The Hockey PDOcast - The Weekly Friday Mailbag with Thomas Drance 2.0

Episode Date: November 25, 2022

Dimitri is joined by Sportsnet 650's Thomas Drance as the pair crack open the Friday Mailbag and answer your most pressing questions. 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.

since 2050. It's the Hockey PEDEOCast with your host, Dmitri Philip Ovid. And joining me is my good buddy Thomas Drance. Thomas, what's going on in? Not much, bud. Been on the air for a long time, so. You have. We just did your show, Canucks Talk before this as well.

Tons of fun. Thanks for joining me on it. Always a blast. We're going to plug that more at the end, okay? Sounds good. So here's what we're going to do today. We're going to end the week with our Friday mailbag. Let's go.

A couple weeks ago with me, which. Always a blast. Reviews. People love this. I've been getting people sending me unprompted mailbag questions throughout the week. It's great. So people really seem to be enjoying the interactive element of it. If you want to get involved in future episodes, please do so.

Keep sending those questions in. Perfect way to end the week, slide into the weekend. You and I are hanging out here in studio. It's going to be fun. Let's get into it. Laughan. Here's our first question. Joseph Holmgren asks,

which retired players do you think we underestimated while they were playing based on the new stats we currently have available? Ooh. I mean, I think there's an awful lot of guys that you could pick here. Okay. Here's my prediction. You're going to pick someone incredibly niche that I've never thought of in the past 20 years. I'm going to pick someone who's actually a star player that people will have heard of before. I mean, I think there's a lot of guys who you can make this case for. So for me, one of the first guys that always comes to mind when I think about this specific question. And it's a question that I think about a lot is Stefan Robita. Yes. Because Stefan Robeda was like a 5-10 defensive defenseman in an era where that didn't exist. So what does that mean? It means that Robid was undrafted despite being like 80 points in 40 games in his last QMJHL season, right?

Today he would have been drafted probably in the first two rounds, right? He doesn't really make his NHL debut until like 24, right? Now he'd be in the NHL at 21. Yep. Right? So he loses probably in an extra 250 games. probably an extra contract. Then, you know, he is, like, effective for Montreal for, like, his first two seasons.

And if you go look at it, he has a season in Montreal where he's, like, minus 28 or whatever. And if you go look, Montreal had, like, really bad goaltending. Stefan Robito is minus 28. He's an undersized defenseman. What do you think Montreal is blamed on there? Right? So he's sort of cast aside out of Montreal. You know it's just a P.D.O bender season.

Yep. Anyway, ends up establishing himself in Dallas. He only really earns like one big contract his whole life. And it's the one that he signed at the end of his career right after he'd sustain that devastating leg injury late in the year. And they named an island after him. And then they named an island after him. But he was just steady, reliable, drove play, transitional defensive defenseman. Now we'd appreciate him as like the stud top pair, frankly, like Norris Calibur.

You know what he was? He was Jacob Slavin. Yeah. He was Jacob Slavin for six years and no one cared. And now people would. I don't really remember. Did he play the way Slaven plays? Well, just shorter.

But like, yes. I mean, he was like physical, eight shots, eight pucks. Yeah. Ace penalty killer. And then once he like verges into the era where we have modern numbers, he was an absolute stud. Yeah. But he plays a large proportion of his career before that where we had no way of evaluating it.

His career would have been completely different. Okay. if he was born in 1987 as opposed to 1977. Yes. Okay. I really like that answer. Do you want to hear of mine? Sure.

I have two. Sorry, I also have more. So why don't you go one? Let's keep perfect. Although one of my objectives heading into the show was, let's try to get through as many questions as we can, because last time we started with like a question about the goal drafting system. And then 30 minutes in, we're like, all right, question number two.

