The Hockey PDOcast - How the Rangers Beat the Canes, Conn Smythe Picks, and Mailbag Questions

Episode Date: May 17, 2024

Dimitri Filipovic is joined by Pete Blackburn to talk about how the Rangers were able to finish off the Hurricanes in Game 6, where Carolina goes from here after yet another playoff disappointment, and help answer a bunch of mailbag questions from the listeners. 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.

2015. It's the Hockey P.D.O.cast with your host, Dmitri Filippovich. Welcome to the Hockey P.D.O.cast. My name is Dimitri Vlipovich. And joining me as my good buddy P. Blackburn. Pete, what's going on? Not much. Thanks for having me. You beautiful, beautiful man. Happy to be back. I'm excited. This is going to be fun. The plan for today, you and I are going to talk about last night's Hurricanes Rangers game with the Rangers eliminating the Hurricanes of Game 6 of the thriller. We're going to talk about some mailback questions that we got from listeners, both from the Discord and from Twitter, some really fun stuff, and I'm sure that's going to drag us in many different fun directions.

So let's get right into it. Let's start with Hurricanes Rangers. A game that certainly quickly turned, right? Like, it looked like we were kind of destined for a game seven. The Hurricanes were up 3-1. The Rangers were sort of staring down the potential of blowing a 3-0 series lead. And then all of a sudden,

in the blink of an eye in that third period, Chris Kreider just has a natural hat trick, which is such a baller move, particularly on the road to claw back from that deficit, to close out a series the way that he did, was just wildly impressive, and he did it in very crisp crider fashion at that, right?

It was like a tip on the power play, a rebound in front of the net, and then kind of a tap-in off of a cross-creased pass, and you look up, and all of a sudden the Rangers are up, and they took care of business to close the door from there. And Warrior kind of main takes from both that,

series from that game and particularly, but also I think from the series as a whole now that it's done and we can kind of reflect on on how the six games went. Yeah. I mean, you nailed it with Kreider and just being the most Kreider period you could ever expect, but also just like that guy is the lifeblood of the Rangers, right? And just seemed kind of perfect that that happened. My bigger takeaway, though, was like the Hurricanes had so many chances to put that game away leading up to

the bottom falling out in the third period. And they hit a bunch of posts. Igor made some really, really good saves. And it just didn't feel like they could step on the throat and force the game seven. And that is

a bummer. And Freddie Anderson is like, I think the book is closed on Freddie Anderson. Unfortunately, I just think that you can't trust him. Not the guy. And good for the Rangers, good for Crider, but man, it does feel very, very frustrating for everybody who constantly backs the Carolina Hurricanes to end up in the same place where they can't get over the hill.

And they're always eliminated in what feels like a very close series, but there's just like one or two things that don't really go their way. And that ends up being the difference. Yeah, that third period was the perfect encapsulation for it. Certainly Shisterkin got fortunate with a couple posts that they rang and two of them in the third period in particular, but he also after that made at least a handful of just like high end saves in tight where he just shut the door and then let Carolina get that fourth goal and extend the lead and kind of kept his team in it. And then you look at the other end, obviously like the

Crider tip and then the last one in particular to make it four three, there's not that much a goal he can do on it. But I'd say like the first goal and then the rebound one certainly in the way Anderson sort of handled the initials of binajad shot and just how like clumsy. and uncomfortable he looked. That was a common theme for me in this series, right? And that's kind of Freddie Anderson at his worst. Once you get him moving and once you get him into these sort of sketchy positions, all of a sudden he just completely unravels.

And I feel like that's what you saw here. He just looked so uncomfortable. And it really extends to the whole post season, right? It didn't really get exposed that much in round one against the Islanders. But what, in that close-out game, even in that series, there was that goal where he's kind of just like slipping and sliding on the ice and falling down and just leaving an empty net for Casey's Zellers. because I believe to score.

And that sort of happened in this game as well. And so, yeah, that's kind of the difference here, right? Just starting out a 9-19-s 8-8 percentage in this series. Freddie Anderson had an 8-78. And if anything, I'm a bit surprised that they didn't go back to Kachkov. I know that Anderson had won the most recent game. I think that was more of a defensive effort by the hurricanes. Like, the Rangers didn't get any scoring chances in that game five.

Kachikov, when he got his chance of this series, I thought was pretty good and made some saves to keep them in it. So it's kind of a lament I would have because, I didn't feel like it ended this point of the series, even when Anderson was making saves, that it was going to continue. Like, it just felt like it was precarious the entire time. Yeah, the two big things that I come away from being like,

that was the difference is goaltending and special teams. Like, I know Carolina sort of started to figure it out on the power plate towards the end, but it just special teams was a huge, huge factor in the series as well. Like, you look at the five on five splits and fairly even. It paints a picture of a much closer series than maybe what was anticipated or not anticipated, but like kind of the lens that it was viewed through when they took the 30 series lead. Yes, definitely.

And I will say I kind of made this note on a show earlier this week. I pushed back against the general perception in previous seasons that the hurricanes were right there on the precipice. I know they were losing close games, right? Like, they got swept last year by the Panthers in a bunch of overtime games and won-go games. And then Rod Brindamore had that hilarious press conference after where he's like, we did not get swept. Don't even say that. And it's like, all right, you lost four games in a row.

