah, I mean, they've got a few of those guys, whether it's a Travis Sandheim or a Robert Hack. Yeah, I think they're, I think, after those auto walked, I think they're kind of hoping that one of those young guys is going to be able to step up.

I guess worst case, they'll be able to pluck some veteran off for cheap out, you know, as they get closer to the season. But I'd like to see, now that Ivan Provorov has gone through his mandatory one year of hazing, playing next to Andrew McDonald full time, I'd like to see him separated from him and get to spread his wings. But considering, as you mentioned, that they only have five guys signed, it seems like we're in for at least one more season of heavy, heavy Andrew McDonald usage.

Yeah, absolutely. They're such a weird team because it seems like the Flyers, for throughout, the time that the cap has been around have always had no cap space you know like they've they've always spent over the cap and had some guys on like l t i r whether it was like darian hatcher mike rathge chris pronger they've always got somebody and now they've actually got really nothing on lTIR the only guys that they've got that they're paying that aren't on the roster are rj umberger for one more year 1.5 and ilybrizz gallov forever but he was a compliance buyout so they're not paying him anything on the cap so like there is

in a situation where they do have a bit more flexibility, but they actually don't have much cap space. Only 3.37 million this year. So it's a, that's not a lot of cap space for a team that's probably not going to be in the playoffs. And, you know, maybe this, people are free to disagree with me,

but I don't think they're necessarily going to even be close to the playoffs this next year. I don't think that they're that competitive. I think they're probably in like an 11th, 12th range more than 9th, 10th? What are your thoughts? Yeah, I think that's fair. But the way they're set up, I mean, I guess it would be kind of disappointing,

considering how many of those forwards, as you mentioned, are in their late 20s. You'd like to squeeze some competitive opportunities out of that and maybe go for the playoffs. But it seems like they are looking ahead to the future. And it is weird that they have so much money tied up. and they're not that good, but I still think Ron Hextall's done a really good job with his team. I mean, he took over a pretty unfavorable situation and has a community young talent. So I feel like a large majority of the moves they've made in the past few years, I've been in favor of and actually agreed with completely.

So I can't say that for a lot of GMs in this league. So I think Ron Hextall is at least taking him on the right path. Yeah, I agree. They're a team that, like, the immediate future isn't necessarily. really good, but they have a bright long-term future. Yeah, I'll go with that. Perfect. Okay.

Let's move on. Magnus Simonson asks, how good is Matt Murray? Is the fourth rank on the NHL Network, The Truth? I got a few questions about this NHL Network goalie ranking list, and I didn't even, I haven't even seen it. I haven't looked at it, but I'm assuming that it's wild and very out there. I saw that they had John Quick as third best, so obviously it's not rational. Yeah.

Okay. Well, we're not going to waste time on discussing whether John Quick is the third best goalie. But I think that the Matt Murray one is interesting because obviously the sample we've seen from him in the NHL so far has been very good. And he's really succeeded at every level so far. I think I know how you're going to answer this one. But I'll let you go. I'll let you take a crack at it at first. Do you think that Matt Murray is the fourth best goalie?

And if not, or, you know, where do you think that he stacks up against the league's other best guys? I think Matt Murray is a very good goalie, but fourth best is a little premature. You know, he's played 62 regular season games so far, another 32 in the playoffs. His numbers are great. But again, he's playing behind the Pittsburgh Penguins. He's not the only reason they've won two Stanley Cup. cups in a row. I'm skeptical that he is as good as his number of show, simply because of his age. He hasn't really had to battle any adversity outside of injuries yet. So we'll see how he deals with

that if the penguins ever take a step down. I think the sample is just a little too small. You know, we're talking about essentially 94 NHL games. He's probably going to be good, but right now I would put him, you know, like a hair out of the top 10 maybe, or maybe just in the top 10 in that range. I don't think I've seen enough from him to bump him over guys who've been around and shown that they're great for a lot longer. Yeah, I guess it's kind of tough to answer this question because it's like, you can make the argument that he's the fourth most valuable goalie, just based on his age and contract.

But in terms of like, if you were just heading into next season, there's obviously a handful of guys you'd have ahead of him. Like, would you, even though they still had, um, they had down seasons, you know, at least compared to their, uh, relatively high career norms, like, you'd still have to take Lundquist and Schneider ahead of him just for next season, right? Oh, yeah, for sure. Uh, you know, people got on Schneider a little bit last season that he wasn't, you know, as great as, uh, previous seasons, but, man, the devils were such a mess.

Like, I, his numbers that he's been able to put up with the devils so far, is mind-bendingly brilliant. You know, like, it's incredible what he's been able to do there. So he's a guy that, you know, for a while, I think when he was like a backup in Vancouver, people overrated him a little bit because he wasn't getting those marquey matchups that Luongo was. But he's become a very great goaltender, top five for sure. And, yeah, I'd have to put him ahead. One season doesn't tell me much.

You know, we've seen Sergey Bobrovsky struggle for a season and then come back Winnevesna. So it's kind of the same thing with Matt Murray, right? Like we're, we can't just judge on one season. You need probably three or four for a goalie to really know what they're about. Yeah, that's true. I mean, it obviously is encouraging that he was a standout at the OHL level and the HL before this. I always like to see that from my goalies. I know that sometimes performance in that at that position in major junior can be very unpredictable. I'm not predictable and volatile and it's a completely different game, but whenever you have this sustained track record of success, that always is

encouraging and a good sign moving forward. Yeah, we'll see this year. I feel like, considering that Antidami is the only thing behind him, we could see a pretty heavy dose of Matt Murray this season for the Penguins, and I think that's going to be a good barometer for how good he actually is. Yeah, for sure. Once he's forced to deal with a full season of ups and downs, if he can stay healthy, you know, it'll be a totally different thing. And we'll see how Chris Lattang plays now at 30 years old after all those injuries. I'm not exactly worried about him, but it'll be interesting to see how he recovers this time. Yeah, I think the Penguins will be fine. They've had a few guys I've heard of. Well, they did just win the Stanley Cup without their best defensemen. So I'm guessing

they'll be okay this year. Okay, friend of the podcast, Chris Watkins has a couple questions here. and, you know, he's being very selfish, taking up a lot of our time, but a few of them are really interesting, so we'll try to get to them. He asked first, who's on the GM hot seat right now? Who's on the GM hot seat? That's a tough one.