Fair enough. Here's a, this one's cheating because I think this player is appreciated, but I would argue, and I'm going to put together a hopefully compelling case, that he's not appreciated enough. Pavel Datsuk, who won three Selke's, won two Stanley Cops, playing for the Red Wings,

had the four Lady Bings, if that's the thing you care about. I believe his only time registering in MVP voting was in the 0809 season when he finished third behind Alex Leveshkin and Fannie Malkin that year. I often post clips of Pavel Datsuk doing really cool stuff,

and I think there's a nostalgia element where people are like, oh yeah, like I miss this guy so much. And it's like usually Red Wings fans because they got to see him every night. And then there's like every time there's a few people who are like, how did this guy only score 32 goals is his career high? Like he never had a crazy ballooned offensive season. He had 97 points twice, I believe, but he never got to 100 points. 32 goals.

Obviously it was a different NHL like in those like mid to the late 2000s. Totally. What I would say is if you look at the few years we have of him on natural Static or evolving hockey, his underlying numbers are genuinely not of this world. No, I know. Like, his impacts at 5 on 5 were just incomparable. He was legitimately the best player in the world. Oh, yeah.

I don't even think. And I don't think he was really regarded that way. No, right? Like, because there'd be flashier players who would score more goals, got more points, and they'd get regard, like, they'd. Crosby and Ovechkin. Right. He was kind of considered like a piece of the engine of that Red Wings team that was dominant

and he was like a playoff performer, but he was never considered as like the most dominant two-way force that we have in the game, which he really was. And so that's kind of my argument here for if we had all of these numbers as readily available for his prime, I think we'd appreciate it a lot more. Because if you look at his last NHL season, which was 2015-16, I believe, and he's like 38 years old, he was still one of the best five-on-five players in the league. Yeah. So for sure, to add to it, Sergey Federov, I think would have Bergeron quality two-way data from his prime years and the fact that we don't have that to know is disappointing. Another statistical oddity, Larry Robinson's plus 100 season.

Like Larry Robinson had a plus 100 season for that 1978 Habs team that only lost eight games. And I'd kill to know what his course C4 percentage was. What is PDO? Yeah, was it like a 140 PDO season or was it a 78% course C4 season? My bet is that it was 75%? Of course he four. Yeah. But he also probably had like a 25% on ice shooting percentage because everyone did it

because the goalies were catastrophic. Except he had Ken Dryden. So yeah, I mean, for sure that's part of it. But like I bet you it's unlike anything we've ever seen. Can I give you one more? Yeah, of course. I'm going to go defense again. Okay.

Eric Desjardin. Desjardin. One of the most prolific five on five defense defenders like at scoring in his generation by a lot. Played obviously in front of Patrick Gua for a bit, but then he went to Philly where he didn't like necessarily play against killer goalies. If you go and look at his era, he was the seventh best plus minus defender over like a 10 year stretch.

There's six guys ahead of him. They're all either Hall of Fame players or Nick Liddstrom defense partners. That's it. That's it. And so I wonder What his underlying data looks like because the fossil record Right not the full record but the fossil the carbon dating Suggests to me that this guy was like an absolute stud five on five score

Playdriver who was probably like a secret all-star now he was like on team Canada It's not like he was under the radar right but I don't think we understood I didn't understand growing up This is probably one of the best defensemen in hockey I think think he very much was, and with contemporary data, we'd have known it. Can you name one non-French Canadian defenseman? No. No, I'm not going to knock you for that because my answers for this were Pavlatsuk and Peter Forsberg. Yeah, yeah.

Well, Peter Forsberg. Can you imagine Peter Forsberg's underlying numbers in, like, the late 90s, though? I mean, I can't. Because every clip I've seen of him, no one could take the puck from him. So I imagine he had 100% possession rate. I would think so. I also would be fascinated to know. how much cliff running drove play in his prime yeah I'm pretty sure I'm pretty sure

cliff running was brayden point just just in a league where you could water ski on offensive players I can vouch to the listeners that you've definitely given this thought in your off time as well you've you've had the thought cross your mind of I really wish I had these numbers for clip running this isn't something no no it's it's something that I like obsess over yeah and since we're on Vancouver radio live if you're not if you're listening on the podcast I apologize But since we're listening, like, yeah, I'm convinced that Cliff running, if you drop him into today's NHL at the age of 21, is like a superstar. Yeah. In a way that he wasn't in his time where because he was undersized, people were able to, you know, infringe on his movement and just like chop him down at all moments.

