The Hockey PDOcast - Monday Mailbag

Episode Date: March 6, 2023

The Score's John Matisz joins Dimitri to answer listener questions about deploying defenceman in the playoffs, the bleakest situations in the NHL over the next couple of years, the top of the West, and our definition of superstars.This podcast is produced by Ben Basran. 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. 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.

It's the Hockey PDOCast with your host, Dmitri Filipovich. Welcome to the Hockey PEOCast. My name is Dimitra Filipovich. And joining me is my buddy John Mattis. John, what's going on, man? Not a whole lot. Just getting through that first day after the deadline minus the weekend. Still trying to process things, which obviously sets up well for what we're about to tackle.

Yeah, it does. First show post-deadline for me as well. I had a bit of a chance here over the weekend to, reflect tie up loose ends, see where we're at. You know, the dust has settled a little bit, although I still would like to see more games with some of these guys and their new teams to really get our sea legs. But it's been a while since we did a mailback here on the PDO guys

just because we were so busy over the past week or two with kind of like more pressing trade stuff. So now we have the benefit of taking a step back and answering some listener questions and having some fun the way we're doing previously. So that's the plan for today. We've asked the listeners to come through with questions. they've delivered. We've picked five or six of our favorite ones that I think allow us to cover the most ground. And so we're going to get into it. So here's the first question from Kyle. Kyle asks,

who is the odd man out on D in Boston? And the reason why this is an interesting question is because they've played five games now since acquiring Demetrior-law from the Washington Capitals prior to the deadline. And they're kind of left with seven NHL defensemen that I think they'd ideally like to play. So they've been basically alternating who sits in game one after the trade. They sat Connor Clifton. Then they sat Matt Griswick. Then they sat Brandon Carlo. Then they sat Derek Forbort.

And then most recently they sat Matt Grisleck again. And there was some talk that in that most recent game against the Rangers on Saturday afternoon, that was the lineup that they would like to start the postseason with. Obviously, they have some injuries up front with Taylor Hall and Nick Folino. And we'll see if they come back. But at least on the blue line, it seems like the first. fact that they circled back to Grizzlick again, um, indicates at least that this is probably the way they're leaning how they want to start the postseason. And I think that's entirely fascinating,

right? Because someone is clearly going to have to sit until there's injuries and them choosing grizzlic. I don't know how you feel about that. But it's, it's certainly a strange on considering he was like basically playing top pairing minutes for them before. Yeah. I mean, if you do process of elimination, it's not difficult to get to Grizzlick as the odd man out because Obviously, Orlov and McAvoy, not going anywhere, Lynnholm as well. That's three guys off the table there. I think Carlos, that second pair right, D, it just makes too much sense. I don't think what they were doing, taking him out of one game, was much of an indication of the future plans there.

And then, so then you get down to the third pair, and on Saturday for Bert and Clifton, not about you, Demetri, but Clifton is a no-go there in terms of taking them out of the lineup. just a very effective defensive-minded, smaller guy. But he plays big, kind of like Orlov in that way. Forbork kills penalties. He's their leading penalty killer. Yeah, that's why I said. That mixed with the size.

I mean, he's six, four, Grizzlick's 5'10. And I'm not saying this is what I would do necessarily. But I think Jim Montgomery is looking at that and going, absolutely, I want this mean forbearer character in the line of versus Grizzlick, who's, you know, not. getting power play time, not getting PK time. So when I sort of, you know, just throw everything out there against the wall in terms of, okay, what makes sense and eliminate basically half of the defense core before you even start thinking about things deeply, it's easy to get to grizzly.

And that's unfortunate. I think he's a, I don't know if underrated is the right way to put it, but he's a quality NHL defenseman. I mean, there's no reason he should be sitting out under. normal circumstances. Yeah, I guess for these final 20 games or so, they're going to keep rotating guys because they have such a healthy cushion for the president's trophy in the first seat in the east, right?

And so it's kind of a luxury they've afforded themselves. I think they're going to load manage everyone. So that makes sense. But yeah, when, you know, obviously this is a bit of a moot point. If they do have an injury to one of those seven guys and then you kind of have a more natural, um, natural fit in terms of just putting all six of them in there. I get it. Like, you know, they like forward on the penalty.

He does, as I said, lead the team. in penalty kill ice time on average. He's got the size. And I think NHL coaches are sort of reluctant to have a defense pair that's constituted of two guys who have a very similar build in Grizzlic and Clifton. Both guys are, I think, generously listed around 510, 511. Now, Clifton, I've often said on the Pediocass plays like he's 6'4. For my money, he plays a meaner game than Brandon Carlo.

If you just stripped away the name and how they look and everything, and you just watched what they do on the ice. It's like, wow, one guy is one of the most physical defenders in the league and other guys is really tall. But I feel bad for Grizzlick because he's played 59 games in his Bruins career in the playoffs. In those games, he's been outscored 41 to 24 when he's been on the ice at 5 on 5. And there's been a lot made of his postseason struggles and how his game doesn't translate. into the different playing environment once you get into the playoffs.

