The Hockey PDOcast - Monday Mailbag with Harman Dayal

Episode Date: December 12, 2022

Dimitri cracks open the mailbag on a Monday as The Athletic Vancouver's Harman Dayal rides shotgun.This podcast is produced by Dominic Sramaty. 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.

dressing to the mean since 2015. It's the Hockey PEDEOCast with your host, Dmitri Filippovich. Welcome to the Hockey PEDEOCast. My name is Dmitri Filippovich and joining me to my left here in studio. It's my pal, Harmon, Dile. Harmon, what's going on, man? I'm doing pretty well. How are you?

I'm doing really well. What better way to start our week on the PEDAOCast here than with a little in-person mailbag session? I'm happy to have you on. Hopefully we'll stay more focused on our topic matter today after last time. when we got totally derailed right out of the gate and then we're scrambling the rest of the show. Yeah, I'll try not to go on in all of Recman-Larsson or Tyler Myers' tangent this time. No, I think we'll have plenty of opportunity to do so. All right, we've sent out the bat signal for the listeners to send us questions.

They've delivered with some really good stuff, so we're going to try to get through as much of it as we can today. So I'll start us off here. Saul Yannuk asks, curious if you could talk about Andrew Burnett. He was the head coach of the best offense in the league last year. then he moves to New Jersey where all of a sudden the devils are a total wagon. And they're doing in a seemingly similar style to the way the Panthers had previously dominated themselves. Does anybody know what he's bringing to these teams to make them so successful? Yeah, so right off the bat, I will say that his stint in Florida, at least from the regular season standpoint, was really impressive.

I think when Quenville left the Panthers, I think there were a lot of us that wondered, well, could the Panthers continue, sort of building on the success from obviously the season prior where they were a really good regular season team as well, especially because I think the way in which they excelled, they were getting more than some of their parts on the roster. And I think once Brunette took over, especially in the beginning, I think Barcov was injured too. So kind of thrown into this awkward spot and it's not as if Brunette was prepared to take over the head coaching position at that point. It's kind of just a thing that came together last minute. And so I think it was impressive the way that the system continued where you had

defensemen like Montour and Foresling continued to fit really well. And it was sort of a style where I think they embraced just, okay, we know we might not be the, we don't have great defensive personnel. Yes. But what we do have both upfront and on the back end is a lot of speed and a lot of skill. And let's embrace that. And I think it also helped where, obviously, when a guy like Barkov does eventually return, the forwards then, I think, helped the defense. And their responsibilities were just, okay, retrieve the puck, jump up in the play, and we're going to make a lot happen off the rush.

And they were just so... We're going to basically keep trying to play, like, moving forward. Exactly. And it sort of became a track meet every time you would play the Florida Panthers, which worked really well in the regular season. But this is where after the playoffs, I was a little bit, I wasn't sure yet about Brunette because I think we saw with Florida, right from that series against Washington, you could tell that, okay, now that it's a seven-game series and teams are able to study what the Panthers do and sort of devise a game plan, I think there were a bit of a one-trick pony in terms of how

they created offense. And the one thing that you talk to coaches around the NHL or just executives even, and they say that to have success in the playoffs, you need to be diversified and have many different ways that you can create offense. You don't just want to be a rush offense team. You don't just want to be a four-check team because otherwise teams can kind of adjust and they're able to, you know, then you kind of left without answers. And that's how it felt watching Florida in the playoffs a little bit.

So that was where after the off season, I was thinking, okay, that was great for the regular season. And you could really see the value in terms of, I mean, that team was just a wagon. And wagon, obviously, won the president's trophy. But in the playoffs, I think a lot of us were disappointed, and especially even in the second round, after barely squeaking by Washington, there wasn't really much of a fight in the second round of the Battle of Florida.

Yeah, I mean, there's a lot of different ways we can go with this. But part of it is going to be kind of, like, speculatory on our part, because it's really tough, especially when someone is an assistant coach, like he was initially in Florida and then, like he is now in New Jersey to, it's almost like the backup quarterback sort of thing where like when things aren't going well, everyone's going to be calling for the assistant coach to, to take over and bring in some new stuff.

And then when things are going well, it's like, all right, like we don't know necessarily how much credit should be assigned to Lindy Ruff, to him, to who's responsible for the way they're playing, how much of it is just the personnel, right? Like it is ultimately, for the most part,

still like a pretty talent-driven league. And if you have the horses to play a certain way, it's going to make everyone look like a pretty smart tactician behind the bench, especially in the regular season when I think talent wins out more so than anything else. Here's what I'll say, though. It's tough, especially in this case,

to know exactly what to do with Andrew Burnett as a head coaching candidate. I think he's going to get a lot of attention and buzz. He already did a couple weeks ago, even here in this market when there was like, okay, are the Connock's going to get rid of Bruce Boudreau? He was coming up as like a pretty trendy name that would he come in here and take over behind the bench. And I'm sure that's going to happen this offseason,

especially if the devil's playing the way they're. playing. The thing for me is look at the spots that he's been in, right? So he takes over from Quineville in Florida and they pretty much played the same way they had previously been playing, right? Like, if anything, the best thing he did was not trying to mess with what was working. And so it was a continuation of that. Then he comes to New Jersey and certainly their performance this season has been a massive step up from where they were last year. But even at the time, you could see, you could see the breadcrumbs being laid in terms of like, all right, this team clearly has a ton of young talent.