Like, I legitimately think if you drop him into today's NHL with the way the game is called today, he's a 95 point guy. Well, that's the thing with Peter Forsberg, like, A, if he has modern medicine, which would hopefully keep him on the ice. longer. Right. And B, if guys aren't just like, he's not carrying defensemen around on the ice at all times. I'd love to see. Which he was capable of.

No, but I'd love to. And part of that is what made him so cool. Yeah. But at the same time, I'd love to see like 1,100 NHL games worth of Peter Foresman as opposed to whatever he wanted to play. He was a joy to watch. Yeah. Okay.

Any others for this? Or you want to move on to next question? Oh, dude, I can go all day. But yeah, let's move on. Okay. Justin Liu here asks, can you specifically define what quote unquote two-way player means. I understand it means a player who's good at both ends of the ice,

but are there any stats or metrics that separate a two-way player from someone who's just good defensively or offensively. And he uses an example of, I always hear about how Ilya Mikhail is such a good two-way player, but my experience with him is that the play dies on his stick every time he's in the offensive zone. It seems like he's more of just a defensive forward. I always agree. I mean, I agree with that.

I used to love to refer to Dustin Bufflin as a one-way player. even though he had great two-way impacts. Right. Because if he went one way really fast, he wasn't going to be coming the other way very fast. Right. So, you know, it is a misunderstanding. I think for me it is that you're valuable or you're additive at both ends. Right? Like you're both contributing to the offensive attack without taking anything off the table

and providing for an environment where your team is less likely to give up the next goal on the defensive end. You have to be both. it's very rare that a player really is a net positive in both areas. So then it becomes a matter of like their two-way value remains high despite the fact that they take a little bit off the table. Yeah. Defensively or offensively, right? So I sort of use it that way. That's at least my sort of go-to.

And I sort of just use what, I mean, I look at like the team relative metrics a lot, like the RAPM, stuff like that. But I also just know from watching players play. like I have a good sense, I think, and then I use the numbers to back up my biases. Tom, I think Justin's on to our trade secrets here because I'm going to fill in the listeners. A lot of times when someone says someone's a good two-way player, they have no real actual way to describe how they play. And so they just say that as like a placeholder. Oh, okay, interesting. I see a lot of players described as two-way players, and it's like, are they?

And would you classify? Because I guess there's two ways to look at. It's kind of like a chicken or the end. like thing, right? If a player has good defensive metrics, but it's because they're so good offensively that the puck is just always territorially in the offensive zone, does that make them necessarily, like they have good two-way impacts, but they might not necessarily be good defensively. They're just not exposed to it as often. Right. I mean, so I think it's kind of a stretch of that definition. It's kind of a bit of a misnomer to say they're actually a two-way player

when I think you're saying they have good two-way impacts. And I think those are two different things. Now, that just might be like a nerdy nitpicking thing. I don't think so. I think two-way impact, though, for me is like an overall description of a player's... Of what's happening when they're on the ice. Of a player's utility. Right. You know?

And, but, but I mean, you can be like, the way I often use two-way impacts is like, this guy isn't, like, isn't a very good offensive player. But he does enough defensively that his two-way impacts are still solved. Okay. You know, like I almost use two-way in that, two-way impacts as like a stand-in for overall value. Right. but people lazily define players or describe players as two-way players when they're like a center who maybe is good at face-offs. Right, I know. And then they score points.

And they're actually a no-way player? Right. Well, we're going to talk about, the next question is about Boer-Horbat. Oh, Bo-Horvats. Who's not a no-way player. No, he's not. But he's not a two-way player. He's a good offensive player.

He's a good offensive player. Who wins draws? Yeah. That does not mean he's good defensively. Sure. I used to use the squirrel analogy. Yeah. Bo Horvettes' face-off win percentage is like the squirrel having the bushy tail. So you think it's cute or do you think it's a defensive player?