And I get part of that argument, but it's really tough to reconcile with the fact that in those minutes, he has like a 55% expected goal share and just is having brutal luck. I think they're shooting like 5% or something as a team with him on ice in those minutes. And I don't, watching those those games. I never came away thinking, wow, Matt Rizlick is really killing this team offensively. Like it seems like it's much more of a sort of small sample size,

random variance thing as opposed to something he's doing wrong. So it seems like he's kind of being punished for that as well. And I think that's a mistake because part of what makes his Bruins team so special. And we could do like a full show listing all of all of the things they do incredibly well, right? Because they're about as flawless a team as you're going to get in today's at H.L. I think Garnet Hathaway actually recently was asked about like kind of his initial impressions on playing for the Bruins what they do differently than what the capitals were doing. Like what makes them so effective. And he was saying it was like the fastest team he's ever,

I either seen or played on, I forget which he said through the neutral zone. And you see that in not necessarily how they skate, but how they how they operate. Like they flip from defense to offense as quickly as anyone, right? Like they're so efficient doing so. And that's something Grizzlick is awesome at. Like he's such a good neutral zone defender despite being undersized.

He's a very aggressive blue line defender. He doesn't allow you to carry the puck in. he also makes a beautiful first pass and does these beautiful regroup similar to what the avalanche do so well, where like even if you clear the zone, he gets it. And instead of bringing it back into his own zone, he just quickly gets it back up for another zone entry opportunity for a forward. And so stripping that from the lineup, it's ultimately like an embarrassment of riches. And I don't think it's going to move the needle that much one way or another. But I do think it is a bit of a suboptimal move to be taking him out of the lineup just based on like the particular skills he has.

Well, I guess the silver lining would be that you assume that Montgomery is going to tinker and you sort of mentioned it there in passing down the stretch because this team is on a historic pace. It would be silly not to throw Grizzlic back in there, whether it's every other game, every third game or whatever, and see what mix might be out there for him. And I mean, another way to look at this if your Grizzlick is like how often do NHL teams go through the playoffs without getting a defenseman injured. You know, you see what the Leafs did, what they have nine NHL defensemen if you want to, like, quote unquote, around the NHL there. And I think that's on purpose.

I think it's not an accident. I think when you look back at Cup champions, they get to probably defense been eight usually. So Grizzlick's got to, you know, at the very least, keep that seventh spot. I mean, Zaboro and Riley are behind him. So I think that he's in pretty good shape there. but it'll be interesting to watch because like you said, it's like you know, the rich got richer

over this trade deadline period and it's such a first world problem that the Bruins might have here with too many good defensemen. Well, I was just going to bring up the Leafs and part of why I was fascinated by this question was you know, the Leafs made a move on the Blue Line where they traded away, Rasmus Sandin, who

you know, I really like his game and he certainly especially in like third when he's played third bare minutes, is just absolutely crushed, right? Like, his underlying numbers are through the roof amongst the best in the league. And I don't think he necessarily does anything that would make me think,

oh, he cannot play in a bigger role in instances where he's had to. I think he's looked perfectly fine. But I think the reason why the Leafs were comfortable trading a guy like him, especially ahead of this postseason, was they clearly felt like they weren't confident in his ability to go back

and play the puck deep in a zone in a playoff setting, especially against the team like the Lightning or the Bruins in a playoff series where you know they're going to be coming in on the forecheck looking to take his head off. And they're concerned that his ability to make plays in those settings under that kind of pressure, it would lead to mistakes or he wouldn't be able to quit himself as well as he maybe does in the regular season. And that's not a unique thought process to either what the Bruins are thinking with Grizzlick or what the leaves are thinking with Sandy.

And I think that's kind of like a general thing that a lot of teams are coming around to or at least thinking about. And so I think that's part of the calculus here as well. So I wanted to bring that up. Well, and I think a lot of it is contextual in a sense that if we're talking about say Grizzlick playing on the second pair, I think that's less of a topic of conversation in terms of, oh, how is he going to handle the forecheck or if he's on the first pair for whatever reason.

Like I think that coaches look at the third pair and just go, I want to not worry about this, these two guys. And I think Clifton certainly accomplishes that for her. I guess, you know, depends on your mileage with him or your mileage may vary with him. But like it's relatively safe as far as, you know, just doing the bare minimum, not getting scored on hopefully and, you know, keeping turnovers minimized. And maybe grills like you look at and go, well, he might bring up our ceiling offensively, but what does it look like defensively? And, you know, you point out that he's perfectly fine in a lot of defensive situations. but when you're the coach and you're going,

how about when, I don't know, let's say it's a leaf set end up playing him in the second round or something. How does Grizzl handle a forecheck of O'Reilly, Tavares, and whoever's else out there with him? So I think that's also a big part of this. Yeah. Yeah, I think the special teams utility is key too. You see it in like the NFL, for example,

with like how teams like dress their running backs, right? Like which ones are the backups? Usually they're the ones who have like some sort of like, special teams utility where they're either on the kickoffs or whatever or they can provide other value because they're they're probably not going to be as on the field in that case as often unless there's an injury right and i think that kind of applies to a third parent defenseman here where for its ability to just like chew up significant amount of thankless penalty kill minutes and just be out there and just like eating shots and kind of doing all that all that dirty work is a big selling

point i think here for them as well right because like in an ideal situation what's the five one five five usage going to be like if you have Orlov, McAvoy and Linholm, you ideally want those guys out there pretty much for as every minute possible, right? And I'm really curious to see as well, like they've used Orlov and Macavoy mostly here since the trade. And Orlov's been otherworldly, right? He has like three goals, I think six points. They're crushing with him.