I feel like you would assume that Joe Sackick is, considering the Avalanche tried to hire Kyle Dubus behind his back. You know, like, but then again, he hasn't been there very long, so maybe that was just a shot in the dark. and after it didn't work, they're good with Sackick. I don't know. It's hard to figure out because, like,

it seems like for the most part, as teams are right now, everyone knows who they are. Right. In the NFL, does that sound right? It does. There's a very clear separation

between the, the haves and haves not. Yeah, yeah, the contenders and the teams that are going to be bad this year, but it's kind of like, by their own doing and they understand that it's part of the process it's not like there's this handful of teams that are really actively trying to compete and just aren't capable because they're putting together an inferior product like there definitely is that delineation between those

between those two objectives yeah and i feel like also at this point in the summer you know everyone who was going to be fired this year has already been fired so we're kind of in a refresh situation so like in december we'll probably know a little bit more of who's on the hot seat. I mean, based on some of the things that I've heard if the Montreal Canadians don't do really, really well this season, we're talking like Stanley Cup final appearance Mark Bergeman may be on the hot seat. But again, this is the kind of thing that, you know, you hear in Montreal every year anyway because it's Montreal, so maybe it's not true. But it does make logical sense based on the drastic changes that he's made to the roster

year over year, that if, you know, these major changes don't result in something good, after six years on the job, he might be on the hot seat. But as of right now, the second, I wouldn't put him there because we just don't know how that team's going to perform this year. I have two for you. Kevin Shevledale-Day off. Ooh, good one. Because I do, I think they, you know, obviously being in Winnipeg, they're, they're sort of progressively

working their way up. But it's six years now. and zero playoff wins, one playoff appearance during that time. And I like the team that they've built and they have a good, a lot of good young, exciting players. But eventually they kind of have to put that together and actually have someone to show for it. And I guess we'll see this year, I mean, the goaltending has been what's really done them in in years past.

And now they have that Steve Mason, Connor Helleboy combo, which I think there's reasonably, it could be pretty effective. And if they can, can't really make a run this year and make some noise and potentially get a playoff spot, then I feel like it's time to start asking questions about whether there needs to be some sort of change there rather than just kind of bringing everything back from one year to the next. Yeah, they need to up the aggression a little bit in Winnipeg. They need to find a way to drastically improve their team instead of just, you know,

hoping that their guys that they draft fit in. they've done a great job drafting. They've got, like you said, especially at the top end of their forward group. Like, that's a fantastic top end. You know, like maybe one of the best first lines in the league. But they've got to find a way to fill out the rest of that roster. And it seems like they're just a little bit too patient. And you look at guys like Blake Wheeler, who is fantastic and has been for years.

And you're kind of without having any success, you're wasting a guy that's that good. And it kind of sucks to watch. I think you're right. that they need something to change there. But my only wonder with Winnipeg is it seems like they're so absurdly loyal to Shevoldeuf that I can't imagine him ever getting fired. You know what I mean? And I think he's, I mean, I didn't love their summer this year.

I feel like making their Demetri Kuulkov, their priority was a bizarre choice. But for the most part, I just kind of like with Ron Hextall, maybe the results haven't been there yet. But I think he's done a pretty good job of assembling this team. So I'd like to think that it'll eventually work out. for them and the process will be rewarded. But I guess we'll see this season. Another guy is, what about Garth Snow? Especially if John Tavares walks, then I feel like he could be in some trouble. Yeah, that's a good one. Yeah, if John Tavares doesn't sign and, you know, we're at trade

deadline and they're out of the playoffs, it might be, it might be time to say goodbye to Snow. I mean, is he with the longest 10-year GM outside of Ken Holland now? Because he's been around for a long time. He's fourth. I'm actually looking at it right now. I'm glad you asked. Yeah, Poil and Holland are from 97. Right, Poil. It's pretty wild.

That's crazy. And then Doug Wilson, 2003, and then Garth Snow 2006. So, yeah, he's been there for quite a while over a decade now, which is, which time flies. Yeah, 11 years. And, you know, I think they've won one playoff round in that time. That's, you know, I, he's a guy I find every couple years, I'm like, oh, Garth Snow must be, like, really smart and with it. And then like two years later, I'm like, what is this guy doing? And it seems to go back and forth.

And he's just a guy that I can't quite figure out. I don't know if maybe it was problems with Charles Wong interfering. And, you know, we know that's why that Rick DiPietro got that insane contract. But it seems like there's never a clear direction in Long Island. And I think that's kind of the same problem that I have with Montreal, right? It seems like every summer or every two summers, there's like a reset button. and they aren't willing to stick with a plan. And, you know, maybe sometimes that's a good thing when the plans aren't good.

But when the plans do look good and you don't get the immediate success that you want, and then you just flip on it immediately, it's, you know, it's not good stable management. And I feel like Garstnaud's got to stick with his guns a little bit more for a little longer. Otherwise, you're just stuck in this perpetual refresh mode for 11 years, which is what we've seen. Yeah. And it's good that you kind of, connected him and uh and and mark bergerine in montreal there because uh i feel like he definitely is on that bergivine spectrum of either great moves or really really questionable ones with very very little

in between um so yeah well i guess we'll see i mean this is going to be a big test for him here both you know in terms of uh whether they can be good enough this season to entice john tveris to stick around and if not um how he handles that and um i guess we'll We'll see. But yeah, if, I mean, if they miss the playoffs this year

in John Tavares walks, it's, there's going to be very little left behind him, and it's going to be tough for, for Garth Snow to stay around for another decade, I feel like. Yeah, I totally agree.

Okay, and the second question Chris has here is, who gets fired first? Joel Quinvo or Stan Bowman? Well, I feel like, it's always the coach that goes first unless it's a situation where the GM has,

you know, backed up the coach, like in L. last year where they both went at the same time. Right. But I feel like there's a lot of, you know, dissatisfaction in Chicago right now. And I totally agree that they are on the down swing.

And I heard you talking to the podcast, I think with Craig Custins recently about, you know, whether that core is done. And, you know, I think for right now, probably they are on a downswing. But I look at, you know, how good Patrick Kane, John Taves, are. maybe in Duncan Keith's career, they are done.

But I think that there's time still for those guys to be part of like a veteran core in a rebuilt Blackhawks team. And they have done a good job drafting. They've got some pretty good young guys coming up. I think there's so much criticism like shoveled onto that team. But when you win three Stanley Cups and you're trying to keep that core together, they've definitely made some mistakes. You know, like I think trading Jalmersen over Seabrook was a mistake, signing Seabrook to that contract in the first place was a mistake. But I think there are mistakes that any team in the NHL probably would have made, especially in that situation where you're winning constantly. You think that everyone you have is this like big game breaker, right?

Especially because Seabrook was part of that tight core, right? So it's not like he was their fifth best defenseman that they signed to this crazy deal. he was at worst, their third best defenseman during those cup runs. So I feel like they get too much crap. And if you give them time, like there's no way that you can keep being competitive the entire way through Taves and Cain's career because of what they're making and what they've had to sacrifice with the cap. But there is a possibility with the people in that organization, how smart they are,

that maybe two, three years from now they can refresh that roster and be good again. So I feel like neither Quenville or Bowman should be on the hot seat. I feel like they've accomplished too much. They've shown that they're smart enough to figure this out. Right. And we, they kind of deserve a little bit of our patience. You know, and I know like with the Twitter community and the analyst community, we like to get on every single problematic contractor, every move that goes mildly wrong and, you know, picking apart. And that's our job as analysts, right? But in the long run, it's hard to deny what they've been able to do. And even last year, you know, they went out in four against Nashville.