And also offensively, like, on the right night, you can really see, like, the vision come together of what they could be. They were a flawed team last year, but, like, you could still, even when they were losing, you could see the signs of, man, this team could be lethal when they put it together

and as these players get better and when they improve on the margins. And that's what they did. So I think the best thing Andrew Burnett has done so far in his coaching career is put himself in great positions. Yeah. Right?

I think it's a pretty good. These are two pretty good spots for him to have been in. Not to say that he hasn't contributed in the slightest, because first off, I don't know exactly what he has contributed, but he's clearly, like, his teams have done well. So at least he hasn't been, like, a negative influence. I would love to see him go to a team, like, say the Anahem Ducks, who I think theoretically have personnel,

especially as they introduce more of these young players, they've drafted high in the past couple years into the lineup, to play this kind of fun, up-tempo, up-and-down rush style, which they just haven't done under Dallas Aiken's. They haven't played any system under Dallas Aiken this season. It's been a problem. And I think it's been a massive issue for the development of some of their players. So I would love to see if you'd come in what kind of success they'd have in that case.

Because I think that would be a pretty good test of like, all right, you take this team that has so many flaws but has interesting talent. Can you put it together into something that resembles this Panthers and Devils team that we've seen in the past two seasons? Yeah. The other thing I will say is just in general, I feel like, fans can, and it's not their fault, but I do think that they tend to overvalue the impact of a big name assistant coach, especially because at the end of the day, it is the head coach that's really devising the systems. And sure, he's going to have his input from assistant coaches. And some assistant coaches have, you know, different responsibilities in terms of this guy might run the power play. This guy might be responsible for the PK and overseeing the defense. But kind of like what you mentioned, And in terms of the Devils' this big step that they took this season. I feel like last year was when I was first really blown away. I ended up following the Canucks on a road trip out to Newark.

And just watching them live, I was like, this team is insane. They're like a year away. It was kind of the feeling that I got just the way that they were able to, just how fast they were, the possession style that they had. Like, you still had the same foundation. that they do today. And that's a big reason why, for instance, I did, I, like, I butcher tons of predictions.

So I'm not trying to, I'm not trying to be like, oh, I saw this coming. But for the athletics, preseason prediction, we had to pick a dark horse team below a certain betting odds that we thought was going to have a huge, huge year. And I picked New Jersey. Yeah. I felt like they were ready to take that big step.

Did I think that they'd have this sort of record? No. Of course. But I think, I mean, I certainly believe that there were going to be a playoff team this year. So it's tough to isolate what Brunette's impact is there. So. Well, here's what else I'd say. I mean, you mentioned, I think you underplayed what happened in the postseason.

Because I thought he just got like totally schooled by two veteran head coaches in Peter Labia and John Cooper. I put it nicely. Like, he got tactically outclassed in both. They got through in Washington partly. because Carter Verhaghi just put the team on his back and just exploded offensively. And they just had so much more talent than Washington. Like, Washington was breaking them down defensively through the neutral zone in a way that, like, made life-living hell for them. But they just didn't have the personnel to, like, well, no, I mean, Washington didn't have enough, like, talent to, like, take that system and, like, outscore them over seven games.

And then they bumped into Tampa Bay, and Tampa Bay was an extension of that. But they did have the players to beat them on the counter attack and really make them pay on the powerplay. And so on the one hand, that was like alarming because they showed no ability to adjust or or change up their game plan. They really look like a one-rick pony. At the same time, that was pretty much like his first experience doing so. And if it was like a young player who went through that, it got schooled by the defending champions in a playoff series, he'd be like, oh, well, you know, they'll come back better. But for a coach, obviously we don't really talk that way, right? but he was a rookie head coach who was doing that for the first time.

And so I'm going to give him a little bit of leeway there. I don't think that's necessarily representative. Okay, he'll never make adjustments if he gets put in a similar position. But that was alarming to me. And the other thing I'll note, though, is while we say that the Panthers were a one-trick pony, what they did in the regular season was actually, if you look at the way they were getting their shots, was clearly they were trying to get out and rush on the rush and beat you in odd man advantage as whatever they could. but part of what made them so special offensively

was like they would be able to retrieve the puck and then just shoot from everywhere and their shot volume in every game state was like the best right it was like off the cycle off the forecheck off the rush everything the devils have done a little bit of that this year as well where last year they were such a lethal rush team because they had this young speed and the raw talent

but this year they've gotten so much better at diversifying themselves at being able to break you down off the forecheck off of sustaining longer offensive zone possessions and so if you're going to make like a bullish case for like why Andrew Brunette is good, that adjustment in terms of how New Jersey has adapted their own offensive style this year would be like something I would focus on. Now it might just be young players getting better and then adding. Yeah.