I expectantly he's fit right in in terms of the way they want to play. But I'm curious to see if they also experiment with just loading up Lynn Holme and Maccaboy more now that they have Orlov because I think Orlov could be. perfectly fine, can be perfectly fine with, with Carlo on a second pair. So a lot of moving parts, a lot of options for them. I'm curious to see how it all plays out. Let's move on to the next question here from Mo. We were just talking about the best team in the league. Mo asked outside the coyotes, who are the franchises with the most depressing medium term outlooks moving forward? It's so damning on Arizona that they're included as sort of a side from the coyotes,

especially when we're talking about rebuilding teams mostly, right? That's not great. I don't know about you, but do you look at medium term as like three to four years or two to three years? Where are you at on sort of the time frame there? Yeah, I'd say anywhere from like two to three up to five years. And then everything else after that is long term. And I'd say like the rest of this season and next year are like short term. And then everything after that kind of falls in the opinion for me.

Okay. Just want to make sure there. And so if we're talking most depressing, In terms of medium term, I think it comes down to like, does a team have a distinct, committed plan? And so to put that in the context of the deadline that just passed, the capitals clearly have a plan here, right? They want a retool on the fly. They have Ovechkin for another three or four seasons as he chases the record. And they thought, okay, after not doing anything to our roster all season in the last couple of weeks, boom, let's go.

like let's trade basically every UFA that's remaining and we're going to try and flip this over whether it works who knows but like you got to commend them for having the plan and committing to it so there's a lot of teams that that don't necessarily fall into that bucket and that makes them depressing and honestly I think I think the Flyers is they're the one team that really jumps off the page and I'll just throw a couple of reasons why So first of all, I don't look at whether it's their NHLers now or their prospects and see a bunch of superstars. Like I don't see a bunch of stars even. Like the high end of the roster isn't very high. The cap sheet is pretty messy.

You know, Fletcher, the GM clearly misread the deadline. Doesn't get anything for JVR. He goes into this 2023 draft with no second. Obviously, he can do something before the draft. that's a bit of a last minute plan. Their prospect pool is okay. The athletic had them as 14th among the 32 teams recently. So, you know, not terrible, but, you know, you're not looking at it going,

oh, they're really going to turn this thing around or there's a lot of optimism. And they have the eighth lowest points percentage. So they're not, you know, necessarily in a good spot to land up a dart or a fantilly. Sure, they could. I mean, in this, in the draft lottery world, they certainly could. but as we're talking right now, there's just so much to dislike about this Flyers team and the light at the end of the tunnel is not very bright, I'll say.

Yeah, I mean, I think you hit all the key points there and yet somehow I came away from it being like, wow, John was being really nice because it is, and I feel like the general tone is like so much, it should be so much bleaker based on everything than the way than the picture you painted were. I was like, oh, you know, yeah. I mean, John, they have one pick right now, as you mentioned, in the top 45 or 50, depending on where Florida is second rounder lines, I guess.

Now they have an ability to acquire more at the deadline, but it's clearly a suboptimal position for a team that's 25th in the league in point percentage. And that's another part of this conversation as well, where they've been one of the worst teams or like most hopeless teams in the league this season. but because there was a long time where Carter Hart was just playing out of his mind and because John Tortorella has them playing like absolute max effort as if they are in the postseason all year basically they've like grinded out points that they had no business otherwise banking and really they should be 28th or 29th or 30th in the league and have higher odds of landing at Dillier-Padard but because of that they're probably going to get like what the sixth or seventh best prospect which is fine.

of course, but not what you'd like to have to show for an otherwise miserable season. You mentioned keeping JVR. I mean, that was obviously a mess. I get that maybe the market just simply wasn't there, especially for a player who has a $7 million cap hit, which is a bit more difficult to navigate. But I don't understand how a team like the Cracken or something who needs help on the power of play,

like I don't understand how they weren't like spending all of their time and resources, convincing them to at least give them like a third round pick or some sort of a B prospect for him. I mean, that seems like a no-brainer. And part of this conversation as well is, you know, your own ability to rationally evaluate where you are come to terms with an act accordingly, right? Like, I know they put out that letter recently, right? That was kind of reminiscent of what the Rangers did. We saw both Tortorella and Chuck Fletcher come out and, you know, essentially admit that they need to like rebuild. And this is like a lot. long-term thing and they're not necessarily entirely diluted on how good they are.

But actions speak louder than words and you look at everything they did this past off-season and it's just it's not reflective of a team that understands that, right? Like they bring in John Tortorella. They give a four-year contract with a modified no move to Nicholas Deloree, which is just absolutely preposterous. They trade picks, valuable picks of that for Tony DiAngelo and then come out mid-season and say, we were kind of surprised by how bad he is defensively, actually, as if they don't have any access to any public metrics,

they would just show you that he was like a bottom five percentile defender last year, even when he was having a good year for the hurricanes. You know, everything they've done is just runs polar opposite to what you expect from a traditional rebuilding team. And now you look ahead and they don't have much drought capital. They have $23 million invested next season in a top four of Rasmusselaiden, and Travis Sandheim, Tony DiAngelo, and Ivan Provarov. I don't really see a quick way out here, right?