And, you know, maybe they wouldn't have gone out against another team. They still finish first in their conference. And there was some smoke in there, smoke and mirrors in there. But I think this is still a pretty good team. Maybe not so much now that they don't have Jalmersen and their defense is going to struggle a little bit. But Corey Crawford is much better than people give them credit for. I think Taves is better than people want to admit because you know, he's so overrated by certain people in the media that everyone goes the

complete opposite direction. I still think he's a top 10 center in this league. So I'm not ready to write them off as an org yet. And I don't think either of those guys should be on the free market, free agent market anytime soon. Yeah. I think that's fair. I feel like we didn't really answer Chris's question there. I guess either guys should be fired. It's crazy that Joel Klinnell's been there since 2008, which is five years longer than any other currently tenured coach. It's nuts. Yeah.

But you know what? He's a heck of a coach. And I honestly thought they weren't very good this past season. And he really pulled some strings, especially as the year it went along and put some of the younger players. And, you know, he was willing to experiment and try out different combinations. and I always like that from my coach rather than just, you know, being stubborn and just sticking with one thing even if it's not working. And that's a testament to how good of a coach he is and his staying

power. And I think that he'll probably be able to stay in Chicago as long as he wants unless they go on some sort of a sustained dip, which at least with this current core, like it feels like their basement is elevated pretty high. So I don't think he has to worry about that. Yeah, I think I think Joel Quinville's a pretty damn brilliant coach. And like every coach, he's going to have his little blind spots. Like I know that people rip him a lot because he loved Brian Bolig so much and he loved Dave Boland. But, you know, Mike Babcock loves Matt Martin. All these coaches have. There are certain types of players that those grindy, fourth line guys that aren't very good that they love. And I think it's just that coaches are too close to the situation to take a step back and look at how ineffective

of those guys are. You know, like Claude Julian, one of the best coaches in the league, loved Sean Thornton. You know, like, everybody has their guy that just is terrible that they love in the lineup. So I feel like that's kind of like a thing that I ignore in coaches because they all have that blind spot. So you got to look at like what you were saying with all the little adjustments that Coach Q made throughout the season. And obviously they've had some good development.

Ryan Hartman looks like a real keeper. And they've got De Brinket that's coming up here. soon. They've got some good guys on the rise here. Yeah, I agree with that. Okay, Will Hartey here asks. He basically asked us to rank the seven Canadian teams going into the season.

All right, we're talking just this season? Yeah, going into the season. And I guess, well, we can have both discussions in terms of this season and sort of being in the best position moving forward as well. Although I'd feel like those two things, I guess the habs could kind of throw a monkey

range and really be different on those two lists, but I feel like... Yes. Yeah. I don't know. Okay. Let's just do purely for this season. Okay. The top I would probably say is...

My instinct is to go with Edmonton, but they're so... They still haven't addressed their weaknesses on defense and they're going to be out Sakara for a good portion of the season. I feel like in terms of like the actual standings, the Canadians are probably going to finish on the top. and then we're looking at a mix of the oilers, Leafs and Flames. I know everybody is like the throat of my face

that I didn't think that the senators were going to make the playoffs and they made the conference finals, but I still don't expect them to make the playoffs this year. So I guess the senators after them and then you've got, well... Well, would you put the Jets or... I don't know. I feel like it's so tough. I find the Jets are so unpredictable. Maybe with the goaltending now, I'd put them above the senators, and then the Canucks last, because the Canucks are definitely going to be last.

I think what confuses me about the Canucks is all those signings that they made this year that, you know, like in a vacuum, they're all pretty good signings. And then you're like, but why do you want to do that? You're not competing for anything. You're just like, yeah, I think, I think the motivation behind that was, like, I don't think Michael Dosato and Sam Gagne, and Alex Burmese Straub are going to put them over the top to the point where they're going to really ruin their position in terms of the draft lottery sweepstakes, but they're going to have like actual NHLers that people can come to the game and see as well because last year they were shodding out guys that no one had ever heard of and had no reason to have heard of in

the past. And it was just a it was just a complete tire fire. So I think they're just like, they're striving for a certain baseline level of respect to. ability while also bottoming out and getting high picks. And they're probably going to accomplish it because they're going to be one of the, what, two or three worst teams in the league. So, yeah, I feel that is a prediction I feel very safe in that they're going to be the worst Canadian team. Up top, I agree.

If Carrie Price can stay healthy and give the HABs like 60 to 65 games, they're going to win a lot of regular season games. But would you just kind of tear that? the HABs, Leafs, Oilers, and flames, and then separate the other teams? Or, like, it's kind of tough to distinguish between those four in terms of this exercise. Yeah, and I feel like it's tough to predict how good Calgary is going to be, too, because I think that they've got some major room for growth there, especially with Hamannock in the lineup as well. Like, they're top four. I mean, as much as you can make fun of Michael Stone, as a fifth defenseman, that's pretty

hefty, you know, like he can produce some offense. He's going to be pretty sheltered. with that top four, you know, you're probably going to see your return to form from, from Brody this year, not having to carry a guy like Stone or worse around. So they're a team that I think is legitimately exciting. And people like to make fun of Mike Smith a lot, and he gives them a lot of material for it. But if you look at the quality of shots he's faced the last two years in Arizona, like he's been an easily top 10 goaltender in the league last two years now maybe he's a guy that needs to face that quality of shot to show his talent so he might not be as great looking in calgary as he would be in arizona but i think that he might be an upgrade this year and if calgary can get some consistent goaltending from him they're a they're a really good team like they don't have very many weaknesses they've got a few guys in the lineup that aren't very good, but for the most part, they've got two really good lines up front.

They've got two really good pairs on the back end and probably a decent third pair built around stone. So I don't see much to complain about with them. They could actually end up being Canada's best team. Like, that's how good I think they could be. Yeah, it's very conceivable. I mean, obviously the lasting image we have of them most recently was getting swept by the ducks, but I feel like they played better than that in that series, and it was kind of just a rough draw in terms of, you know,

they had some late, like late unfortunate penalties in some of those games, and obviously they blew that one game at home where they had the multi-goal lead. And I feel like that, you know, if you replay that series, it's much more competitive and they're in it. And I think they're a pretty good team, and they had a good summer, and we'll see. I mean, it's so tough. Obviously, it's just based on the pure high-end talent at the time,

top of the roster like the Leafs and the Oilers just instantly draw your eyes to them. I don't know if you if you had to pick a team moving forward, would you take the Leafs or the Oilers? Well, man, I think I'd take the Leafs and it's not just the roster. I think they do have a better roster like top to bottom. I think their management is just so much smarter. You know, I'm just not convinced by Chiarelli. I did not like the Jordan Eberley trade at all. I know that I really got a lot of crap last year, last couple years actually, but I think he's still a legitimate first line player.