Adding on the margins, like adding a John Marino to help them in certain things. I don't know, Andre Platt's been hurt, but like they're a pretty smart organization in terms of what they went out to try to address this offseason. So it all kind of came together in coales. So I'm not sure how we're kind of talking in circles here, but I'm not sure how much of that is on Andrew Burnett, but I can see the for and against case in terms of like if you wanted to make an argument for like why this guy should be the next trendy head coaching candidate.

Absolutely. I really like the idea that you mentioned in terms of to test out what exactly he is, a young flawed offensive team like the Anaheim Ducks. The other thing I will say is just in general with head coaches, I feel like we're not very good at being able to isolate their impact just because it is very, very difficult. There's so many variables at play when you look at injuries, shooting luck. Goaltending is the biggest one, I think.

Yeah, if the goalie makes a save, the coach is really good, and if he doesn't, then he's doing something wrong. Yeah, I mean, I think even Elaine Vigno referred to it when Roberto Luongel was honored. He was essentially saying behind every great coach is an elite goalie. Yes, of course. So I think just in general, we're not very well-quished. to, I think, objectively evaluate coaches. Of course.

Yeah. And a lot of the heavy lifting comes, like, behind the scenes and just stuff are not necessarily privy to and then based on what the result is, we assign either credit or blame in hindsight, right? Exactly. Yeah. Okay. Next question.

Abijah here asks, I'm a Jets fan. And purely in terms of points, Josh Morrissey is on track to exceed his previous career highs. Or far exceed his career highs. is his play the real deal? And is there anything about the Jets new systems under Rick bonus that have facilitated this huge increase in production? Now, the Jets are 18, 8, and 1 so far. They're actually number 1 in points percentage in the Central Division,

which I think would surprise a lot of people. Their plus 20 goal differential is fifth best in the entire league behind just the Bruins, Devils, Stars, and Leafs. Yeah, Morrissey is on pace for 15 goals and 94 points. And to suggest that that would be his new career high is the understatement of all understatements considering that the 37 he had last year was his personal best. And he's on pace. He's, I think he's 31 so far.

So he's six away with 55 games left. I'm going to do my best James Myrtle impression here and say, I say he does it. I'm really curious for your take about this because I haven't, I have to admit, like, I haven't given the Jets a lot of time on this program. I've in the past been quite critical of Rick Bonas in the job he did in Dallas. And certainly they're getting amazing results right now. I think there is a lot to like with his team and Morrissey himself, who clearly doesn't get a lot of attention in the Norris race

or in the conversation of all these defensemen that are putting up video game offensive totals throughout the league. I think you'd have to go pretty far down the list of talking points before someone started talking about Josh Morrissey, especially in a national show. But I think the reason why I picked this question was, I was like, all right, this is a good opportunity for us to talk a little bit about Morrissey and the Jets. So I'll let you take it from there. Yeah, it's, Morrissey's interesting because I think a lot of people who maybe don't watch the Jets as much look at his underlying numbers and they aren't nearly as stellar as I think the counting stats. I think to a degree, it's true in the sense that I think there's a middle ground, right?

Like I've seen people online who probably don't watch the Jets much say, oh, this is just a degree. just PDO, it's not the real deal, but then you obviously also have Jets fans who are arguing that he should be in the Norris conversation right now. And I think there is definitely a middle ground there where, yeah, I mean, you'd want to talk about offensive numbers. The Jets have shot nearly 12% when he's been on the ice at 5 on 5 on 5. And I think 14 across all situations. Yeah, so that's going to cool off. So I think right off the bat, I would expect that his point totals will slow down. and it's not only offensively, but even defensively, like I'm looking right now, when he's been on the ice, Jess have had a 950 save percentage.

So anytime you have that sort of swing. Oh, that's just another night of the office, or kind of how I lucked out. Well, I'd be it even relative, right? Yeah, of course, of course. So right off the bat, I think when you have a situation like that where a player is getting bounces, it's going to elevate the perception when you watch that player just because every good play that you make is now, seemingly ending up in the back of the net.

And you notice that as a view were way more than, let's say, a pass which leads to a great scoring chance, right? Like, you'll remember that for a second and then forget about it pretty quickly. But, and having said that, I will say that I also don't think that the

two-way numbers would show that, I think, for the season, jets have been outshot and out-chanced. I don't think those are necessarily indicative either because early in the season he was playing with Pionk. Yep. and Pionk was just awful and I think he was sort of tanking that pairing

and since then I think since November 1st Morrissey's numbers even are looking sterling so I think there's a middle ground there where he I mean even just last season I felt like he started to stabilize a little bit better I also think the sort of leading to the

idea of well what are the Jets maybe doing a little bit differently I'm seeing a bit more defensive commitment from the forwards, which I think was a big problem under Paul Marisa at times was the way that they would, let's say, reload or just the defensive habits that they had compared to this season,

they play with a lot more structure. I think the defense have more confidence being able to gap up at the defensive blue line. And I think that's where Morrissey's looked a lot more confident compared to years past is where defense. defending the rush, sometimes that's been my worry and hasn't been nearly as much of a worry this season. So I think that's an element where bonus is, I don't know if it's bonuses impact or just the forwards buying in. I think that's helped. But no doubt that he's eating a ton of tough minutes and faring pretty well here. Well, here's the thing. A big problem with the Palmerese Jets for years, or at least in the most recent years while he was still a coach, was the defenseman. were not being involved at all offensively. Yes.