And like, no, it's just. Which is fine. Like he's a good player. Totally. I think he's not a offensive player with the bushy-tale. And I think defensive, like, who's good defensively, honestly generally comes out to effort. And the reality is for most players, they're good offensively. If they're the key player on their team, they have to exert most of the,

their energy and effort and attention to the offensive side of things. So they're going to sacrifice defensively just because they have to do what they're paid for. So I think a lot of players could be much better defensively if they played either on better teams or environments where they didn't need to focus so much offensively. So that's why I struggle with saying someone's bad defensively because I think most NHL players can generally, if they're smart, be good if that's their job. Most, but definitely some are worse at managing the puck.

Right, yeah, and have bad instincts, right, in terms of where to be positionally, of course. But a lot of it is effort and back checking and just trying. I agree with that. Okay, well, then here's a question that relates to this from Bull Horv, or not from Bull Horbat, it's about Boerb. Bo's calling in this video here. Yeah. The question is about Bo, it's just Boerabat to Carolina question mark, but which is very specific. It seems like a statement more than a question.

Yeah. If the Canucks were to decide that it is in their best long-term interests to trade Boer Haurbat ahead of his unrestricted free agency as opposed to signing him long-term, what are the most interesting landing spots in your opinion, both in terms of where he'd make the most sense, also teams that would theoretically be interested, and then who could facilitate a package that would be worthwhile to the Canucks. I mean, Carolina, if you're making a, if you're making a,

trade as a team in need of defensemen, like young defensive prospects in addition to draft capital. I think the hurricanes and the kings should be the Canucks's prime targets, right? Like you're hoping that Waddell or Blake call you with the Horvad inquiry because those guys, those teams have the process. I mean, the amount of quality defense prospects that this hurricane's organization has in its system, whether it's a Hamosolmi or a Ronan Seeley or what have you. I mean, there's just so much, what's the guy that they have in university?

Morrow. I mean, they just have an absolute stable of quality blue line prospects. So, you know, Carolina definitely ranks high on that list. The Kings definitely rank high on that list. In terms of teams that I think Horvatt would help a lot, you know, Carolina's for sure a really interesting one to me because of, you know, the way that they're lining up and the simplicity that they play

like the simplicity of their game which requires, you know, a lot of, just hit it out. Yeah. A lot of dumpins, a lot of battle winning. You know,

adding a really opportunistic finisher. Like Bo Horvatt, who can win battles and play bumper car hockey, I think would be a uniquely good fit. You know, something like Svetnikov fast Horvat with Kockeniam. me jumping a little further down the lineup, maybe to play with Stahl and Jarvis.

Like that sounds really interesting to me. Or Jarvis with Horvatt sounds really good to me too. So, you know, the Hurricanes might be at the very top of the list, particularly because I think their style, you know, win battles and then Horvatt's skill, which is opportunistic converting, I think would really help. I mean, how many of Horat's goals this season, his league leading, were tied with Jason Robertson and Connor McDavid for 16. deflection.

How many have been kind of tips? I mean, the one against Colorado most recently comes to mind for a team that takes point shots as freely and frequently as the hurricanes do, that would actually be appealing to me because there's another question here. I think Corvettes. About what do you think Carolina needs to do get over the hump? And I'm not sure necessarily. They need their Marion Gabbrick.

Right. You know, like when the Kings added Marion Gabbrick. So I sort of view, I have this like old way of viewing this where I think about guys. who can set the table versus guys who can eat, right? And there's a few guys who can do both, like Sidney Crosby, right? But the Carolina Hurricanes are a team of table setters. Yes. And they need...

They're 30 second and shooting percentage this season. Right. They need a guy with appetite, and Bull Horvette can put it away. Yes. He can. And in a way that stylistically makes sense, I guess, you know, I think Gabrik was such an interesting dynamic to add to the Kings because he added so. much, he infused them with so much more speed.