You know, defensive issues aside, you know, people look at his lack of like getting in one-on-one battles and think that he's soft defensively. But he's actually pretty good in other areas better than a lot of other players on the Oilers. That's for sure. I don't like that trade. I didn't love the haul trade, obviously. I feel like we're in the heavy majority there outside of Edmonton. But I'm not seeing anything from Cheerle so far that's giving me the confidence that he's going to continue making the Oilers better instead of giving the reins to McDavid and saying, like, please make this happen instead of, you know, giving him some support.

And I think the Leafs are already ahead of the game there with some really young prospects that give Matthews. the support that he needs. And they've also got, you know, like other great centers that they have confidence in and like Nossam Khadry and they've got young defensemen as well. I think defense is still an area that Toronto needs to look at. But at the very least, they've got some guys there. Like I would put Jake Gardner and Morgan Riley ahead of anyone on the Oilers on defense, maybe except for Kloffbaum. Klef bomb is above. But those two like are better than Russell or Larson or whoever the Oilers have. I don't have much confidence in that group.

Yeah. But counterpoint, Connor McDavid. Yes, this is true. This is true. Yeah, I guess that's sort of the tantalizing part of it, right? It's like if you just had faith that they'd be able to build around him and do, you know, utilize their assets wisely, it would be a no-brainer that you just take the team that has Connor McDavid and figure out the rest.

But the Leafs definitely. It feels like they have something more special building than just the one player. Yeah. And it's, I guess you just have to go with them because of that. But it's pretty close. Well, and I think the other thing is how much is Drysidal going to get, right? Because if he ends up getting something like $9 million, I'd be extremely worried for the Oilers. Because if you look at his numbers away from McDavid last year and away from Taylor Hall the year before,

He's never been the singular driver of a line. And I know that people point out that he was great in the playoffs this year in terms of point production. But I was following some Oilers analysts a couple months ago and they were pointing out that he had something like a 106 PDO in the playoffs, something like that. And like a 42% coursey away from McDavid. I was like, okay, so that's why you don't judge my playoff performance. Yeah. No, I agree with that. I mean, he's going to cash it.

and it's going to make it, it's going to make it even tougher for them to fill out the stuff around McDavid. You know, okay, so a related question to the Oilers and Leafs discussion we're having right now is Owen Starlin asks, will you please discuss what you think are the NHL's most legitimate and illegitimate narratives heading into next season? So what, looking ahead, I know we have a good month and a half or so until we even start really thinking about the regular season, but what are some of the top storylines that you think we should kind of be keying in on and focusing on and on as we preview this season? I feel like the one that, sorry, excuse me, I think the one that will probably prop up or crop up really early is as soon as the Maple Leaf's got an injury,

right? It'll be like this injury watch of like, oh, they were so healthy last year, this year. They can't have that same health. Yeah, exactly, right? So they're going to follow these two teams. and look at sophomore slumps and stuff like that. I'm sure that if Austin Matthews doesn't score four goals in his first game, there will be some sophomore slump talk on Toronto radio from some hot takest.

So I feel like that'll be stuff to watch. One thing I'm interested in, and this is obviously my Montreal bias, but the Canadians let it be known earlier this summer that they don't expect Kerry Price to play 60 games in a season ever again. And I look at that and I'm like, well, if you're looking at a 55 game goal, or 55 games a year, why are you paying them $10.5 million a year? That's a pretty tough sell for this market. So if Kerry Price ends up playing like 50 to 55 games and he's healthy the entire time, if they, you know, struggle again

in the playoffs, that's going to be an interesting little thing to look at in terms of how that's covered because that's going to be a weird one. Well, why didn't you tell me that before I pick the Canadians to be finishing atop the standings for Canadian teams? You don't have faith in Al Montoya? Buddy Cop Al? No. I mean, he was good last year. He'll be fine. He's like the consummate backup goalie in today's NHL. I have a feeling there's a chance that the Canadians might bring up Charlie Lindgren to play a few games too because he's had some really good results in the HAL and every game he started. I think it's only two games in the NHL that he's started, but he's been really good as well. Yeah, I think that, I mean, the Leafs and Oilers sort of just seeing if these young teams that have the young superstars can kind of take that next step.

Like, you know, they took a big one last year in terms of just pulling their franchises out of the dumps and actually making the playoffs. But now it's can they take that next step as well? And especially before some of those big contracts start to kick in, like this is their opportunity to strike and really make something happen. so I'll be fascinated to see that. I mean, we mentioned the Blackhawks earlier. I feel like a legitimate storyline will be seeing whether this really is the year that they finally decline and fall off the map or whether they're able to kind of keep just sticking around and winning games despite all the concerns that we might have about their roster.

And then the other one is, I'm very fascinated to see how the Metro Division plays out. you know obviously the penguins having won the last two Stanley Cups um it's feasible that there's some sort of a fatigue there and they might have a down season but at the same time they still have so much talent there that they could very conceivably be one of the best teams in the league again and then obviously you know with the capitals and owee there's always going to be intrigue there about whether this is going to be quote unquote their season or not so um yeah i think those are sort of the things that I'll be watching for most closely. Yeah, speaking to the Capitals, how long into the season do you think before there's

some questioning of Ovechkin's captaincy? Let's say that's probably going to be like one of the more illegitimate narratives that goes into it because if he is unable to completely, you know, recover his goal scoring that he had the rest of his career. He had a bit of a down year last year, which, you know, a down year for Ovechkin is a great year for everybody else. But, you know, if he's not a 50 goal scorer next year, and the capitals are probably not going to be as good.

I think they're still going to be really good, but they're probably not going to win the president's trophy. Probably not going to win the Stanley Cup. I'll say this. For once, I'm not going to pick them. Maybe I'll change my mind in six months. But if they struggle this year, how long until some hot takists start going after Ovi?

Because I don't think it'll take very long. Yeah, I don't think it'll take it. I've already seen some slander. like a picture, a picture came out of him at the beach and he was like kind of slouching and people were questioning his weight and whether he was taking the summer seriously and working out and it's like, oh, are we doing this? Are we really doing this again? Yeah. I'd be cool with like just getting rid of captaincy in general because all of all of those debates about whether a player really is fit to be a team's captain are just mind-blowing to me.

so I try not to engage in those. Yeah, the caps, you know, it's an interesting strategy. I'm sure it's not intentional, but they had a few really good summers, and they didn't have anything to show for it at the end of the season. So maybe having a really bad summer here will really flip the script for them and maybe surprise us in the playoffs. They're trying to reverse psychology or something. Yes.