And the forwards were not being involved at all defensively. And so there was this weird kind of, it was like very binary in terms of like everyone just kind of did one extreme. And that's like a really tough way to play in a modern game where it's so much more free flowing. And we always talk about like positional interchangeability and the idea of having five guys who could all kind of move around in the offensive zone especially, but all over the ice and be able to do multiple things. And so now all of a sudden, if you have forwards who are helping more and providing more support defensively, that allows a defenseman to play more confidently, to play more aggressively when they have the puck to break it out themselves, to actually gap up as you're saying, and not feel like they're just on an island basically alone, right? And so I think that's one big thing.

I think the other thing we should say is for like, I want to focus more on Morrissey here than the Jets, but just on a team level, I would expect them at both ends of the ice to outperform. their like raw counting numbers and expectations when your goalie is Connor Hallibuck and when you have Kyle Connor or Mark Sheafley, even Blake Wheeler is still as a playmaker and passer at this point in his career. Like the talent at both ends of the ice in that regard should in theory allow them to beat the percentages, at least to some degree. For Morrissey, you mentioned the on-ice shooting percentage.

I also wanted to note that he has a point on nearly 60% of the goals the Jets have scored while he's been on the ice. And we don't talk about IPP as much in terms of like. regression. But last year he was at 34.9%. He's basically been around that mark for his entire year's career. So yeah, getting a point on basically twice as often when the Jets are scoring on the ice and he's being used in all these situations. That'll help inflate the individual totals, right? So even if they keep scoring themselves, I would just expect naturally that he's going to get fewer points along the way because that's how regression in terms of IPP works.

You know, last year he really, he's had a really interesting career arc because he came out of the gate hot and they had so much defensive depth remember that like 2018 19 when they were at their best that was such a loaded blue line and he was playing with jacob trouba and they were able to like basically just everyone was able to to do whatever because they had so much talent so much depth to work with and then they had this massive talent exodus where pretty much just everyone leaves and all of a sudden he got this massive like 50 million dollar contract they put a ton of more responsibility in his plate and he struggled for a couple years there and it looked like oh my god this is a mess like this is a horrible

contract. He can't like live up to what he was before. And last year I thought he really turned it around. Like, like, his underlying numbers took a massive spike in the right direction. And they're actually better than they are so far this year. And so like I would say like from an encouraging, from feeling encouraged about him, I would actually point to that and like be able to tell this story of how like he's gone through these ebbs and flows throughout his career. And he looks like he's more on the way up now as opposed to where he was a couple years ago. So I think there's like encouraging stuff there. I wouldn't, I wouldn't point to the 97 point. pace he's on as like this is a sign that he's an entirely new player but i think there's enough

stuff from the team level to his own usage and own way he's playing to suggest that like there is something here that he's actually like a really good player he's legitimately turned it around yeah in a big way and in kind of like what you mentioned there was a point there where i think a lot of us looked at that contract and went that's inefficient i i don't think there was ever a point where i looked at it and went that's the worst contract one of the worst contracts in the league like I think you know some people wondered but well I think statistically you could have made that case like two or three years ago because he was like a 42% expected gold share guy making all of a sudden bigger dollars and it's like if you're paying this guy to basically be your

number one defenseman like this is this is looking pretty bleak and so I think that like that clearly was an extreme that we've moved away from as well so yeah and now we're at the point where he clearly looks like he's worth every penny I will say like on a more team level on a broader team level. In terms of what has impressed me about the Jets to turn around, I think is there was just so much turmoil internally, if you think about it. So many like messy dynamics at play. Yep. With obviously the way last season went with Blake Wheeler being stripped at the captaincy. I mean, we had Paul Stasney at the end of last season with some scathing remarks about the

team's accountability. It just seemed like a total mess. And I even sort of had talked to someone within the organization. They were kind of like it's just a new headline every, every few weeks. Even with the Pierre-Luc Dubois, all the talk about, well, he's going to want out at whenever he's UFA eligible. There was every, there were so many reasons that this could have imploded from an internal like locker room dynamic standpoint. Even with Mark Schifley at the end of last season, sort of questioning his own long-term future. and I think with Rick Bonas, more than anything that he's done tactically or strategically, I think what you have to give him most credit for is navigating all these personalities,

all these sort of messy situations, and having this cohesive sort of group where everyone's kind of bought in, where you are seeing Shifley like, Shifley, it's pretty incredible seeing him playing defense and committing to his own end. Dubois, despite all the storylines around his long-term future, is quietly having a really strong season as well. Wheeler's continued playing pretty well in the top six despite losing his captaincy.

So I think from a team-wide perspective, in terms of what Rick Bonas has done with the team, I think that's what I'm most impressed about. And I think that's where his experience is really useful because I'm right there with you. When he was coaching, for example, the Dallas Stars, I sort of looked at that and went. I don't think he's doing necessarily the best job with the talent that he has to work with.