That's literally the definition of being swept. But I felt like they were dominating in a very Carolina hurricane's way in those previous defeats, which was piling up a bunch of low percentage shots, getting the shot attempts up. Yeah, but it's not, you look at it. It's like, all right, the other team actually had more scoring chances and have. as a better goalie, I would expect them to win these games. That's kind of how playoff hockey works. In this case, they obviously had the inferior goalie yet again.

And in most series, if the other team has Eagles or Sturiken, I don't care who your goalie is, that's going to be the case for you. I did think offensively as the series went along, though, you sort of, you started to see some improvements, right? They were scoring much more off the rush. They were attacking that way. Guys like Marty Natchez and Jake Gensel were creating legitimate grade A chances. Even in the game six defeat, you look at the goals.

scored and it's like, Aho picks the top corner off the rush. Nace's from a pass from behind the net picks the top corner as well. Like it was like high end finishing and also actively looking for those shots as opposed to just in Carolina Hurricanes fashion, just jamming it into just Dirkins pads. So I did think those were kind of positive developments. It's the same result after this many years of results like this. I imagine there will be some changes, right?

And people are going to kind of sound the panic meter and that's going to happen. and that's the reality of the NHL. But I do think this is, I kind of want to point out the distinction between this defeat and previous ones because I kind of, I don't know if it's really solace, but I do feel like they're at least moving or so in a direction that I wanted to see.

I get what you're saying. And like I know that frustrations do stack and they mount. So like this is just the latest of failures. But this one did feel different. And if I was a Hurricanes fan, I would be just a little extra demoralized this year because they did do a lot of things that you wanted them to do. I mean, even at the deadline going out and getting Gensel and getting Kuznets off,

who ended up being more of a factor than anybody probably anticipated him being down the stretch. Like getting those guys mattered and they were good. And I do feel like this team had a bit more of a playoff DNA to it than maybe in the previous years. And their path, man, their path. man, their path was there. And that's why, like, Vegas had them as the odds-on cup favorites at the start of the playoffs. The path was probably the easiest. But the one thing that you didn't address midseason, which everybody kind of forecasted as maybe being the Achilles heel was the goaltending.

And that ends up coming back and biting you. So it's, I would imagine Carolina Hurricanes fans are very, very frustrated and disappointed. Yeah. And they have every right to be. I guess here's my question for you. We'll talk about the Rangers side of this as well, although they're the ones advancing. So while they're victorious and we should be focusing on them, I'm going to be doing like an Eastern Conference final preview soon once we know who they're playing. And we'll have plenty of chance to talk about them.

This is probably the last time we're talking about the hurricanes until the off season. So I kind of wanted to flesh us out with you. Where do you go from here if you're then? Because I think the first big question that needs to be answered is what's going to happen with the coach. Right? We've heard a lot of sort of rumors about his contract status, whether. they're willing a pony up and pay him what a team like Seattle probably with a connection to him would if he ever actually became available. I'm sure there's any other number of teams.

There's like five coach openings right now. Many of those teams, even teams that currently do have a coach, would probably instantly fire their coach and hire Rod Brindonmore if they were given the chance to do so because of his reputation and success during these six years in Carolina. What do you do if you're them? Is it kind of as simple as, listen, you're close. you're winning a lot in the regular season, you're losing close playoff series, the longer you kind of linger similar to what a team like, let's say, the Washington Capitals did, right? Where it's like, you're good for a long enough period of time. You kind of hang around one year, you will get some breaks and you're going to go on a magical run and probably win a Stanley Cup.

Obviously, it didn't happen for a team like a San Jose Sharks by comparison, but that's still not the end of the world if you're just consistently good year over year. Do you kind of go that route and potentially try to optimize the roster even more? with more Jake Gensel type ads, or do you see them kind of making a more sort of foundational, drastic change and completely changing things after yet another playoff disappointment? No, I wouldn't shake things up too much.

And if you can keep Roderndamore, I'd say you're wise to do so. I think he's a big part of the culture in Carolina for a lot of reasons. And that, to me, is one of their strengths. I wouldn't go away from Roderndamore, by any means. I do think that, like, you're running out of excuses, though.

Like, you mentioned the slow build and kind of, like, the journey that it takes for a lot of Stanley Cup winners where there's years of frustration and you kind of hit a wall and then you finally break through. I think we're nearing the end of, like, being able to say that about the Carolina hurricanes just because they have been seemingly on the precipice for so long. Like, at some point, you have to, you have to break through or else you have to reset. And for me, it's more of a roster thing. And I floated this idea out there. And I'm sure the idea is going to piss off a particular fan base. You'll know exactly when I say it. But I want to get your thoughts on it.

Like, what about the idea of a guy like Brady Kachuk being traded to the Carolina Hurricanes? And I think that would be an incredible narrative because it would be the second Kachuk brother traded from a Canadian market to a non-traditional U.S. market where there's like a little less pressure. and he has the ability to come in and like materially change the DNA and the makeup of a team and help them push through and get over the hump. I thought you were teeing me up there from Mitch Marner trade with the preamble. I don't think Mitch Marner changes the DNA of the Carolina Hurricanes. No, he doesn't.