Yeah, I feel like they were just so devastated this year. Like they bought into the idea that this was, their year. And I guess they just, like, sat on their hands for too long. And then before they knew it, it was time to make all these moves. And they're like, oh, crap, we have to lose Johansson. And like, I know you've been on this a few times, but this was a really bad summer in terms of asset management for them. Yeah, especially since they did lose in the second round. So they had plenty of time to plan this out. Agreed. By then, by the time the decisions actually had to be made, It's not like it snuck up on them when they were playing late into June.

And all of a sudden, they were like, oh, crap, we have like two weeks here to figure it out. Like they, I don't know. We've talked about it enough. Ben Gordon asks, with a wild signing, Nino Needwriter and Michael Grandland, although the terms differ on those contracts. And the AAV is similar. Who do you think will hold more value and why? Oh, that's tough. I can't even really defend this, but for whatever reason, I,

never quite loved Michael Granlin or Michael Granland. I do love Neander Rider, though. I think it's kind of a style of play thing. You know, Neider Ryder is one year younger. Usually I go with the center, but I just like that Neiderider is always stirring things. He's an agitator. He's a scorer.

He just is super dynamic to me. Granlin is a very good playmaker, but I don't know, something about his game, I don't think he's amazing. You know what I mean? I don't think he's a top line player, whereas Neider Rider, I think can be. So I think I'd go with Neider Rider. I mean, you mentioned all the reasons to like Neider Rider. It was also the fact that he was tied with Forsberg, Malkin, and Ovechkin, and 5.15 points last year. So he's also a good one. incredibly productive as well um yeah yeah i've seen people mention this but i do love that sort of profile

neederrider has in terms of he doesn't necessarily need to play top minutes or play with the top guys but he's just going to be like if you prorate his stats he's going to be so sneaky productive and and he just gets the job done regardless of how he's used and that's an incredibly valuable player i mean granland on the other hand is a fascinating case study and i'm really key to see how he does next season because, you know, he came into the league with his pedigree and he was a top 10 pick and we all, you know, expected that he'd be incredibly dynamic and be one of the best playmakers in the league and it took a while. And last year, he really came into his own. Now, some of it, conveniently enough, seems like it was percentage driven. And if that comes back

down earth a little bit, maybe he looks less appealing and maybe this really slants the discussion in favor of Nieder Rider, but assuming that Granland can keep up this level of play, it's a very interesting debate. And I think it is sort of just purely based on sort of subjective, stylistic preferences, because they're very different players, but they're both immensely effective in their own ways. Yeah. And I feel like also with Minnesota, I'm kind of stuck, looking at them and you know you've got coivu granland and coil down the middle right that's that's a pretty good trio so you're not going to really suffer no matter what like they've got i don't know what it is that they've been so underrated for so long but you know you look at some of the guys that they

have producing especially at even strength and i wonder if maybe they didn't have the zach prezate contract to worry about if people would be a lot more uh positive about them because like jason Zucker the last two years also been like incredible at five on five. Charlie Coil's great at five one five. Need a rider like you said. I think last year Zucker had like 40 something points at five on five, which is you know, top line level. Yeah, he was tied with, uh, with Nick Baxter and Brad Marchand. So he had some pretty good names to be in the middle of. Yeah. Yeah, but 20 even strength goals. But so are, should we be concerned about the fact that they did seem to. So, you know, it's a lot of, outperform their underlying numbers just as a team last year?

Like, do you think there is a bit of a regression coming here, or do you think it's just Bruce Boudra Magic? Well, I think there's a little bit of Bruce Boudra Magic for sure, because if you look throughout his career, it seems like every team that he's on, they outperform their possession by a fairly significant margin. I remember, you know, like, when he was in Anaheim, they were never a great possession team. They were okay, but they were never great.

The same kind of thing with Washington, I think outside of a couple years, they were, you know, a middle of the pack possession team, but, like, score like crazy. He's a guy who, like, he's the one coach in the NHL, I find, that consistently finds ways to improve team shooting percentage. And I wouldn't expect that to change necessarily, but it might drop a little bit because it was so out of whack last year. But then again, they were the team that had, like, the most high-inger scoring chances according to sport logic by, like, a wide margin.

And I think they had the best differential as well. which, you know, this is something that I think Boudreau wasn't that great at in Washington for most of his career, but the last few years he's really found a way to cut down chances defensively. And that's why we saw Devin Dubnick put up these completely absurd numbers. Because I think Dubnick is more like a mid-range goaltender, and he just didn't face much for challenging shots last year. I believe it was a fewest in the league or second fewest in the league after L.A. Yeah. Yeah, they definitely, it's no coincidence that as things went off the rails a bit for them last season, his play dipped accordingly.

And I think those things were intertwined. But yeah, I'm optimistic about them heading into next season. They have, you know, they might lack that traditional superstar, but they have so many good, productive players that I'd like to think that those things will add up. push them over the top but I feel like we've been saying that for a while now as well and I'd like to find let's see something come of it yeah I guess we gotta get to Tyler Delo on again explain what's more important the superstars or the depth players I've seen him get on that a few times this summer I think that's a fascinating debate I don't think there's necessarily one right answer it's probably like

depends on on which superstars and what kind of depth but yeah there's there's many different ways to to assemble a winning roster yeah I have a I have I have like a hypothesis that you can be a great regular season team without stars, but you can't win without them. You know what I mean? Why do you think that is? I think it's just when it comes down to it in the playoffs, you've got to have those few guys that, you know, like, if your first line is neutralized completely by the other team's first line, you're not going to be able to, you know, like shift the, shift the game in high pressure situations, right? So you've got to have those couple guys who just are complete game breakers. And I think we saw that in the Stanley Cup final with Ryan Johansson out for the predators.

They didn't have that top line that could just dominate other lines. And they did great in terms of possession stats. But every time Sidney Crosby got the puck, it was a game breaking situation for the Penguins. And he just took over that series. And if you don't have a guy like that up front, it's hard to really find a way. around that and the penguins had two and you know the predators were able to shut down malcolm extremely effectively uh the suban echo pairing but they had no answer for crosbie and you you've got to have a couple guys who can just take over games and if you don't you know i guess you you end up having to

change the game in your third and fourth lines and you know that can work in a regular season game but over a playoff series you know you're counting on guys who play last time to do the damage for you. And I think that's where you get diminishing returns. Yeah. No, that makes sense, especially, you know, when the game slows down a little bit and you have more time to the game plan and try to slow down the other team that you would need. Those guys can kind of put you over the top as opposed to just treading water. John Abney here asks, are there any good defensemen who aren't quote unquote puck moving defensemen?

Always see this phrase thrown around and I'm curious. So is it possible in today's NHL to be an effective blue liner without really having any puck skills? I mean, I guess not without having any, but I think that what most people will talk about as puck movers are talking about, like, great transition defensemen or offensive defensemen. So I would say guys like, I don't know, Velocic's pretty good in transition. Jalmersen too. Yeah, they both have, they don't definitely have a skill. Yeah,

there's their skill there, but I don't think that they would be called puck-moving defensemen. Right. Is that fair? Yeah, no, they're definitely like the more, they're the modern day defensive defense.