Yeah. Yeah. Well, one final out here I had on Morrissey before we go to break. When I track the 2021 playoffs two years ago when they swept the oilers and then got swept by the Canadians themselves, it was very jarring to see like the way their blue line was playing because he was the only one out of the six or seven, whatever they used, the defenseman of those eight games. That was above 50% in terms of controlled exits. Like everyone else was just like struggling so much.

mightily to basically get the puck out of their own zone with anything resembling possession. And so he, I think he was like only like 51% or so. So it wasn't necessarily like a dominant performance by any means. But like that really like I thought that showed that he like the steps in the right direction and he built off of that at a five one five level last year. Then he's carried it over now. So there we go. A full a full segment there talking about Josh Morrissey and Rick Bonus and the Jets. So, um, all right, harm.

We're going to take a break here. I'm going to put up in the conversation. And then when we come back, we're going to keep going through the listener questions. So stick around for that. All right, we're back here on the Hockey-O-Cast, joined by Hardin-Dial. We're doing the mailbag questions from the listeners. So we're going to keep it going.

Christian here asks, I've noticed defense, I've noticed defensive metrics, I should say, sorry, being mashed together with a lot of other statistics lately. I see defense and possession in particular, almost spoken of as being said. anonymous. I've seen things I would consider to be offense being described as defense, like holding the puck in the offensive zone. Obviously, that has a positive defensive impact because the other team can't score

from their own end of the ice. But do you really consider that to be defense? Same with something like takeaways. They can have great defensive impacts, but if a player is just being a good forechecker and getting all these takeaways in the offensive zone, is that necessarily considered good defense and should it be considered good defense? To me, it feels like the beginning of the moneyball era and baseball where offense was so heavily favored in the stats and a piece of the puzzle is still missing. So do you think that offensive metrics are being overrepresented and inflating defensive impacts? That's a long, long question. I wanted to read it all because I was like, I love, this is exactly what I love about these segments and my listeners because they come

through with, I can tell Christian here has given this a lot of thought. And I have to, this exact thought about how to evaluate defense, especially through the lens of analytics, is something that I've personally had a lot of internal debate with. And I think it starts with the idea of defining what exactly defense is, because for some people, that can simply mean making sure that you're not scored on and that you're not allowing a lot of shots and high danger chances. But I think a lot of people, when you reference the idea of defense, are more referring to it from an in-zone when you're in-end,

your own end, are you in the right positions? Are you consistently breaking up plays? Do you win your battles? Are you smart with your defensive switches? I think that's where a lot of the difference can sort of lie where sometimes we look at the underlying numbers of a player and we see, okay, well, when this player's on the ice, they don't allow a lot of shots and chances, but that may not necessarily be because of their in-zone work. That is maybe sort of what the listener sort of reference. It can be maybe they're making plays in the offensive zone to keep pucks alive, like a defenseman pinching up the boards to keep an offensive zone possession alive

or a forward winning a battle along the wall and helping his team spend more time there, simply not making mistakes with the puck even. A lot of time not giving it up. not taking an inefficient point shot, which ends up in a player's shin pads and the team's counter attacking back the other way. So I think that's where a lot of the difference can line. I will say that just in general,

when I do see a player with strong defensive underlying numbers, I am more skeptical. Not that I don't trust it completely because I do obviously still put some stock into it, but I will sort of think about, okay, what environment is this player in? Who is he playing with? What, like, is this team?

team just a defensive juggernaut, for example. Yeah. Like I look at, I mean, there are a few examples that come to mind, but for instance, like early in the year, Andre Kuzmanko's two-way play driving numbers were off the charts. And specifically, you looked at his defensive metrics and it was like, wow, this is crazy. But you'd watch Andre Kizmanko and you're like, he's actually a well below average defensive player. Yep.

But he's on a line with Lewis Pedersen and they're driving so much offense together. that it's still a really good line, but to someone who's just looking at the numbers, they would say, Kismako is a quality two-way player. And it's like, that could not be further from the truth. So that's where I do look more of context.

I think it's really important to, if you're looking at it from the lens of the, how's your play away from the puck perspective? I think you have to gauge that from the eye. I don't think a player's defensive numbers necessarily will tell you how well they play without the puck. Like another example where, Sometimes the numbers can be a bit misleading.

Last year, Matthew Kuchx, um, yeah, defensive numbers, especially when it's like, he's playing on a line with Lice Lindholm, who's a two-eight beast. Yeah.

With another elite overall player in Johnny Goddrow, like I don't think Matthew Kuchukch's a defensive savant, for instance, right? Well, yeah, and I, I believe in that specific example, like part of the, when players like that are spending so much of their time on ice together.

Yeah. The only way you can really, assign credit statistically through the modeling is to look at the minutes when they're away from each other to see what happens, what kind of differentiation there is, and then assign the credit accordingly, right? And so they spent like 90% or whatever their minutes together. When they weren't together, it was because Elizland Home was coming out for a defensive zone faceoff with like Trevor Lewis and Milan Luchich as his wingers. And so they would spend most of that shift probably following the face off in the defensive zone, bleeding shots.

and chances against. And so I think it was easy to look at that and be like, well, Matthew Kachuk is driving the defensive success of this line here because of what's happening when he's on the ice first when he's not compared to Linholm. Right. And so it's really tricky. I think what you have like, we almost need to frame, like figure out how we want to frame what good defense is, right?