Unfortunately, like the things that he fits the mold of the current Carolina hurricanes, and I think that's a bad thing if you're Carolina. know. I mean, Brady Kachuk's a hell of a player. What I will say is there's part of me that's very cynical about the fact that he's sort of been the poster child of inefficient scores who like pile up huge expected goals totals because they jampucks into goalies pads and get a ton of rebounds and him going to this hurricane team, which is like that's been their biggest undoing during this era. It's like, just from that perspective, it's like, oh man, that's very fitting that would happen. But certainly, like, he's a heck of a player. And I'd be interested in something,

like the good thing about them, unlike most teams are in this position where you've had like five or six years of winning in the regular season and then falling short in the playoffs, is that they have so much flexibility to facilitate whatever type of move they want to make, right? Because of how many players are expiring either this summer or next summer, how like neatly they've managed their contracts and kept that financial flexibility. But also, the prospect pool they have to work with to allow a trade like that to happen, right? Where they make the Gensel trade this year and it just like completely, it like doesn't even dip at all into their prospect pipeline.

Like a lot of the, I know the, they're kind of older, more mature prospects that I think the penguins prioritize because of where they're at and what their needs are as an organization. But for most public lists that I saw, it was like, all right, this is like their 10th and 12th best prospect or something. It's like they still have a bunch of key players that they could move and would be interesting to teams like this. So they're in a unique spot that way. They can pretty much make any type of trade like that that they want. I'm curious to see what happens with.

I think there's been a lot of reports for years now, but even since this last defeat, that like Marty Natchez probably will get traded, right? He's in his last year as an RFA and he probably wants to go somewhere with a bigger role. He was really good in this series. so it would have to be quite a player getting back in return for it not to be a step back because I thought he was other than Gensel probably their best offensive player in this matchup. So I'm curious to see what they do there.

But yeah, I don't know if it's Brady Kachuk the type of player I'd be targeting, but certainly like I'd go the bigger route as opposed to the Carolina Hurricanes sort of status quo of like, oh, a bunch of cheap players that we bring in on the margins and are in the bottom six. I think if anything, the Gensel trade and the success that he had on this team and how he changed the way they play offensively is reinforcement that they probably just need like two or three more of those types of deals as opposed to the alternative. Yeah, and I wonder like for Brindamore if that's sort of a negotiation tactic that he can bring to the table and say, listen, I'll stay here. But if I stay here, you got to go out and you got to get me somebody who really moves the needle and kind of changes the dynamic of this team. Like I feel like we've done as much as we can with this this sort of makeup and DNA to the roster. We've got to do something different.

Go get me somebody. Well, you know what's remarkable, Brindamara? So he's the fourth longest tenured coach right now. Cooper, Sullivan, and Ben are ahead of them. All of them have won cups with their current teams. We're in this era now where like the shelf life for coaches is so short, right? It just is the rotating door where you get a couple of years. And then all of a sudden, someone you was going to come in.

And he's been there for, what, I guess, six full seasons now. Now, part of it is, and I think you need to apply the context of what he means to the organization from his playing career and the icon status and all of that. But on the one hand, it's like, it's interesting how we, and I think you and I spoke about this last time we did a mailback together, right, where we got a question about whether we as a society need to care more about the president's trophy and why no one seems to really be that bothered by it. And then come the postseason, you almost completely throw it out the door. And all you care about and covet is the Stanley Cup. And then it's like one team is successful. 31 other teams had a failure of a season, essentially. And how flawed that is is logic.

I get why we lionize the Stanley Cup. It is the ultimate goal. That's what you're striving towards. It's so hard to win it. But in this case, it's like the hurricanes before he took over had nine years of a playoff throughout where they were completely irrelevant essentially, right? He comes in in these six years. They're second in the league in regular season.

and point percentage, you're going to love this behind only the Bruins. And they're tied for fifth most playoff wins in that time. Now, they have zero playoff wins past the second round in those six years. And I think that's where the frustration comes. The two times they made it to the conference finals, they got swept. But still, like that is swept. Oh, yeah, of course. Yeah, depending on what your definition is and who you ask. But yeah, like, it's, I see both sides of it. I just think it's kind of like devil you know versus you don't. And on the one hand, I think they've really done a good job of assembling a personnel group that fits what he wants and prioritizes and he can get the most out of.

And I think if they kept the same team and brought in a different coach, I think they would take a massive step back. But also, we did just say that with how many UFAs they have and flexibility they have, they could essentially just have a whole new team if they wanted to. And so I guess that does kind of keep the door open for a potential. different voice if you're going to go that route, but I'm still much more intrigued by, I think, just breaking them back and just arving them with better players. And I hope that that's what they do, but I guess we'll see. Agree. I'm much more on the side of get a goaltender

and maybe change up the ingredients a little bit before you move on from what has been primarily the driving force of success on your team. What's remarkable about him and I think doesn't probably get enough attention is like how improbable it is. And I guess part of this is I wonder if there's just like a certain level of respect because he carries that reputation and he's done it. But also like he's quite literally the hardest worker himself and he's the most fit guy on the team even though he's no longer an active player. But through these six years, it feels like there's never really been like he's kind

of butted heads with Marty Natchez, I guess, because of his role. And I think Natchez just wants to be more of a featured player in a team. And so that makes sense. And also he wants to be more creative compared to the way the hurricanes have played. But for the most part, it's like, it's so difficult in today's game, I think, to be a coach of a team for that long and not have players just sort of tune you out and check out and just be like, all right, I'm not listening to this guy anymore. And that's why teams generally justify coaching changes, whereas he's been there for that long. And even when there have been ups and downs, that's never really been an issue. Maybe it's just the type of players they have because they have such like a workman-like team.

and even guys like Aho and Slavin don't really seem like players who would be very ego-driven and looking to change the coach to suit their own needs ahead of the team. But I do find that interesting. I kind of want to note that in terms of how long he's been there the longevity and what it means to an organization. I think that he genuinely cares about his players and is able to deliver messaging in a way that's palatable and just genuine.