Yeah, like, and those guys are extraordinarily rare. Yeah. Like off top of my head, those are the only two guys of that mold that I can name that are legitimately great

and also don't produce anything offensively. Actually, you know what, Chris Tanev as well. Yeah, especially before this past season, kind of his results are weird, but yeah, I wouldn't put much weight in this season, would you? No, Vancouver. No, I think that was just the loss season,

and he was banged up, and I think he was playing injured, and I'm still a big fan of his game. Yeah, no, there's a few of those guys, but you can't look at their points to figure out how valuable they are, that's for sure, but they can still make that pass out of their own zone, and they're not just, you know, they don't have brick hands for sure. So it's, it's, you do have to have like a certain baseline level of talent to hang around in

today's NHL, regardless of how good you might be positionally or, or, or what have you defensively. Like, you still need to be able to do something with the puck. Yeah, absolutely. And it's the same with forwards, right? Like, there are players in the NHL who are good at, who are good forwards who don't produce a lot of points, but like they have to have, like, I was like the way that I broke it up last year for that top 20 of each position thing where it was, you know, defense, offense, and transition, there are no legitimately good players in the NHL who are only good at one of those three, right? You have to have two. And I think that's where you look at guys like Tanev and Jarmelson and had massacred that name. Jarmels. Jarl. Jarmels. Yeah, now I'm not even going to try it. And classic. Yeah, Nick. those guys are all good at two of those three. And they might not produce offense,

but they create the situation that can lead to offense. And I think that's the major difference. Yep. I agree with that. Let's see here. Let's bang through a couple more. Oh, Josh Stafer here asks, how do you evaluate whether players are good on the penalty kill

outside of just watching them play lots? Do shots against per 60 tell us anything in that sample, or do we need to look at something else? Yeah, I usually look. look at like course against relative to team. Just in, like I haven't done any calculations on how persistent it is, but just looking at year to year over the last five, six years that I've been looking at stats, it seems to be pretty persistent year to year. I look at longer samples as well to see, but for the most part, guys who are good at the penalty kill, stay good at the penalty kill. I look at goals against as well.

that's less persistent, right? It's a little bit more random. But I also have the advantage of looking at sport logic stats where you can look at, you know, specific plays, like breakups and guys who are good at defending their own blue line, guys who are good at clearing their own zone. I would say like zone exits is probably a good thing to look at if that's trackable data for you or if there's a database that you can find with it. I think on the penalty kill specifically, there's more. value to dump outs, right? Right. So, like, you're looking more at zone clearances than controlled exits for the penalty kill because that's what's more important. So players who are good at that, like, P.K. Suban, last couple years, has dumped the puck out a little bit too often at even strength for my liking.

But that strategy has made him essentially, like, number one or number two in the best penalty killing defenseman in the NHL. so it's it's interesting to see like what kind of defensive strategies don't really work well at even strength but are really good on the penalty kill and you can see a lot of players who are like that you know they're not very good defensive players that even strength but on the penalty kill they are it's it's fun to find those guys yeah especially since he's like mastered that uh all-y-u blob play out of his own which can be sometimes infuriating at 515 but um it's a immensely useful at killing time and letting his teammates change on the penalty kill. So yeah, I agree with that.

I haven't looked at this. I'd be very curious to and whether it would lead to anything enlightening. But I always wonder about how much of special teams play is sort of a, you know, schematics based and tactical versus actual player talent and maybe particularly on the penalty kill. Like I'd be curious to see if a good penalty killer, goes from one team to another, whether his underlying numbers persist or whether there's noticeable difference. And I guess vice versa, like if a player who's not that great in the penalty kill goes to another team and all of a sudden his numbers dramatically improve, whether that's a sign that

it's just something that whoever's running the penalty kill on that team is doing as opposed to that player having some sort of natural penalty killing ability by himself. Yeah, I think that's a great question. And I'd also be really interested to look into that. I think, that there are a few things that probably make for the potential of a good penalty killer, and that would be, you know, guys who are good at staying in lanes, essentially, like good reaction time to the puck moving, a lot of instincts of where plays develop. I have a theory that offensive players are better on the penalty kill than defensive players, like even strength defensive players, right?

because they know what the offensive player wants to do. And I think that's why you see guys like Max Patcheretti or other players of that stature around the league. When they get a chance to play on the penalty kill, they're actually phenomenal because they know where the puck's going to go. They know where they would want to put the puck. You know, who leads the league in the history of shorthanded goals, Wayne Gretzky. You know, like people don't think of Wayne Gretti as a great even-strength player,

but on the penalty kill, like watch video of it, and it's phenomenal what he was able to do. So I have a theory, well, hypothesis about that, that offensive players are better on the penalty kills. So we'll see if that ever bears out. I'll take it even one step further. I think that, you know, for a while and obviously this is reflected in other parts of the game, not just the penalty kill, but there was this kind of size bias and you'd want bigger players

and you'd want guys that could block a ton of shots and get in the way of those shooting lanes. But the more I watch and the more I think about it, like I understand why you wouldn't want to have your high-end skilled offensive players. out there using up a lot of their energy on the penalty kill when they're not going to have that many opportunities to score themselves and, you know, they can put themselves in harm his way by having to block shots and potentially get injured. But like, I love the idea of some using like smaller, kind of quicker players to just wreck havoc by just consistently pressuring the other team, especially if they're, you know, content passing the puck back and forth

at the blue line and just trying to make something happen by getting in those passing lanes and being very aggressive as opposed to sitting back and just letting the shots come to you. Yeah, absolutely. And I don't know, maybe, like obviously we don't have data for this. And I don't know if it was before your time, because I know you're a young one, Dimitri, but Theo Fleury used to be phenomenal on the penalty hill because he was just, not only was he fast and, you know, a demon on loose pucks, but he also pissed guys off too and drew a lot of penalties.