Yeah. Because the New Jersey Devils right now are. giving up the second few of shots against, the fewest high danger chances against, the third fewest expected goals against, and the second fewest goals against. And they've certainly shored up a lot defensively and, like, adding John Marino helps a lot.

Jonas Seganthal is amazing. Like, they have a ton of good players. Would you, like, do you think it's fair to say that you'd still consider them to be more of an offensive team, though, in terms of their personnel, right? And they're driving great defensive results because that team speed and the way they play aggressively

is so difficult for other teams to deal with that they're just like pressuring them all over the ice and causing turnovers and then countering quickly. And so it's a real handful. They're good in their own zone now, but I wouldn't necessarily, like you don't think of them as being the greatest defensive team that you've ever seen,

even though their metrics are amazing this season, right? You see what I'm saying in terms of that kind of differentiation? So, like, Christian's hitting on a really good point here where, I think it's easier for us to say that, good defense is good offense because it does mean that you're like territorially further away from your own net it's really tough to it's really tough to know what good in zone defense is because you know companies like sport logic and for example are tracking like stick checks in the defensive zone and and and

breakups and kind of like involvement in terms of like specific events where a defensive player is hitting the puck away or doing something we don't necessarily know like how much of that is a feature and how much of that is a bug though right how much like how repeatable is it from year to year like it's much easier for us to know that if your team just isn't giving anything up when you're on the ice that's good and we want to continue that regardless of how it's happening definitely i think from a team perspective i that that's where i'll pay a lot more attention to the results and it's easier to kind of you know i may not describe them as that's a that's a defensive team or but i will put a lot of stock into the

results for instance another example that comes to mind is the Colorado Colorado Avalanche right for as much as we talked about how lethal they've been offensively going into going into the playoffs you looked at the regular season results they were also so so so hard to score on especially when that Taves McCar pair was on the ice and I don't think anybody looks at the Taves McCar pair is there are a defensive shutdown pair but they generate they They generated so much offensively. There were sort of throttling teams territorially, just straight up tilting the ice.

And on top of that, it's like, okay, they also are so mobile that they can defend the rush really, really well. And so even though they aren't what you would, you wouldn't look at them and think that's typical, like, excellent defense, but they drove the results anyway. And I think in that sort of context, I would still look at it and go in our evolved understanding of what defense is, I still can. consider that good defense. And I still consider the all Colorado Avalanche a good defensive team, even though you may not like they're, they're not the toughest team to get into, to mean when you're playing against them to get into the slot against for,

for example. Yeah, yeah. And that's what I mean how we, how we frame it. Like I think we almost need to like like, like rewire ourselves in terms of like thinking like what it, what it looks like. And I think it's for the better.

But it definitely, it forces an adjustment. And it kind of reminds you that, I mean, part of it is, I always say like effort based in terms of just like, caring and being involved. But part of it is like assuming you have that effort in place and that accountability or

or I ever want to say it, like there's no reason for the most part why a good offensive player can't be at least respectable defensively because that probably means like they're, they're a good skaters. So they can pressure the other team. They can be a four checker. They also theoretically, you'd think, all right, if I'm a skilled player, I kind of can see the ice in a way where I know what I would do if I, I would do if I, the puck in the offensive zone.

So defensively, you should be able to also be a step ahead because you could figure out, all right, like, this is what the other team is going to try to do. I need to get there to stop that from happening. And you can, you can understand the game at a higher level, even if you don't have the puck yourself just because you can kind of put yourself in their shoes. It's, I've said, I've said this before about how, like, I thought the hurricanes last year were sort of breaking the expected goal model because they look like a very average defensive team because they were giving up shots from high danger areas.

But then if you actually watch those shots back the way they were pressuring them with their sticks in terms of closing time and space and like, all right, I have a shot from five feet out that registers as a high danger chance. But then you go watch it and the offensive player gets the puck and within a millisecond, like they literally can't even do anything. Jacob Slavin Stick is in the way and they're like rushing a shot that goes over net or something. And that registers as a high danger attempt.

But in reality, the point. had no time to actually pick their spot and do anything productive with it. And we're seeing that more. Like I think the Leafs are a great example of that this season where they're making life so much easier for their goalies because they're so aggressive in terms of the way they defend the defensive zone. And that makes life easier for everyone involved, even if you are giving up shots from areas which look like they're high danger.