And that helps. And number two, it also helps that he can literally kick any one of his players as ass still. I think that absolutely counts for something. You brought up, NACAS is one of the guys who, you know, he may have butted heads with at one point or another.

I will also raise you one Erikaala. That's true. That is true. Yeah. Now that's a heat check by Erikalla to ever be like, it's either me or the ghost. That's a real you're not that guy moment in the NHL for sure. I love that.

Okay. Any other notes on the hurricanes or do you want to talk about the Rangers? We kind of noted the performances by Chesterkin and certainly Crider and the clincher. It's ridiculous that I was looking this up. So since he made his debut and part of this is just because the Rangers have had a bunch of long playoff runs in that time. And that's generally how you get to the top of this list. It's almost like a team driven stat as much as an individual one. But since Crider made his debut, the only guys who have scored more playoff goals than him in that time are Joe Pavelski, Nikita Kutraub, of Andre Palat and Nathan McKinnon.

So quite a list for him to be on in terms of playoff performance and goal scoring in particular, added to that in the game six. You got any notes on either him or other kind of performances we saw in this series that were a big driving force for the Rangers? Well, I was thinking about it on the drive home today. Like, does Chris Crider make the Mount Rushmore of all-time New York Rangers players at this point? Like, I don't know. I don't know if the answer is yes, but I don't think you can definitively say no, which is kind of crazy.

Like, if I was doing the math in my head just off of guys that I've seen and I'm not, I'm getting older, but I'm not old. But like, Henrik Lundquist is obviously on there. I would put Brian Leach on there, Mark Messier. Those are like my three definites. And then like is Crider the fourth guy? Is it Mike Richter? Is it somebody else? Like, where would you land on that?

Well, I think there's always going to be people who just purely prioritized the team success, right? And it's like anyone that was affiliated with a Stanley Cup is just going to be in a certain air in terms of like how they're regarded compared to a team that's been good for a while. They made a bunch of conference finals. They made the Stanley Cup final once. But we'll see what happens this year. I think that's going to drive this. As you were saying that, obviously is one of the certainly like, forgive the best goalie of his generation, but one of the best goals is ever, Henrik Lunkwe. would belong there regardless, but I was thinking, like, even if his performance didn't necessarily

fully justify his borderline, I think you would have to include his beautiful face on that Mount Rush for carving, regardless. If you're carving faces, you're, yeah, if you're carving faces, you're starting with Henrik Lindquist. No pressure. I wonder, do you think the Rangers ever did? I'm sure they did. Like one of those bobblehead giveaway nights of Lundquist. I'm so curious to see if they actually did him justice at all.

Because usually like some of those bobbleheads you look at them and you're like, wow, that does not look like the person at all. And I feel like that's a really tough one to mess up if you're not getting it right. Yeah. There's a lot of pressure in terms of sculpting that for sure. It's like the Rinaldo, the famous Rinaldo sculpture that everybody was like, oh, my God, this is the worst thing of all time because Rinaldo is very handsome. And this is not. I texted you last night while we were watching the game. And this was while they were down 3-1 and I was kind of preparing myself mentally for.

a game seven and obviously they came back and alleviated a lot of those concerns for the team. But just watching, I was like, man, Jacob Truba right now, some of the decision making he's making. And they changed defense pairs. They put them back with Gionred Miller as well. They wound up actually having a relatively good underlying game as the game went along. But you see it like early in that third period. There was a play that I was just laughing at where it's like two minutes and it's still 3-1. And he goes for this hit on Andre Svetnikov.

along the boards and he gets a piece of him and then the puck kind of drifts away from Setschnokov and it winds up being nothing. But if he gets through there, it's like the cleanest three on one a team is ever going to have. And I was like, this is just such, such a horrible decision I think to make given the circumstance. And yet he just so green light just really did it. And I guess that that is what Jacob Truba does. But in looking ahead, I don't want who, you know, we'll see we're recording this before the Panthers play the Bruins in game six, assuming the Panthers win one of these next two games and be the opponent for the Rangers, it feels like they're the type of team that is going to be able to get the absolute

worst out of Truba from like a decision-making perspective and whether it's copying up turnovers or putting himself in like dangerous situations, throwing questionable hits. Like, it's just going to be one of those series where it feels like they're going to be able to capitalize on it because the hurricanes got opportunities off. of it, right? Like, he would turn the puck over. They'd get a chance off of it. He would take a dumb penalty. They would get a power play. But they were never really able to capitalize and burn him for it. And if that continues, and we have no reason to believe it won't, I feel like, whoever they play the Eastern Conference final is going to be in a better position to really

kind of press down on that and make it a real problem for them. Yeah, it's funny you say that because we had, we had Paul Bissinet on the show, on our show last week. And he said the exact opposite of that. He said, like a guy like Jacob Trubo, who is untrue. trustworthy and kind of you can make your decisions on Jacob Truba however you want. But like a guy like that can be a weapon against the Florida Panthers because they're so physical and they play that sort of sandpapery game. And Jacob Truba would be beyond Matt Rempie, who if Matt Rempies on the ice against Florida Panthers, you're probably in tough shape. Truba is like the weapon that can counter that punch for the Florida Panthers. And like, I don't necessarily disagree with either side.