And if he was able to get the puck, you know, he was gone on a breakaway. and I feel like those kinds of guys also back teams off. I'm trying to think of a modern example as well. I remember there was somebody that I watched. Oh, Paul Byron. Paul Byron, tiny little guy. And last year on the penalty kill,

you could tell that teams didn't want to play with the puck on the point when he was on the PK. Because if he got any chance to get that puck, you're not catching him. Yeah, you're not catching him. So I'd love to see Connor McDavid play PK. Don't block any shots, Connor, but just like stick them.

in the middle of the ice and wait for a pass that you can pick off. I know you're smart enough to do it and score 50 short-headed goals in the year. Yeah. Well, especially with the instincts that you mentioned that offensive players have. I feel like he'd be able to jump a lot of those passing lanes. It could really lead to some interesting opportunities. Riku asks, which of the franchise players that are getting a bit older would you look to trade to get good value for them while you still can, I guess, whether that's this season

or even looking ahead. I mean, we mentioned Claude Jureau, obviously, already, but I think maybe the ship's even sailed in terms of getting good value for him at this point, unless he can rebuild his value with a good season this year. But I don't know, are there any other guys off the top of your head? And, you know, we should say with a caveat that, you know, when I had Craig Cusson-Song, we were talking about trading John Tavares,

and I made the point of it's very easy for us to just be kind of emotionally detached and say, of course, you should trade this guy and get some. good value for him while you still can, but I understand why a lot of this stuff is hypothetical because the teams might be reluctant because of what that player might mean to them, whether it's, you know, just fan-based attachment or jersey sales or ticket sales or marketing or what have you. But with that out of the way, are there any names off the top of your head that you think are candidates to fit the bill here? Well, it's tough because you've got to kind of skirt the line between a guy who's, you know,

obviously too old to help their team and another team could see them as, you know, a great player to help them out. I feel like if they had thought of it, or not thought of it, but like given up on the season a little bit earlier, Jeff Carter could have got L.A. a King's Ransom last year. You know, like he was having. Oh, he was having. I see what you did there. Nah, I didn't even mean to do that. But, you know, he had a phenomenal year.

He's probably not going to have a year like that again. although he is a great player, I think that any team would give up a ton for Jeff Carter, but is L.A. going to be competitive again next couple years? Probably not. I don't think that they've got the talent to refresh to become a scoring team anytime soon. So he'd be a guy that I'd look at.

If Minnesota wasn't so strong, I would say Ryan Suter, because he still has that name recognition. And he hasn't, He hasn't really declined, but he should probably play fewer minutes. I think he'd be a guy. And his contract is crazy, but it's also not the worst in terms of fitting under the cap. Yeah, I think those are the two guys that I would look at.

Yeah, it's tough because a lot of the more obvious candidates are also on teams that fancy themselves contenders this season. So it would be tough for them to, it would be like a real, like, it would take like a real like sort of a, uh, just badass GM to be willing to, you know, take that type of a PR hit while also maybe thinking, like, maybe this player is not even that good anymore and we can fill in the gap and be better for it both right now and moving forward. But I don't know. Like what? What about Ovechkin?

Well, yeah, but the thing is, like, with him and the money he's still owed. Yeah. I wonder what the, what's the market for him is, right? Like there was a lot of talk about that at the start of the summer before they had to offload some guys and make it work financially. I'm not sure whether that would ever happen. Like, what about Jonathan Taves? Ooh, that's tough. I feel like you could get probably more than Taves's worth for Jonathan Taves because of his pedigree, right?

So that's a pretty good one. I mean, just the fact that he's a 29-year-old who still has six years and over $60 million, dollars still owed. Yeah. I feel like, yeah, but I do wonder whether, obviously he has like a no move and the Blackhawks aren't going to trade him because of what he means to have franchise. But I do wonder what they could get for him in a deal without even considering how much better off they'd be for it financially in like 2021 when he's not that good anymore, but still

owed 20 or still owed 10.5 million per season. Yeah, I totally agree with you. I mean, if we were looking at a couple seasons ago, I would say like, I know, I know, I understand the decision that they made, but if the Canucks would have traded the Cedine twins a couple years ago, they'd be in such a much better position right now because they could have gotten a lot. You know, whether or not teams would be able to fit in that cap space,

it would be another question. But I feel like you can always work out a deal, right? Like, I feel like oftentimes we're too willing to say, oh, well, it wouldn't fit with the cap. Whereas, like, if you really want to work out a deal, you can figure something out. You know, like P.K. Sub-N was traded for Shea Weber. Those are two massive contracts. You know, hey, a year ago, we could say that's the attitude that Nashville had with Shea Weber

was to move on from an aging player. But it's just looking through the list of players now. You know, maybe if Boston struggles to make the playoffs this year, they can move on from Zdena O'Chara. Now, he's not what he used to be at all. but I would say that a lot of teams would spend a fair amount at the deadline for Zadano Chara for a playoff run. Yep. I think that's a good one. I'm going to take it to the ultimate extreme here, and I've brought this up on the podcast before, but Brent Burns.

Ooh. Yeah, I've thought about that recently as well, because he's not young. Well, he's 32. He's going to turn 33 this season. his eight-year $64 million contract has not even started yet. Oh, man. That's rough. He just scored a ton of goals and won the Norris trophy.

I'd be so curious to see what you could get for him. Yeah, I would too. I think a team would pay a ton for him, and it'd be tough to sell to your fans, especially since the sharks are, you know, despite losing Patrick Marlowe, will once again be pretty good next season, I think, and be right there in the Pacific.

So it's kind of tough. But, man, that would be a fascinating kind of time to get out while you still can and recoup the ultimate value as opposed to, as you mentioned, with a guy like Charra or Cedins where you're not getting what you could have for a few years ago. Yeah.

I wonder, you know, like, if they would be able to lay that entire contract on another organization, that'd be interesting because, you know, I like Brent Burns a lot and I know you do too. Yeah. But at his age and with the amount that he shoots, like, when is his shoulder going to give out? Yeah. Yeah.

I'm not sure how he's going to age. Yeah. It's a tough one. Yeah. Let's do one or two more here. St. Louis Dave asks, are there any key assumptions towards the game that you carried a few years ago that you've changed with improved levels of game data since. Definitely. I was definitely one of those people who was like shot quality doesn't

exist. I would say I was also on the quality of competition doesn't matter either. And I still don't think quality of competition is as important as a lot of people believe. It's definitely not as important as, say, quality of teammates, but there's definitely some data out there now that shows that especially at the very top of the lineup when you're facing, like, the best players in the opposing team, it does have quite the impact. And shot quality, obviously, I mean, geez, half my job now is examining shot quality for sport logic. So obviously my opinions change there quite a bit, especially looking at the playoff results

last year. I think it was like the team that won the high danger scoring chance battle won like 13 of 16 series or something like that last year, which is pretty impressive. Obviously, you'd have to look a little bit deeper than that to get anything of value for predictiveness, but it was interesting to watch just anecdotally and descriptively how that worked out last year. And there's definitely a lot more teams right now that are chasing shots. quality than ever before. I think we saw that a lot with the penguins that they kind of, I think they kind of realized that without Latang, they weren't going to win the possession battle in the playoffs.

And they'd already kind of shifted during the regular season into trying to get more extremely high quality scoring chances. And they just went all in for it in the playoffs and just like formed a shot blockade in front of their net to keep Flurry and Murray insulated as much as they can or as much they could and it ended up working for them. Who knows if it could work long term, but it was an interesting change of pace. Yeah. Yeah.