Like, who knows if Sean Couturey's ever going to play again? Ryan Ellis almost certainly will never play again. They have one star skater, in my opinion, and Travis Keneckney, who had a fantastic bounce back season. But he's 26 and has two years left on his deal. Like, he probably should be traded for futures because he's one of the few assets they have that's going to recoup significant capital. So I don't, what's the way out over the next three or four years here without like a significant

change of philosophy? Yeah, and before you transition to one of your teams, I just want to say a couple things about Torrella. Like this isn't coming from the sort of media side of things where it's like, ah, he's, you know, mean to reporters or, oh, he doesn't give reporters the time of day. This is more from a creating your own gong shows kind of angle where, you know, like, it seems like every other day you go on Twitter and you see a clip of Tortorella of just either not giving information on like a meaningless topic or not a meaningless topic, but just a harmless topic or blasting one of his players or

acting like he didn't know Travis Sanheim had a bunch of family coming to Calgary and then decided to scratch him. Like it's just, it's a circus in a lot of ways. And I just feel like it's got to be tiring to be part of that group. Like you're already losing and your coaches just throw. throwing gasoline on the fire all the time. Because whenever he makes some sort of comment, obviously the reporters go to the players the next day or they hear from their family and friends about, oh, towards this, towards this, so again, this isn't like me complaining about Tortorella

as a media person. It's just looking from the outside and going, is this the right time for tortarella to sort of be, I guess, a hard ask for lack of better way to put it. It's like, what are you trying to accomplish as an organization, right? You look at, I actually, I understand that they're blessed with significant like they're much ahead of them in terms of the timeline and they're blessed with significantly more young talent but you look at what like a don granato is done in buffalo even dating back to last year and you can like meaningfully point to the development the young players have had in terms of like him coming in and changing either how they're being used or what they're being asked to do and then getting the results to show for it from moving tage

thompson to center to like you know they bring in they pick up Tyson joe stoff waivers and all of a sudden he's giving them very valuable defensive minutes. Casey Middlestad all of a sudden I thought was just a complete throwaway, and at least he's giving them some production. Like there's stuff to point to there of like, oh, he's doing a good job. Now, there's another conversation to be had about Granado in terms of like,

I hate how he pulls his goalie super late, or there's been times where Uco Pekalukin and Nara Kamir is struggling, and he just keeps them in there as opposed to switching, switching them out and to try and salvage a game, like whether he's the coach for them once they start playing playoff games and every little one of those margins matters, I think those are two different skill sets for a coach, but it's clear that for development and kind of on the way up,

Granato is doing an unbelievable job. And that's what I would be looking for from my coach if I was in that position, not someone to try to quote unquote change the culture of this team in all of these sort of outdated ways that don't actually reflect in the results. So there's a lot there on the flyers. Here's my team. It's got to be the sharks. I know that the Timom Meyer trade is good because they,

even though I was underwhelmed by the return, at least they get a quantity of assets, right? They get that first. They get another potential for another first. They get prospects. That's good. If they had done that with Tomashe hurdle at last year's deadline,

I'd feel even better. But, you know, that was a different management team, so you can't hold that against my career, of course. But you just look at the books, and they have four more years at $8 million for Logan Gature after this one. Three more years at $7 million for Mark Edward Vlasik. Four more years at 11.5 on Eric Carlson,

who I thought this was their best wind to trade him and get legitimate assets back, even if it meant eating some of a salary for those four years. We'll see what happens at the draft and what they're able to get back in return. They're paying Brent Burns, $2.72 million for two more years after this one. They've got four more years of Martin Jones's buyout. They have so much inefficient spending on their team and they don't have a top prospect pool to come in and produce on ELCs in the meantime, right? Like we just saw William Eklund come back and I'm excited to see him play on this team for

the rest of the season, hopefully, but there's not like this next wave that's immediate that's going to be like, all right, they're going to have these four or five really awesome rookies that are going to be in the team next year, instantly producing. It's going to be a couple more years of being 27th, 28th in the league and really struggling and just basically waiting for some of this money to expire. And so when you're thinking medium term for me for the sharks, I think the next three or four years are going to be just as painful as basically the last year or two have been. Yeah, long term, I think. you can talk yourself into, okay, if Greer plays his cards right over the next couple of years

and is able to offload more contracts, and, you know, they land up a dart or Fantilli or Carlson or whoever at the top of the draft, then you go, okay, like, they got something to work with here. But medium term, it's, there's going to be a lot of pain there and a lot of losing. And it, it's tough to lose when you have these guys with the big tickets. and who knows, maybe this past season, or sorry, I should, yeah, I guess this, this season that we're in is a sign of things to come in terms of being able to get off bad contracts because it did happen a fair bit with salary retention. But that's not exactly a great path to go down because you only have so many retention spots. And whenever you do that, you're throwing assets out the door for the other team or teams to feel comfortable doing it. So it's similar to some of these other teams like the Predators that we've talked about in the past where you you tie yourself to the wrong core.

You tie yourself to the wrong players on the top of your lineup and pay them long term these, you know, 8 million times seven years, eight years. And they're just impossible to turn around. They're impossible to get rid of. And, you know, not to make this all about the predators, but I love what they did around the deadline because they finally. said, okay, let's turn the corner here, let's do something different, let's not bang our head against the wall. But it's a similar thing with the sharks where good luck moving some of these contracts. So I think you're bang on there with the sharks.

It's pretty bleak there. Like say if you compare them to the ducks, even though the ducks are horrendous to watch sometimes, especially on defense this season, terrible underlying numbers, like just a lot to not like at least they have the Zegrasis and the McTavish's and the Rysdales of the world. What I would also say with the ducks though is like, and listen, I don't think anyone's been harder on them than me because I was excited to watch them this season and they've just been an utter mess in every way.