But also, if you're in the conference final and you're trying to focus on good hockey and you have a Florida Panthers team that is as dangerous as they are, the decision making that you see from Jacob Truba sometimes, both in terms of his defensive play, but also playing on the line as a very physical and kind of heat-seeking kind of player, he can be a problem and he can be a liability. I absolutely, absolutely believe that. Now, see, it's interesting you bring that up because I actually, I do one of the few shows

that I go out of my way to check out from a hockey perspective is what chaos, because you guys do such a phenomenal job and it's so unique in the space. And in that interview, you guys also spoke about Charlie McAvoy. And I think he even noted that part of like beyond him not being 100%, and probably once they get eliminated. We're going to find out that he has like 27 different surgeries. He needs to undergo this offseason. Part of why he's struggled and getting himself into trouble is he's like taken on this role of, all right, well, it's playoff hockey and I need to be physical. And so he's just going so far out of his way to try to throw big hits. And it's often leading to mistakes where he's now

out of position and all of a sudden like Mason Lurye or whoever he's partnered with is having to defend a two on one or a three on two. And that's burning them. And then obviously the turnover is and him mishandling the puck and stuff, it feels like that's what we're talking about here, except with a significantly inferior player who's also significantly more likely to make those mistakes in high frequency. And so I actually think it's the opposite of what you were saying there, where I think it would be a real problem.

Assuming it goes that way, I get the argument that he might be able to sort of drag the Panthers into making, taking a bunch of dumb penalties themselves and sort of getting out of character. but I don't know. I see it as a trouble. I don't believe that. I think that Florida is more likely the team to drag you into like their gravitational pull of BAS and trying to get you to play their game.

And you're probably not going to beat them at that kind of game. The only thing that I will say on McAvoy is that I'm not chalking it up to like the Panthers messing with Charlie McIvoy. He was doing it against Leaves as well. Charlie McAvoy was bad against the Toronto Maple Leafs as well. Like with the. exception of game five, Charlie McFoyle, got his game back on track in game five, had a really strong game. Like, since I want to say like game five of the Toronto series, he has gotten progressively

worse with every game. I agree with that. I guess what I'm saying, though, is I think the Panthers do a really good job of, I mean, forcing defensemen into turnovers off the forecheck, but also like when you make a mistake on them or a chaotic situation arises, they're so good at turning that into their favor and then leveraging it into a scoring chance and goal. And that's kind of, I think,

what they've been so good at over these past two postseason runs. And it's a clear scale they have. And so if you're getting in those spots, I just feel like they're probably more likely to capitalize on it than a team like the Leafs wasn't round one against McAvoy or even the Hurricanes were in this series. So, no, I think it'll be really interesting to watch. Any other Rangers notes that you got?

I thought Panarin was awesome. I know he had like the two assists or whatever in game six didn't score any of the goals, but I thought he was creating so many chances. Probably would have scored run of Jalen Chadfield didn't make an unreal play, kind of backtracking on that breakaway in the second, but he was really dangerous,

and it's been really fun to watch him because I think the beauty of the postseason is the past doesn't necessarily matter if you don't allow it to, right? Obviously, if you have kind of like demons from struggles or developing a reputation for not producing as a star player in the playoffs, if you allow it to become part of the story and then build on it,

I think you can kind of go down a road where it's tough to come back from. But the beauty of is that every new postseason is a chance for you to write a different story, right? And that's kind of, I think, what we're seeing here. And it's sort of a continuation of the season he's had where he clearly made it a mission to be more aggressive, to shoot more, to be more involved in the offensive zone. And he's been doing that again in this postseason and in this series. And that's kind of just like from an unbiased neutral observer perspective, I think it's always fun when star players rise at occasion and produce the way he has. I agree.

And I'll also say, like, based off of the narrative point that you made, like the playoffs are when you can change the narrative around you. I look at the two guys that he's playing alongside as two of the guys that are kind of leading the charge this year as the biggest narrative reshapers. because you have Alexei Lafranier who has obviously had the bust label attached to him for a little bit. And anybody who's paid attention to the Rangers this year knows that he's been a really, really good serviceable player. And is he to the caliber of what you might want or expect from like a number one pick winning the lottery? Maybe not, but not everybody's going to be like a generational talent or like franchise defining superstar at that top spot. And Lafranier, like, the way that he's been able to have an impact and become a very good player. It has been awesome to see.

And I think that he's sort of shifted the discussion around him for people who may not have been paying super close attention. And then Vinnie Trocheque is a guy that I don't think anybody really, like, hated or disrespected, but maybe didn't take super seriously. I think that like his general vibe was, you know, not going to be like a major difference maker, but is a good piece on a roster. I think that he's proving this year and that like he can be a real difference maker and be like a real, real, real valuable player on a team that's capable of winning the Stanley Cup. Yeah. I mean, I was when they signed into that seven year deal, I was like,

I actually think he's a good player and he's very valuable. But that's a lot of money for a player who's going to be entering the latter stage of their career. And I don't like that deal. And he has been full value. And then some. That game two he had, right? Where, like, I tweeted the stats after it. But he scored the overtime winner.

But he also played more than anyone else in the game, which is so rare for a forward to do, like 35 minutes. So many scoring chances. Just driving his former team crazy as well, right? There was the goal they scored in Lafranierre scored in game three. And then they showed after like, He was just laughing in his face and taunting him. That was so mean. It was extremely rude.