I still think it's not the optimal strategy for the full season, but in terms of like that 25 game sprint or so, they obviously showed you can do it and they made it work. And yeah, I'd be alarmed if our answer to this question was, no, we haven't changed our mind on anything because that would be depressing in terms of where the games have. headed. I'm very curious what our answer to this question, if it's posed to us again in five years will be when we get even more information and testing on that information. And I think our views on the game could change quite a bit. So that's pretty exciting to think about. But also kind of tantalizing just because we're waiting for it. I feel like we're ready at this point.

Yeah. I feel like we're probably going to know a lot more about defensive contributions five years from now. I think we're starting to hit in on that now. And like the obvious ones we already knew about, right? Like everybody already knows that Patrice Bergeron is phenomenal defensively, but it'll be finding out things that we didn't know about players and maybe see why coaches value some players. One thing that I found super interesting this year is that John DeVaraz has changed his game defensively to the point where like I had him, if I had a vote, I would have put him on my, on my, on my, uh, Selke. Yeah. Like, he was phenomenal last year on a team that didn't have much. He's turned, he's, he went from a guy who was offense only, like really, really bad defensively when he broke into the league. So now he's like a full-on two-way force. So that's some interesting stuff of the new data that's coming out. Yeah. I like that. Okay, one final question here. And this wasn't on the initial list that I gave to you in preparation for the show. But I think you'll, I think you'll be fine. Hampas Nyberg asks

How will Vegas unload their surplus of defense pen? Did they flood their own market? Yeah, I think they did. Like, even the guys that they have traded, they haven't got great value for. No. I think there was a miscalculation that happened here and also just, I don't hate the idea in principle.

I thought that the way they went about it was bizarre with the names they took on because I just, like, they willingly took Lucas Beza. It's not like, I understand, like, taking on a Clayton Stoner or whatever because, you know, the ducks incentivized him to do so. But, like, I think they legitimately took Lucas Beza and thought that they might get a team to bite on him.

And I just think that was a miscalculation on their part. It was a huge one. And also, like, their decisions on defense this whole way, like, ever since, they started have been really confusing, right? Because even the one good, or I guess they made a couple, but one of the major good decisions they made at the expansion draft was taking Nate Schmidt. And then instead of giving him the really reasonable salary that he asked for, they took him to arbitration. It's like arbitration should be the absolute worst case scenario for a player because like it almost always does some level of irreparable damage to your relationship with the player.

and Schmidt is probably Las Vegas' best defenseman. So, like, he was asking for like 2.75, which is below league average salary for a guy who's probably going to play on your first pairing. Like, dude, just sign the guy. And then, like, you know, Alexei Amelan,

they didn't get much for. They got very little for David Schlemko from Montreal. I think they got maybe a second round pick for Mark Matha. But it seemed like they paid, or they decided they were going to take all these guys who teams shouldn't value but some teams do but they were like two years late you know like if they would have done this exact draft two years ago they probably would have gotten a lot more value for those guys but they've kind

of been exposed as defensemen who aren't very important yeah the list of guys they have on this on this depth chart is pretty mind-blowing yeah it's right it's very Steven Spisa, Stoner, John Merrill, Derek England, Griffin Reinhart. What? What did I agree? Why Griffin Reinhardt? Like of all the guys, like, it makes no sense. And, you know, like, when I looked at their team that they assembled and I like went through all the stats for those players and kind of tried to develop, like, what type of team they were going to be next year. And based on the guys they pick, like, they're going to be

a very heavy grinding team that generates almost no offense. They're very immobile, very slow. If you're an expansion team, like, if it were me, maybe I'm naive in some way, and I probably am. But if I'm trying to sell stuff in Las Vegas, you know, you're picking for the future for sure and you're picking for trades for sure, but try to get as many exciting dynamic players as you can, even if they're not going to be, you know, first-liners,

get guys who can do something, who can wow the crowd, because it is Las Vegas. You're competing with some major shows there. And I just wonder, like, I know that they're saying they have a lot of season tickets sold and everything, but that's year one. Right. So if they're really boring this year and can't score and really slow

and just get slaughtered every night, who's coming back next year? Well, and the thing is, like, I completely agree in terms of what their team's in a profile like, but I would have thought that, and we knew that I was going to be the case as soon as the, you know, with all the mock drafts we did for pretty much a full year in terms of knowing the expansion rules. But like, why wouldn't they take more forwards who were either on good contracts or were expiring soon, like, and just put them in great opportunities to succeed in terms of like top power play? and first line and then try to trade them while their values high at the deadline. Like that's what I thought was confusing. Like I understand that the maybe the financial concerns, but like you could have done that with a Michael Camilleri

and then flipped him at the deadline to some contender. And instead they just take John Merrill and it's like it just seems like you're just settling for just like the most conservative bland option ever. And I just don't see what the upside of what that is. And I thought they should have taken a few more risks along that. that along those lines as opposed to what they did. Yeah, I totally agree. And you also look at the defense as they're structured,

and they've got Nate Schmidt, Griffin-Rinhart, and Brad Hunt signed next year. Everyone else is either RFA or UFA. That's a lot of work to do over the next calendar year. Like there's even at forward, they've got one, two, three, four, five, six free agents restricted or unrestricted to work on. Calvin Pickard is a restricted free agent next year. They didn't exactly set themselves up to be able to relax at any point in the future. And I feel like also George McPhee's comments about how he didn't want to make other teams mad

kind of tell you what's wrong with the NHL today. There's always like nobody's going for it. You know what I mean? They want to win, but they're not willing to sacrifice a relationship with their good buddy to do it. And that makes the league kind of boring. Yes. No, I agree with that. Yeah, we'll see. I mean, they obviously loaded up on a ton of draft picks and they came out of this year's entry draft looking good, but it's going to take a few years for any of those guys to really be impact players for them. So they're going to read for that. But yeah, either than that, I think it's time for us to

to sign out of here. I mean, we did a good 80 minutes. I feel like we answered a lot of questions. I mean, there were some other ones. As we said, the listeners really came through. I feel like we probably could have done another 80-minute show here, but I guess we'll just save them for later and get to it maybe later on in the summer. Absolutely. Andrew, do you want to plug anything?

What are you up to these days? These days, I am working on that long-term project for Sportsnet again. That's pretty much all I'm working on right now. I'm off with RDS until September. And, yeah, I've got the podcast going again soon. I'm probably going to be. starting something up with Mark Dumont pretty soon as well, because it's a secret, I think, right now, but there's something in the works with me and Mark Dumont.

I'm a big Mark DeMont guy, so I support that. Yeah, well, listen, we've already made tentative plans, but now that we put it out in the universe, we have to follow through with it. Let's do that top 10 series again, like we did last preseason once you release it to the world on SportsNine.com. Absolutely, man. You can count on me. Absolutely. Chat to you, buddy. Talk soon.

The Hockey PDOCast with Dmitri Filipovich. Follow on Twitter at Dim Philipovich and on SoundCloud at soundcloud.com slash hockey pdiocast.