If they win the Connor Bratard sweepstakes and they're going to change their coach and they bring up like an oldensel Weger, they even Pavel Minchikov, they bring up some of these guys they've drafted recently. Like there's a very. realistic range of outcomes for them as soon as next season where I don't think they necessarily become a playoff team but they go from being historically bad to like legitimately entertaining slash a pain to play against right and and I think that is within the range I do not see that as a range of outcomes for the sharks because you look and it's like Carlson's having this

unbelievable throwback season he's going to win the Norris this year Timo Meyer was so productive for them he was on pace for 45 goals before they traded them and they were still with those seasons they were having still 27th or 28th in the league. I don't understand how that's going to get better. It needs to get significantly worse still for them before it does get better. And so, you know, at least they've started that process. Like there was a year ago maybe or so where they had all of these bad contracts, but also they had no picks. And it was like that was incredibly tough. At least now you can start seeing some of the light shining at the end of the tunnel, but it's still a long process for them. So I think the, I think the sharks and the flyers are two really good picks here.

Okay, John, let's take our break here. And then when we come back, we will keep answering the listener questions. You were listening to the Hockeypedo guest streaming on the SportsNet Radio Network. All right, we're back here in the hockey podes with John Mattis taking your listener questions. So John, here's the next one. Moe asked, or sorry, no, we did, we did Moe's question. We did Moe's question on the coyotes. My bad. Asan here asks, in a conference full of pretenders, is Edmonton now the best team in the West after their addition of Matias Eccl? I think the short answer is yes, probably.

And then the longer answer is that I think it's between Edmonton, Colorado. Obviously, we've yet to see them really at full health and full boost. And Dallas is certainly in the conversation. I mean, one thing we can't discredit here is the Jake Godinger effect. Just phenomenal last year during the playoffs. Hasn't missed a beat this year. You know, Edmonton questions and goal. Colorado, obviously, Gorgiev's been good, but, you know, is he up to snub as far as Ottinger and the standard he's set?

And, like, I don't know, I just look at Dallas's lineup. And I really like their forward group, whether it's that top line that, you know, you wax poetic about it a lot for Robertson, Pavelsky hints. I really like what Ben, Dwight Johnston, and either Dagenov or Delandria have been able to do this. year. Their D, I would say as a group is good, but not excellent. But they're in a conference that's quite weak. I think Dallas needs to be up there. So I'd say those three are sort of in the running with Edmonton, you know,

the slightest of edge because of Connor McDavid and Leon Drysiddle. And obviously I did like the Echholm acquisition as did, you know, 99% of the hockey community. And then I think I'd put the Winnipeg Jets maybe a tier below those other three. with with halibuck having that that x-factor ability um i wanted to i wanted to you know look at vagus and go okay how can i talk myself into including them in this discussion as best in the west but i don't know man with with mark stone likely not playing it's obviously foggy but it's not looking great with the goaltending you know question marks and and just them being depleted a little bit

with depth over the years, although I did like the Barbashev acquisition. I just can't in good conscience put them up at top. What do you think? Yeah, I mean, the Mark Stone situation is obviously the X Factor. I would still put them above Winnipeg.

I would put them in that tier with Dallas. I think it's clearly Edmonton and Colorado. I would still, maybe potentially foolishly, but I would still put Colorado atop there just in the case that they do get actually healthy

and we for once see everyone they have in the lineup at the same time which we haven't yet this season. We'll see some of the sort of rhetoric around Gabriel Landis Gogg is obviously concerning but honestly I've said this a couple times in the podcast throughout I'd never expected to see on this regular season so I'm not necessarily alarmed by some of the talk that he hasn't really come close to getting ready to return yet.

I still think he'll come back for the postseason and if he does and their blue lines healthy, they clearly have the highest upside in terms of what they're capable of. For the Oilers, there's an important conversation here to be had about, like, Jack Campbell cannot play anymore for them. I think they need to send him down to the H.L.

And get him some game time away from an HL competition and away from the pressures of the situation to try and sort of get him back on track if they can, right? Like, I don't think the fact that they've invested so much in him for the five-year deal or whatever should factor into the decision-making of force-feeding him starts here because there's too much on the line. And, you know, we saw a team like the L.A. Kings, for example, and I know it's a bit of a different circumstance, but you look at the investment they made in Cal Peterson, and they were like, he cannot play for us right now. Like, all of these points are too valuable, and he's just not giving us enough of a chance to win.

And so they send him down, and they're just, they're biting the bow. bullet, but it's already a sunk cost, right? I think he has a much better chance of figuring it out for the future down there, as opposed to sitting on the bench at the NHL level or just having these catastrophic performances time and time again. And look at Campbell, negative 25.4 goals save above expected in 32 games. Last five games he's played, the Oilers as a team have scored 23 goals in five games, and they have not won any of those games. That's unacceptable, right? You cannot keep doing that.