Yeah. Even at that point of his career. For sure. Which doesn't necessarily apply here, but definitely the finishing element. And Horvats also not like a sustainable on ice shooting. Well, that's why I think the hurricanes might not be. I think that's why the hurricanes might not be that interested in a player who's shooting 23%. Although, although go look at the overall trend lines in his conversion rate.

He's been above average for sure. He was like 50 in last year. Right. But he's, it's like a grown average. Horvette, Horvette changed up his stick. Yeah. He's done some real work, including with some consultants on his finishing game. But, like, legit, a Bauer rep showed him Connor Baudard's sticks over the summer. And he was like, how do you even use this and started experimenting with lower whip?

Bull Horvettes modeling his game after Connor Bader. Modeling a shot? Right. Like, very seriously. He was like... I believe it. Yeah. And he's, so he's like in the mid-70s for flex.

Yeah. Like, he's using a way wippier flex than he has in the past. This is a guy who's like legitimately just hardworking and has spent a bunch of time being like, how can I get better at this? What can I do? And he's figured out how to be a really deceptive shooter. He spent a bunch of time this summer experimenting with different flexes as trying out a new thing. I don't think goalies know how to watch for it yet. So yeah, I mean, it's going to come down.

But like there's something more going on than just conversion luck here. This is, this is hard earned. No, there is, especially with where he's getting his goals from around the net for sure. The Hurricanes don't strike me as a team that's going to pay a premium for an impending UFA who's on pace for 67 goals right now. I don't disagree with that. Right. But the stylistic fit, well, it's the funnest combo for me.

It does. I can't really, I mean, there's a few others that would, like, he'd help everyone, obviously. Toronto? Right. Yeah, I guess with the way they're playing now, yeah. You're out on the leaves, huh? They're just not fun anymore. I just don't enjoy watching them playing anymore.

Yeah. I know, like, they're a good team. they're winning games they beat Minnesota 4-3 today, I believe, like, they're fine, but they're definitely going to be 150. The things they used to make them so special is just not in a lot of games. Yeah, they're not a track meet team anymore. But I think the thing I think Horvatt would help them with is he doesn't get, he's got the stomach for the fight in a big moment. And I think he could be really effective on the wing if they wanted him to play with Tavares and Nielander and maybe give Tavares some defensive cover. But I also think you could play him on a

third line and that would be outrageous. Like, could you imagine going, Matthews Tavares Horvatt Camp, that's the best in league. Well, does a Horvatt trade necessarily come with an extension? No. In place? No.

No, he has no control. There's no trade. No, I mean, for a team that's playing a premium for him, I imagine they'd want at least to consider whether it's just a rental or whether it's a... Potentially, but I mean, you might get a team that's renting him is willing to give the biggest return. Yeah.

You know, I mean, I don't think it necessarily has to come attached to an extension because, again, he doesn't have to wave. He has no control in the situation. So that's not like a necessary condition. Yeah, I'm curious. I'm curious. I definitely, while the shooting percentage is high and he's talking to score 67 goals the season. We should talk L.A., by the way.

Could you imagine? Yeah, let's do it. Copatard-Denau-Horvatt would be a pain. And then obviously we also got a taught Colorado. Another team that needs to get better at finishing. Right. But we also got to add Colorado. And there'd be the added benefit in acquiring.

Horvat in that who's a better replacement for Nazim Cadbury both at 5 on 5 and on the powerplay, right? You just literally have acquired another elite bumper lefty to throw on to PP1. And it's like, hey, guys, let's just bring out the old playbook. We all know how to use it. Well, I got another question here. I'm going to pull it up right now. It is about this exactly. It is from Alex Higley, who asks, would you trade New Hook as part of a Horvatt deal,