And so I think that's like, that's the next wave of modern defending. It's like how, yeah. Even on the penalty kills. Yes. Right? We're seeing a huge wave of it where teams are. starting to embrace the idea of deploying a lot of their best players on the penalty kill for a couple of reasons, for starters, because I think they look at a lot of their power play

personnel and sort of give a Vancouver example, someone like in Elias Pedersen, or in Carolina has tons of them, obviously Toronto with Mitch Marner and stuff as well. But, you know, whether it's an Ajo, a Marner or a Pedersen, these guys, when they're penalty killing they think they understand how power play thinks they understand when a player on the half wall has a puck rimmed around and they're about to receive it they know they can anticipate where that half wall player is going to make the next play because they've they they themselves have been in that spot hundreds of times and have been able to make next play so they can sort of think from the power player's perspective and they have a different lens and being able to anticipate but

the other point, which kind of relates to what you were kind of referencing with the aggressiveness is, and sort of the changing evolution of what defense is, is penalty kills now, there's a greater emphasis on, well, can we apply just even a little bit more pressure back on the other team, or if they screw up, we want to have at least some skill to where we might have an advantage going back the other way. Make a forward skate backwards. Exactly. And so there are a lot of penalty kills out there where if they have a couple of speech,

players, they have a couple of skill players, I'm sort of, you know, sometimes I'm like, it's, I'm entertained watching these guys kill penalties. And it's not the typical style of defense where it sit back in the slot and just try and block a ton of attempts, right? Well, and here's the thing. I think that was part of the reluctance back in the day for teams to have their most skilled forwards killing penalties because you're like, I don't want my best player breaking their foot, blocking a shot, right?

well here's the thing i don't want my top i don't want my penalty kill unit blocking shots like there's a time in place certainly is like situational awareness and all that but like especially from a forward perspective i want my forwards as penalty killers to be just aggressively hunting the puck high up in the defensive zone right so trying to close off that space trying to cause a turnover at the blue line where they can take it back the other way for a scoring chance themselves and if you're putting yourself in those positions you're putting yourself in those positions you're not needing to worry about whether you're going to break a bone blocking a shot because hopefully the other team is not even going to have the time to release that shot to begin with because

you're such a skilled, such a skilled speedy forward that you're going to be on them and you're going to be limiting the time they have to do so. So I think the calculus is totally changed. I guess the only argument against it really right now is whether it's the optimal way to utilize like whatever minutes you have available. Of course, a 60 minute game. If you're like, all right, I'm going to play my top forward 21 minutes tonight. do I want to be wasting a significant portion of that,

let's say two and a half minutes per game, killing penalties when they're less likely to score than other situations where, whether it's even strength or on the power play themselves. Yeah, that's definitely a fair counter argument. I think one interesting thing that you mentioned in general about forwards and the sort of changing responsibility in terms of blocking shots is that's a worry I initially had

with a lot of players too. and as quickly, like, it's interesting how quickly that that has evolved to where even just a few years ago I used to worry about that. And now I like rarely see, not rarely, but you don't see it very often where a forward on the penalty kill is having a dive across to block shots. It's more the responsibility of the defenseman if you have a flank shooter and you're able to aggressively sort of front to that. Like those are the situations where it can be worthwhile to really try and block those. those shooting lanes, but more important than that on the penalty kill, and this is why it's so valuable to have some of your smartest players on the penalty kill is the important part isn't necessarily about the shots, it's now about the passes. Every team is trying to defend that

cross-scene pass and make sure that, you know, when McDavid's on the ice that he can't find dry settle in the backyard, because it's going to be an automatic tap in. And so I think a lot of penalty kills are almost strategically designed in a way where it's like, okay, if you want to take a shot straight up on my goaltender, which he can hopefully see without any pre-shot movement, we'll give you that. We just don't want you to thread the needle across. Yeah.

Well, and to put a ball on this conversation, I don't know, unfortunately, we've been talking about it for like 15 minutes. I don't know if we've answered Christian's question, which might infuriate him even more because I could sense the angst dripping from his email to me because he wanted clarity on this and I unfortunately think we've only moneyed the waters even further.

That's the entire point I think is there is no great answer. I think on an individual level I think this would be the takeaway and how I look at it. On an individual level, I do not take defensive values at defensive metrics at face value.

I think it's important to consider context, environment and a bunch of, a bunch of other factors to make sure that the player is actually the one driving those defensive results. Right. Especially because another example, in the 2019-20 season, you had Chris Tanev, who for I think maybe the second or third year in a row had a negative defensive impact. But of course, you'd watch him play and it's like, okay, he's a good shutdown defenseman. So on an individual level that context is necessary, I think on a team-wide level,

I guess this applies to an individual level as well. I think our, as we kind of reference, our definition of what defense is, should probably evolve a little bit. Well, the other thing I would say is I think that I would hope so, that once we have more readily available information for like how close, like the physical proximity of gap or of like when in the defensive zone, how close a defender is to contesting a shot or what their closing speed is on that or

yeah in terms of like the efficiency of like how often you're you're cutting down that angle basically because I think it's still going to be clearly like if you just look at raw numbers that's always going to not paint an accurate picture because if you're constantly in that position that's probably a sign that something bad is happening yeah but if like a high percentage of the time when those situations arise if you're contesting it well and affecting the probability that it's going to be a good shot, that's going to be something that I'm going to be very interested in. Now it's going to take a long time not only to get that information, but also to test out the repeatability of it and like how valuable it actually is and all that. But I think like

that's kind of the next wave of this and that's something we've certainly seen in the NBA as well with the publicly tracking with the data available in terms of like, all right, like how close is the nearest defender and then how quickly are they closing out, especially on like corner threes and stuff for like we're contesting at the rim for like affecting shots. And that's something. thing that I think is something I really want to know more of in hockey. That's a really good question or a really good point because we're at the stage now where everybody in the NHL, if you give them time and space, can absolutely wire the puck. From pretty much everywhere.