And so I'm very curious to see how they handle that. If you look at their schedule the rest of the way, they only have two back-to-backs left, I believe. And one of them involves the coyotes in the front end of it, and the other one involves the ducks on the back end of it. And honestly, I think you could easily call up another goalie, send Campbell back down, give them those two starts or whatever if you don't want to be just completely riding,

Stewart's getting into the ground and go that route. And I'm curious to see if they do do that. I'm not sure if they're going to be willing to kind of accept the feat already at this point. But I think that's what I would do if I were them because they just cannot play them anymore right now. Yeah, it remains to be seen if it was a wise choice by the Kings to send Peterson down. But their hand was kind of forced to an extent. I guess there's a lot of teams I wouldn't have sent them down. but I thought it was at least them thinking outside the box,

at least trying to rectify the situation, make it better. And with Jack Campbell, I think you're totally on to something. I think it makes the most sense in a vacuum to send him down with that market. And with, you know, people talk endlessly about Jack Campbell in his highs and lows. Like you wonder how that affects him the demotion. But you kind of can't be thinking about that stuff. Are you trying to win a cup or not? So I think it would certainly make headlines would certainly be a quote unquote bold decision in the realm of the NHL.

But I think it's your spot on in terms of the tactic there. Like Stuart Skinner is your guy. Jack Campbell's broken. Let's try to fix this at least to some extent heading into the playoffs so that Campbell can back up Skinner. And you don't feel like if push comes to shove and you have to throw them out there, that it's the complete last resort. You want to have some semblance of confidence. And, you know, you brought up the sunk cost.

I mean, this guy is around for another handful of years. Four years after this one, yeah. Four years. So, I mean, it's either you bite the bullet now with trying to rehabilitate him, so to speak, build up his game again and get his confidence back, all that good stuff. Or you wait until all the offseason and who knows where he'll be at then. So I think that's a smart approach. I don't know, though.

You watch, and I understand it was the second of back-to-back. So, like, they throttle Winnipeg at home, right on Friday, I believe. And then on Saturday, Saturday night on Hockey Night on Hockey Canada, they're playing in Winnipeg and they go to Jack Campbell. And it's just like, they had no chance. Like, you just watch some of the shots in there go, I get it. It's like, man, this must be so demoralizing. And so I don't, I'm not one to predict a goalie performance or what it takes

to get them back on track or what will work and what won't. I'm sure it goes on like a very, deep individual level, but I don't know how exposing him to that environment and situation in terms of just watching him kind of give up these soft goals time and time again, how that's going to eventually regain his confidence. You know what I mean? Like that's, that does not seem like an optimal approach. Now, Stuart, I want to keep calling him Jeff Skinner. I got, I, I, I, I, I, I, I, I, I, I, I, I, I, I, I, I, I, I, I, I, I, I, I, I, I, I, I, I, come out all the time. Yeah. Stuart Skinner is already up to 36 games.

since going pro a handful of years ago, he's played 47, 44, 32, and 48 games. I think the Oilers have every right to be hoping to be playing somewhere between 12 and 20 playoff games. And so with the amount they have left this regular season, I think that would be a valid concern of, okay, we don't want Stewart Skinner getting up to 60 plus games this season because he's never really done it before.

he did it in major junior like once i believe but this is an entirely different animal right and so you want to keep him as fresh as possible because he's clearly going to be the person you need to rely on if you are going to make a long playoff run so they still are in a race right like they can't be just like punting valuable points away but they do need to take a bit of a longer term view for the rest of the season in terms of getting their line upset for game one of the postseason so there's a lot a lot of a lot of factors there and a lot of things that play but if they can figure that out at all. And if it is going to be Stuart SkidnernerNet for them, I do like this Oilers team quite a bit, especially after that at Quillman edition. He's just been, he's like a perfect

player for what they needed. So, um, yeah, that, uh, that answers the son's question there. All right. Ryan asks, based on what we know about Jacob Chikrin in his game, who do you see is the best fit as his long term defensive partner in Ottawa? So I think, like if we look at the rest of the defense core and, and work backwards from there, I think Shup, with Zub makes almost too much sense. You want Zub to keep Shabbat honest. You want to allow Shabbat to roam around. So I think long term, you know,

without knowing what's going to happen in terms of development with some of these players, like that seems to make a ton of sense. So you rule that out in terms of, you know, he's not going to play with Shabbat. He's not going to play with Zub. And then you get to Sanderson and Hamannick on the second pair right now and Chikrin and Brannstrom are on the third pair,

at least according to the last lineup. up. And I mean, Hamanick and Brantz, Hamannick is a, is a, a UFA. So I think, you know, it would be highly possible or there's a very high chance that Hamannock's not here next year. So if you take him out of the equation, I think if you want to load up your top two pairs, so to speak, and if you can find between Sanderson and Chikrin, one of them that prefer, not prefers the right side but it's comfortable, then I think that's an option, Sanderson and Chikrin, and then you have Shabot and Zub, and then you figure out your third pair in some other way. Another way to look at it would be you keep Sanderson and Chikrin apart and you find, you know, a more reliable,

not necessarily reliable, but a right shot to play with Chikrin, who's either on free agency, I mean, does Connor Clifton end up in free agency? That would be a nice fit there. There's obviously a bunch of other righties that will end up there that maybe you find someone at a bargain price. And there's also, you know, sort of the, is there someone in your system that's sort of a Nick Purbix type? So obviously, for people who don't know who haven't been following the Tampa Lightening, Nick Perbix was a sixth round pick.

He played three or four years of college and then slid right into the NHL, basically, and has been in a top four role and, you know, kind of meat and potatoes to, defenseman, but, you know, can skate. He's a modern guy. He's not an anchor by any means. And Tampa's been able to just use his, his cheap contract to fill a spot in their top four and not really miss a beat. It's not perfect, but I wonder if there's someone. Things are going famously well with the Tampa Bay Lightning right now. Well, right now, but I'm talking about the whole thing. No, I know. Yeah. Not a fun weekend for, for many players. But those are my three options, basically. Sanderson, where one of them goes on the right side,

Two would be, you know, is there a perfect sky in your system? And three would be free agency. Are you going to be able to find, you know, a cheapish option for your second or third pair that can play with Chikrin or Sanderson? So they started in his debut against the Rangers on the road. They started him with Nick Holden and he played a majority of minutes there.