It was extremely mean, but you know what? You need that like in the postseason, right? Like that's, he's got so much dog at him. And you sort of see that. And it's obviously easier when you're up ahead and you're leading to kind of be acting that way. But I think part of the reason why they were in that position is because of his play. So you know what? You're allowed to take that victory lap when you're when you're that good.

And I don't know if it's like the Italian thing, but he just seems like the perfect New York Ranger. He just seems like a perfect ranger. He is. Okay, let's take our break here. And then we come back, we'll jump right back into the conversation. We'll dip into the mailbag and answer some listener questions. You're listening to the Hockey P.D.O.cast streaming on the Sports Night Radio Network. All right, we're back here on the Hockey Peelecast with Pete Blackburn and Pete.

Now that we're done in the Hurricanes Rangers series recap, let's get into some mailbag questions. We got actually a bunch of them that we sort of already answered about both the Rangers and how good they are, but also the hurricanes and whether it's a personnel or system issue. So we can kind of move on from those. but let's get into a few of the other ones that kind of bounce around the league and cover a bit more ground. Here's one for you from Zach. Any potential trade destinations for Allmark in the offseason? I mean, I think the obvious one would be L.A.

because they tried to trade them there in the first place. And, you know, I don't know what the reasoning behind not wanting to go there, whether it was like midseason, not wanting to uproot the family, whatever. I don't know if that gets revisited. L.A. clearly needs to revisit their goal. situation. I don't think Dave Riddick's going to do it for them on that one-year deal. But L.A. is an interesting one. You know, you could look at a team like Carolina.

There's a lot of teams that need goaltending across the league. So no shortage of potential destinations. You know, I don't know if you want to consider like New Jersey. There's just a lot of teams that could use goaltending. And I think Linus O'Mark is obviously going to be one of the better goaltenders available on the market. I don't know. I mean, those are the obvious ones that kind of jump to the front of my mind.

Yeah, L.A. makes a lot of sense. The issue is that from what I gather, the sticking point is that he wants to be on the East Coast. And so I am removing L.A. and pretty much every West team off of my list because I just don't think he would say yes to that. Which leaves you with, I think, New Jersey is the obvious one because it's pretty clear that they're going to be very aggressive. I think, a particular bringing in like a highly regarded big name goalie. that can play 50, 55 games and then give the rest to Jake Allen next season. I think that's the route they're going to go. And so he makes a lot of sense.

I think they'll probably revisit the Markstrom situation as well. I guess my one concern about that, and I'm curious your take on this is, well, I think Allmark is awesome and would be a clear upgrade. I do think it's a bit risky. Like we always talk about environments for goalies, like with the defense in front of them. And going from the Bruins who regress this year defense. but still, I think, do a good job of making life easier for their goalies by like giving them clear paths, right? Like you even see in this Florida series and for the most part, Swayman's getting a lot of clear sight lines.

He kind of knows where the puck's coming from. It's a lot of straight line stuff that he can positionally get to. And when he's able to do that, he just vacuums everything up. And they've been doing that for the past two years and no surprise at all marks looked really good in that situation. go to the devils who were much worse defensively this year, but particularly gave up a ton off the rush and a lot of like East West stuff. I think that would be a bit of a concern for me, just like putting him in that situation and being like,

oh, well, he's going to have the same numbers he did in Boston in the past two years and then being disappointed by that. So it would be an upgrade. I imagine that it would be a pretty pricey acquisition, though, and I'm not sure that they would get the results that they're hoping for. So I kind of wanted to note that. Well, I mean, I don't know how pricey is. it's going to be honestly because like he's got he's got one year left he's got uh i believe is what is

limited it's a limited no movement clause uh and like you got to you got to figure things out with swayman that's that's got to be their top priority and if you're eliminating the entirety of the western conference based off of like his geographical preferences you don't have a ton to uh to work with in terms of potential destinations, especially like if you're willing to, if you're presuming like they're eliminating like Toronto. Like I doubt that they're going to trade him within division to a rival like Toronto. Like I don't know how many,

how many potential spots you're going to end up having. That is true. If he went to Carolina, he would probably win the best in the next season again. Because I just think in that spot like that's a situation where he's destined for a 30 say percentage again. But yeah, I think the market is pretty low. And there's a bunch of names available as well, right?

Markstrom, we'll see about Sorrows, Gibson for the 15th straight season. There's just so many goalies. And then obviously the UFA is like who are in a lower class, but still like Laurent Oswald had a really good year and we'll be coveted. There's a bunch of goalies that are going to be on the move. So that does kind of limit your leverage a little bit as well. All right. Logan asks, who's your cons might pick for each playoff team remaining and why?

Oh, okay. For Dallas, Wyatt Johnson. Yes, pretty clearly. That one's pretty easy for me. And I went on your show and I think, because I went on your show a couple weeks ago, right? It was like at the start of the playoffs.

And I was, you asked me for a cons my pick or like a breakout guy. And then I said Seth Jarvis, obviously that's not going to happen. I think I said Wyatt Johnson as well. At the time I gave it out in the PDOCass Discord, it was like plus 11,000 cons, my thoughts. Now I think he's one of the three or four favorites at like a tenth of that.