Everywhere, right? We have how many goals do you sort of see nowadays where it's a bad angle, but because the shooter has all the time in the space in the world, it could even be a defenseman who you don't expect to be able to snipe the puck. They can pick that corner just because they have forever to choose their spot. Well, and speaking of adjusting our expectations, that's something I think we need to do as well, right? Like, because that is true exactly what you're saying, when you see someone beat a goalie cleanly from like a weird spot, the natural reaction is to be like, oh, the goalie should have had that. And it's like, maybe he shouldn't have because the shooters are just getting really good.

And so it should be on. It's actually the defenseman's fault for allowing the shooter that much time. So anyways, that's a that's a whole, whole. of worms that we open, but I'm glad we did. All right, Zach Kay here asks, why are certain organizations so averse to properly rebuilding? I don't buy that the fans will not accept the rebuild argument. Two to three years of being bad and replenishing assets is certainly better than years of mediocrity. I don't know, I don't know which organizations Zach here could be talking about for this specific topic. But I certainly applies to many, I'd say, because the league in general

seems to really, really try to be pushing this, like, quote unquote, retooling agenda as opposed to properly rebuilding. And I, I, you know, there's,

there's complexities involved, certainly. Like, I think something maybe we don't consider enough is, it's a pretty tough sell if you're in the business of selling tickets and merchandise and treating your home games, which you have 41. of as a night out or an entertainment experience that someone takes their kids to, to just like basically fully just make your intentions clear. And like, we're actually not trying.

We're not trying to ice our best product on this given night. And we also want you to spend $120 to come watch us play. That's like a tough sell. Yeah. I understand. I think the issue with that is I don't know that the alternative is a better sell. Yeah. Like I think most, most smart people, I would hope, certainly everyone listening to the show, of course, is being able to kind of see through the fluff and it's like when you look at the players who are playing for you on a given night, it's like, is this really the best that this, that this team could be putting out there? Do I, should I be paying $120 to go see this? And even if the team is trying to retool as opposed to properly rebuild, I don't know if that's any better than the alternative. Yeah, I do think it's, it's usually the business aspect. that is most prevalent for why teams are reluctant to embrace a full tear-down type of rebuild.

I know that a lot of smaller market teams, a team like Nashville maybe comes to mind, a lot of them would probably look at a scenario like Chicago and go, well, if we could do that, we'd love to, we just don't have the confidence when you compare the size of the markets that are, fan base is like our casual fan base that we're still going to be selling enough tickets and merchandise to be viable and I think they're legitimately for a lot of franchises their goal isn't to win the Stanley Cup yeah a lot of time for many franchises being completely honest their ownership's goal is let's let's stay in the playoff race as much as possible yeah hopefully get in and earn some home playoff dates and just have enough fan interest there that we're captivating them on a

year in, year out basis. And I think that could maybe apply to, you know, like if you're the Florida Panthers, I bet being relevant and being good, they're not the, I'm not trying to bring them up, as an example of, oh, they haven't embraced rebuild. But if you're a smaller market team, I really do believe that a lot of them think in that way of our ultimate goal is to year in, year out, being the playoff race. Well, I agree. Now, I didn't mention this when I read the question, but Zach did include two teams in

brackets, and one of them is the Canucks and the other is the Flyers. And I don't, I'm not really buying that argument for those two franchises. You're right, though. The goal is to not win the Stanley Cup, or maybe not even to make the playoffs, it's to extend the timeline as long as. as possible where you're not mathematically, where it's not impossible mathematically for you to do so. Exactly.

Right? So it's like, and that's almost even more bleak to consider. Yeah. It's not even like, it's not trying to win. It's trying not to lose or at least do so in the slowest way possible. It is.

And that's, it's sad, but that's the reality. And yeah, that sucks. And that's where it's so unfortunate to have a team like Vancouver where the market would actually embrace a rebuild. the fan base would endure it.

I mean, the team had so many bleak years and essentially did the losing of rebuilding team anyway. Yeah. And obviously the attendance dipped, but it wasn't a catastrophe here in Vancouver.

And yet, you still have an ownership group that's worried about could we get two home pole updates in April? Yeah. Wow. And you have to,

like from a business ROI perspective, like at a certain point, at least if you're in the Canucksus perspective or a team like the Flyers, which is a big market team, I think is a bit of a separate conversation and discussion. At a certain point, you've got to kind of do the math of, okay,

well, if we embrace a few years of pain, sort of miss the playoffs, okay, we might not, our revenue might dip there, but then we might have half a decade or longer of

consistently making the playoffs. And wait, wait, maybe even going deep. Yeah. And that might mean even more home playoff dates. And I think that's just an aspect where at least in Vancouver's case, it's instant gratification. Yeah, well, dare to dream, Harm. All right, harm, this is a blast.

I'm glad we got to do this. We're going to do this again, certainly. We only go through like three or four listener questions. We've got plenty more to dip into. So we'll do this again soon. Thanks for taking the time. Thanks for coming on. Thank you to the listeners for listening to the HockeyPedocast here on the Sportsnet Radio Network.