Then the next game at home against the Blue Jackets, they played him with Eric Brandstrom, both on the third pair, although I believe they ramped up his minutes. And in the second game, he was like, like third on the team. Chickren was in 515 usage. So, you know, the pairing designation is kind of irrelevant in the sense. And if anything, it's great because you want to tone down Thomas Shabat's minutes a little

bit to try to optimize efficiency. He just plays way too much and has for years. I'm on the record. I really like the idea of him in Sanderson because part of Chickren's game that I think he needs help with is having someone who's a bit more fluid in terms of breaking the puck out of the zone. I think he's got a nice first pass. But if that breaks down, I don't really want him freelancing much, whereas Sanderson is such a fluid skater that he can kind of handle those responsibilities quite a bit. So I actually think, in a way, pairing chikering with like a traditional

puck mover is actually the way to go here. Even though he does, he does play a bit of a risky game in the offensive zone where he goes down below the dots and he tries to get involved in the offense and go for those backdoor tap ends and use a shot and all that. I, I, I, I, I still like him with someone who can move the puck. And in this case, both him and Sanderson are such great rush defenders that it's like a very interesting pair to be able to throw out against other teams,

you know, most electric skaters and they can keep up with them. The inspired answer here is Jake Sanderson with one of them moving to the right side. The wired answer here is bringing Garrett Carlson back this summer. Oh, baby. Chickren and Carlson? Yes.

Yes. that's that that that's that's that's that's the dream and obviously there's there's tons of loopholes to go through I'm not even sure what what the interest there would be on both parties I but I just I'm throwing that out that out there is a very interesting option for me me I mean the vibes around this team are are so good I don't want to I don't want to get carried away because they still have a lot of work to do to even qualify for the playoffs as the second wildcar team right there four points back of the islanders they have three games in hand on them they're tied with the sabers who have a game in hand on them and there are three points back

of the penguins with the same number of games played. You look at their schedule, there's like two or three kind of relatively easy games against the Blackhawks and I think the flyers, but the rest of it is pretty tricky. Like I think both them and the Sabres have really tough upcoming schedules. So I'm curious to see how they handle that. But the vibes are very good right now, right? Like it's two games in. You don't want to get carried away. But Chickren is clearly incredibly happy about his change of scenario and actually, I guess, finally getting to play hockey after missing eight games and sitting from the press box and waiting for a year and a half for this situation to get resolved.

And if the opener at home with his debut against the Blue Jackets is any indication. And I know that's not necessarily representative of what it's going to be like moving forward because the Blue Jackets are a mess themselves. But the market and the fan base seems to be quite happy with Jacob Chikrin as well. Right. So it seems like it's a really nice match made in heaven. And I'm very curious to see how the rest of this season and then heading into the summer goes for them. Well, I'm really happy for the sense fan base too.

I mean, it's been a rough, I don't know, since 2017. What is that? Six, seven years. It's been tough. And this obviously was a big win for them as far as the, uh, underwhelming package that went out the door for Chikrin. And just the fact that he has ties to the, to the area. I think that helps in terms of keeping the guy happy in terms of, you know,

making a marketable, all that good stuff. And yeah, the fit's been small, really small, sample size, but the fit's been nice. The vibes are immaculate. So even if the Sends don't make the playoffs, I think this has just been, it hasn't been a perfect season by any means. They've had pretty poor stretches there. But if they can end strong and they just happen to miss the playoffs by a few points,

I mean, you got to go into that offseason feeling pretty good about yourself if you're a Sets fan. Yeah. Yeah, I agree. I really like the move. I love the price they paid to get it. And I think he's an awesome player who's going to fit great and get. gives them a lot of options, you know, regardless of what they do, if they want to just keep

spreading out those three pairs and playing in with a guy like Eric Brantstrom, I think that'll be totally fine, especially if that incentivizes DJ Smith to trust Eric Branson a bit more. I'm all for that. And if they wind up loading up that top four in whatever capacity, I think that'll work, that'll play just as well too. So good times ahead. Okay. Let's end on this note.

So Iron Caniac asks, if you exclude media hype and just go by production and underlying metrics. Is it accurate to say that hurricanes don't have any superstar players or are there hurricanes players that are just as good as the quote unquote media dubbed superstars are, but they don't get the same recognition. Now, you and I are both, I guess, members of the media, right? So it seems like, Aaron Caniac here is blaming us for the perception. But it is an interesting conversation, right, because the hurricanes certainly compared to other top teams. And I don't know of this. If it weren't for the year the Bruins were having, we'd all be talking about the fact that the hurricanes are on pace for like 120 plus points or something this season themselves. They

definitely do it by more of a sort of balanced approach, right? Even if you look at the usage upfront, like Sebastian Ajo plays 19 and a half minutes or something and then everyone else is like 18 or under. It's much more of a balanced approach in that regard. They're clearly not just leaning on one pair or one line up front. And I think that certainly has a bit to do with it. Like, Marty Natchez leads the team in points and he's 40th in the league. Sebastian Aho's 53rd. So I think that it's kind of as simple as that.