But so I gave that and then I gave you Luke Evangelista as well and that obviously. I mean, I thought he was really good for Nashville, but they lost him around once. So those were those are names. I think Y Johnson is pretty clearly. I don't think even like sometimes a goalie like, Audinger's been good. And if he had a couple crazy series where he just didn't give up anything and had had ridiculous same percentages, that'll get a lot of attention. But I just feel like with the narrative of his age,

into this superstardom, but also the goal scoring and how much he's carried their offense. I think that's like about as big of a lock as it is if Dallas is able to win. And like the big moment factor. Like that clearly worked in Jonathan Marsh's favor last year, where I was like wondering, you know, would it be Jack or would it be Marsh? So I think the big moment factor means a lot in terms of those goals goals scores. For the Oilers, I would say Leon Drysidal, you know, very much at the top of the list.

Like maybe if Zach Hyman continues to score, just like an absurd amount of goals, he gets some consideration. Vancouver, J.T. Mithler at this point. Maybe she loves for narrative purposes, if he continues to be great. Colorado, Kail McCarr, for me. Boston, Jeremy Swayman.

pretty easy there in my mind. Yeah, is there even a second one? No, it's definitely not. Florida. I want a little Barkov on that one. Florida is it. Barkov or Vibrovsky maybe. Brobsky, though, hasn't had a good series against Boston.

Yeah. I just think that like maybe if there also is like a plenty of room for Bobrovsky to have an impact and then the final two series. So I wouldn't write that off. But like right now, I think it's Barcov. And then am I missing? Who else am I missing? No, I think we got it.

And then New York. Just reckon? New York, I would say Igor. Yeah. Yeah, that one's a bit more open. I mean, his numbers are really good, of course. And I think if they are going to beat like a Florida in the conference final and then whoever they play in the West, he's going to have to continue that.

So that's probably the safe bet. I also just like if they win the Stanley Cup, I don't think their defense is good enough. No, it'll be because it would be because Igor bails them out quite a bit. Yep. Yeah, I have that as well. I do think I'm a bit more bullish on Barakov as Florida's,

just because I feel like, especially in this series, but even towards the end of Tampa one, he, I mean, he's getting the defensive assignments and he's obviously going to get a lot of love from that side of things. but I feel like he's just been so much more assertive offensively this postseason

compared to maybe last one when he was just doing all the heavy lifting defensively but not scoring himself and it was all a chuck line creating it it feels like he's been carrying the burden offensively more so this year so I've got him on that okay um all right here's a good one if there was an award for best defensive defenseman who would be your top three nominees and the winner this season now I have a pretty clear number one here for me. And I'm going to leave it at that one. But I'm curious,

do you have anyone that's kind of popping pop into your mind, especially from what we've seen this postseason, let's eliminate kind of the rest of the league and focus from a playoff view here from the first two rounds? Like, pure defensive defenseman was the question. Yep.

Chris Hanove is just great. Josh Manson also kind of pops of mine Josh Manson has been pretty pretty impressive He's been one of Dallas who's been like to though At times yeah Not to the level of like Ian Cole But like Josh Manson to me has been

I mean Devon Taves obviously is like the guy But Chris Tanna probably my answer. Like, I don't know. Like, I'm not as smart in terms of, like, defensive structure stuff as a guy like you. I'll defer to you. But, I mean, Chris Tannap's probably a guy

that jumps to the top of my mind. Yeah, I think Tannov's a great call. I think on, on the East Side, I would say, I would say my boy Gus Forsling, who once again. Oh, yeah. What an idiot. Yeah.

In a top assignment. That's a really good call. I know there's a lot to it, right? I tweeted the stat after one of the games and Bruins fans got upset with me because they were like, have you noticed that he's playing the patronage playing with Morgan Geeky and Pavel Zaka at the time? It's like, yeah, I get it.

But he's still, he's been playing with those guys for a long time and producing. And when he plays against the Brandon Montour pair, they have more success. And then whenever he's out there against Gus Foresling, even if it's not a direct one-on-one, because there's five other players on the ice, the Panthers just give up nothing. And so after this many games all season, did it last postseason as well, but this season. and then round one against Kutrov, now getting the head-to-head against Pastor. And they're just, they're so good defensively when he's on the ice.

So I think, I think Forreling deserves all the flowers. And I'm trying to compensate for the fact that he's not getting it from the rest of the people. So I'm sorry if I'm overdue. Yeah, I'm a little mad at you from making me look stupid there because that was, that was a stupid omission on my part.

Also, like, at the beginning of this Bruin series, Eklad looked really, really bad. Yeah, game one was horrendous. For Florida. Yeah. Yeah. Horrible. So, like, he may have been the Bruins best player in that game one.

He was. Okay. Here's one from, uh, from Nate Dogg. Are there good general arguments about the elite tattel building model versus a strong depth model of team building? Um, we're certainly seeing. I think there's no right answer. Like, I think you can win a Stanley Cup or compete for one meaningfully building your team

anyway, as long as you're very, decisive and have a plan and execute it. But do you have a preference in terms of the approach of a kind of going, for lack of a better term, stars and scrubs and having a couple of high play players and then filling out the roster around them with cheap guys or kind of having more of a ballot, depth approach and just having a bunch of good players across the board? Yeah, I'm always going to lean in favor of being able to roll four lines and just kind of commit to a system and a just kind of like a character team.