But I'm kind of curious for your take on this and sort of the players that we attribute superstar status to and then how that kind of ties into team success and all that good stuff. Yeah, I mean, if we're talking legitimate superstars, I don't know if Aho would make the cut. I mean, he's obviously a superstar in a lot of ways through the lens of a hockey nerd, right? And same with, you know, a Jacob Slavin. But if we're talking about, like, being realistic and looking across the league, I just don't think he would make that cutoff. And, you know, it's always bug me how often we use. And I loop myself into this.

I'm not, you know, innocent completely. But, like, the way we use the word superstar is kind of outrageous. Like, we just throw it out here and there and everywhere. I think star you can, you know, one or two guys per team per average. Like I think that makes sense. But, you know, what makes a superstar? And I was thinking about it in the context of this question. And it's like, okay, if it should be a pretty rare thing, then, you know, should it be reserved

for 15 players, which is roughly like 2% of the league? Should it be for like 20 players? Because I think that it should be one of those labels that are really. And I realize, you know, maybe overthinking it, like it ultimately doesn't matter. It's just a word. But the questioner is certainly interested in it. And I think, you know, if you keep it to 20 players and also factor in, I think superstars probably should have some flash to them, should have some track record to them, kind of that, not necessarily a brand, but like an on ice, I guess, just they jump off the page on the ice. then you get to 20 names fairly quickly.

And I don't think, you know, an Aho or a Slavin quite make the cut. But that doesn't mean that they're not, you know, in the star tier or that the hurricanes don't have, you know, a handful of quote unquote stars and that they can't go on a long run, right? So it's an interesting question. Well, I think there's a distinction to be made, though, right? Like, I don't think it's a meritocracy in the sense that we don't up. date our opinions on this often enough, right? So like once you become a superstar in our eyes, whether it's like nationally or in the media's eyes or what have you, the way players are talked about, it's really tough to shake that. Like it's like for years, even if their production doesn't

necessarily merit it anymore, these guys are still viewed and talked about a superstar's articles or written about them. The focus is majorly placed on them. And so maybe in that way, we are kind of responsible as media members because we are the ones driving that conversation, right? We're the ones writing the story. You'd like to think that it's based on a meritocracy of, okay, well, this guy's playing really well. People want to read about them. So we're going to write the story. But for the most part, it's just kind of the same names over and over again. And it's really tough to break into that circle. I would say that the superstars on this hurricanes team are Rod Brindamore and Eric Tulski. Like the infrastructure they have in place in terms of the way

they operate, the fact that they can bring anyone in or at least a certain type of player is. and get maximum results out of them and then view it as a business where as soon as that player, like their value to the team doesn't match up with what they're going to be paid, they're just going to move on and find the next guy, right? And for better or for worse,

that's clearly what they keep doing. And so that's the way I would view it. Now, I would say Slaven and AHA are certainly stars. I would say Marty Natchez and Svechnakov have incredibly bright futures and they're budding stars. These guys are quote unquote superstars, but I would, we throw that term around it.

You're right. way too loosely. Like there's probably between 10 and 20 actual superstars and instead anyone who's like everyone gets viewed that way. Right. So yeah, I think, you know, the hurricanes. And I think the hurricanes are totally fine with that. Not that they're flying under the radar or anything, but like they're perfectly fine winning

games and banking points right now. And they're going to have to get over a hurdle in the playoffs, which they haven't yet. And so I think doing that as well will also change the perception quite a bit, I imagine nationally. Well, and I think if you're listening and your Hurricanes fan, you're going, oh, man, we don't have any superstars or our only superstars are our coach and our assistant GM. That's not bad. I mean, the sustainability of that is much better than banking on a player who could get hurt at any point. That's exactly what I was going to say. I was going to say, if your identity is tied to the coach and it's actually like a very good coach who is very sort of direct in like, this is what we do, this is how we play and it's effective and it takes you places.

sure they haven't won a cup but one of the best run organizations they know exactly the type of player they want and they go out and get them like you said with tolsky they're kind of ruthless in some ways in terms of letting guys go or just circling a name and getting it so it's actually it's kind of a backhanded compliment i would say that rod brindamore is the face of the franchise and that's that could lead to a cup it doesn't mean that you know like if you say the oilers as an example obviously macdavid is the face of the franchise and it could lead to a cup. But there certainly is a lot of uneasiness in that market because

you look at the rest of the team, the organization and go, is it all figured out here? Obviously, we got a dry saddle. We got other pieces. But like, is the stability there. And I think in Carolina, there's no question. The stability is quite there. Okay, John. We're out of time here. We've got to get out of here. I'll give you quickly an opportunity to just let the listeners know where they can check out. Yeah, sure. So on Twitter, I'm M-A-T-I-S-S-E. said J-O-H-N. So just my last name, my first name. And it's the best place to check out my stuff.

I tweeted out and just fired up for the stretch drive here, Dmitri. Like, what a crazy, you know, a few weeks there. You could even go back to the Horvath trade and just nonstop news. And it's nice to now settle in and start watching these new players on new teams. Yeah, yeah, I echo that entirely. All right, John, this is a blast. We're going to have you back on soon. Thank you to the listeners for listening to us.

If you enjoy what you heard, go smash that five-star button wherever you listen to the show. And we'll be back tomorrow with more of the HockeyPedio guests streaming on the Sports Night Radio Network.