When I say that, I think of like last year's Seattle Cracken where you look at that team. Nobody really jumped off the page, but they played so hard in terms of their 200-foot game and their forechecking. And like that was, that's a lot of fun. And I don't necessarily think that you're going to win a Stanley Cup a lot of the times if you don't have the high-end talent that's capable of taking over games. But I think that you're in a much better position to punch above your weight class playing like that and with a team like that versus a team that has maybe two, one or two stars and you're just leaning on them to carry you. because you're going to run into a team that's capable of either winning those minutes against those stars or neutralizing them or like even just losing those minutes and then making it up somewhere else. I just think that there's a bigger expiration date on that than there is on a team that can roll four lines and keep their foot on the gas through 60 minutes.

Yeah, I agree with that. I think, though, from a team-building perspective, I guess the one issue is I don't think it necessarily needs to be one or the other. And I would actually use the Dallas Stars as an example because they're generally regarded as the deepest team in the league. They're rolling lines. They have so many scoring options. Well, their quote-unquote scrubs in terms of salary are Wyatt Johnson and Logan Stankov and making 900K on their ELCs, right? And you'd argue that they've been their two best officers. offensive players in this postseason.

Now, obviously, I don't think it's rocket science to be like, all right, well, just draft really good players. And then you have to achieve it. And it's like, yeah, I think you should try to do that, certainly. But I don't think necessarily, like, you're allowed to supplement, like, you're allowed to, if you have high-price players, the way teams get into trouble is doing what the oilers have done, which is like, all right, we're paying McDavid and Dreisaitle a bunch of money. and then like darn illness.

And so we're going to surround these guys with cheap veterans. And it's like a bunch of washed up guys who actually aren't good anymore. I think if you have high-priced players, but you also draft and develop well and care about that, you can have those cheap players be skilled guys who actually contribute and play with the top players as opposed to just kind of filling out the depth chart. Right?

So it's easier said than done, but I just don't like, I don't like when teams go that route of like, all right, well, we're going stars and scrubs. So we're going to go so aggressive this way. And then our bottom of the line of players are not just not going to be good. It's like, I think you can find good players for cheap. And the stars have done that as well.

And I think the avalanche have done that as well. So I mean, you can say the Bruins too, because like everybody thought that the Bruins were going to be trashed this year. They shopped in the bargain bin over the off season. And they found really good, useful players that allowed them. I don't think they're the deepest team in the league. I don't think they're even close to the deepest team in the league. But like, Dan Hinen on a league minimum contract,

Morgan Geeky on a very cheap contract, ends up being your top line center. Like, that is good evaluation on lower end, lower price point players. And that's what you need if you're not going to be able to draft guys like Wyatt Johnson, Logan, staying coven.

I'm glad you brought that up because I had this conversation last week. Like, is there a player on a, worst contract that is criticized less than Tyler Sagan, who is the highest paid player on the Dallas Stars. Yeah, highest paid player on the Dallas Stars. Like third line center, middle six guy, very depthy for a guy who's supposed to be a star, but it doesn't matter.

And he's a good player, but he's just not the star that he was signed to be. Yeah. I think certainly a situation has helped taking a lot of the attention off of him. I will say, like, bringing to Shane in helped spark him so much this year from a scoring perspective, just giving him that guy as a playmaker. And also, you know, in both his and Dallas's defense, and this is part of the issue when you draft guys to long-term deals when they're already approaching their late 20s, aren't going to be getting into the 30s. It happens.

But like he almost, what was that story where it kind of around the bubble during COVID, like he essentially had to like, relearn how to skate because he had such horrible hip issues and surgeries. And so I think that's kind of like a freak thing. And the fact that he's bounced back now is actually a good story. But you're right in terms of what he's paying. It gets kind of lost in the radar. All right, Pete, let's get out of here. This was fun. I'm glad we got to bounce around and take some listener questions. I'll let you plug some stuff here on the way out because you've obviously got a lot going on yourself. Tell the listeners where they can check you out and what they can look forward to. Yeah, the what chaos show is my baby at this point, Monday through Friday.

live every day at noon. That's Eastern time. And we're just doing the playoff thing and covering it. And you mentioned it earlier. Like we're trying to do it in a little bit different way, a little bit more lighthearted. We're not the smartest guys, as you probably figured out over this last hour. I'm not the genius X's and O's guy. But you're the smart guy of the crew.

Well, that's more of a damning damnation. of our show and it is popping me up. So yeah, we like to zoom out and talk about narratives, talk about kind of like our takeaways and stuff like that on a surface level. And we have a lot of fun. It's the best. Great community. Shout out to you, by the way, for convincing me to set up a Discord for our show because

the PDO Discord is great. We've taken that and run with it. And our Discord's great as well. So please subscribe to our YouTube. channel, listen to us at noon every day, Monday through Friday. And if you're on Discord, hop in our Discord as well. Awesome, buddy. We'll keep up the great work. Looking forward to the coverage. Looking forward to being back on your show as well. The time I went on was really fun. So hopefully we'll get to do that again. I can return the favor. And I'm glad you got on the

Discord train as well. You're right. I completely co-sign it. It's such a cool community, both the one you're building there and obviously the P.D.O. guest one as well. So if you're listening to this and you're not in there, pop in, InVite Lake is their show notes. Get into both. and you're going to get all the coverage that you're looking for every night when games are happening. Pete, this is a blast. Be well, man. I'll let you go here. We're going to do one more episode of the PEDYOCAS here to close out the week before we go away for the weekend.

So looking forward to that. Thank you for listening to the HockeyedioCat streaming on the Sportsnet Radio Network.