or do you think he's worth holding on to for the Appalanche? that's a tough one right it is i mean this is such a key year for the abs yeah because of the logic of the mckinan extension right like yeah it feels like if you're going to repeat you know they're they're built well enough that they'll be fine but this feels like a really a vital season you've got comp for expiring you've got mckinons rays kicking in um you know it's i mean there's a lot that's going to change for this team. And sure, the expiry of Eric Johnson will help, but you know, you've still really only got like one more year of Taves at 4.1, right? Like, he's about to be a $10 million player. Yeah. Or $8 million player anyway. Uh, certainly six and a half. And so, you know, it feels like,

it feels like the marginal value of taking one more real all in swing is through the roof for the, for the Colorado avalanche. It's just, are the Canucks really going to get a new hook quality player from someone else for Bo Horvatt? Yeah, I guess it depends on your mileage of, you know, I mean, yeah, I think that's right. But I do think, I do think they're going to upgrade over Alex New Hook. Yeah, I think the thing that's interesting about the avalanche is that what they've shown this year, where I think they entered the season with the hopes that he would step in and fill

that Nazim cadre role on the second, second center spot. And instead, they basically laid in the game, got Evan Rodriguez for peanuts. and I know he got hurt in the most recent game against the Canucks, but he was doing great in that position. I still think they want more. Sure. But when you have the nucleus in place that they have in the core, you can fill in a lot of these other parts and make them look better

and also get players that want to come play in a fun style where they're going to score a lot and potentially win a cup. And so I don't think the Avalanche necessarily need to get into their business of paying a premium. Now with the injuries that they already have in place and potential LTIR shenanigans, I'm curious to see how much they push that envelope this season, whether they just really take a massive

home run cut and try to significantly improve their team for like a repeat bid. I think they will. They have their, but I just don't, I don't feel like New Hook has to be part of it. You've got too many guys expiring and he's an RFA who's not going to have like the best arbitration case.

Like to me, the new hook, like New Hook's a really vital piece if you want to win beyond this season. Yeah. And I bet you the Avalanche would be super protective of him in that context. That said, you know, they have a first and then they don't pick again until the fifth round,

I bet they'll trade that first. Yeah. If I was a first round prospect, I would not be expecting Colorado to call my name this summer. I would think that first is gone. And then you sort of flesh it out with lesser pieces, you know, that Martin Cowton, on and on. I just, how are you going to win in a world where, you know, you've got Devon Taves making $8 million and Bowen Byron making whatever he's going to make on his second contract. Yeah.

If you don't have a guy like Alex New Hook providing cheap. When you said Devon Taves and then six and a half, I was going to say, Devon, before you sign anything, please call me for a representation. Do not take that deal. All right, Tom. I mean, me and Devon Taves share representation. So I think he'll be fine. Okay.

Tom, we're going to take a quick break here. And then we come back. We're going to keep tackling the listener questions. You are listening to the Hockeypedio guest streaming on the sports. internet radio network back here on the hockypdio cast doing the friday mailbag with our pal thomas trance tom let's uh let's jump back into the listener questions i have one more here before we start taking some from the uh from the mailbox micky asks both panthers and flames have been average not doing poorly but not doing as well as either would want do you guys want to revisit

the key players of the trade and how they're doing so far now you and i on your show just before this talked a bit about the Florida Panthers because they're on the schedule for the Vancouver Canucks this season. You and I also did one of my favorite PDO casts that I've ever done this past summer after the trade where we spent an hour and a half in a we were a conference room

breaking down every single possible angle of that trade to great reviews I'd say. I think people on all all sides were pretty happy with it. Yeah, a lot of important people listen to that podcast for some reason. I got to say, I think the logic for why the Panthers paid the price that they did where I think people were shocked at the

sticker sticker price. So I can't believe they gave up Weger and Hubert O for one player. And our logic was not only does he fundamentally change the way they play, probably for the better. I mean, we'll still see the juries out in terms of whether that helps in the postseason and in terms of their problem solving offensively. But also the logic was, well, you're paying a 24-year-old for all of his prime seasons, basically.

and you're getting out of the risk of having to pick up the tab on a 30-year-old's contract for the next eight years. And so far, that's looking pretty good from a thought process perspective for the Florida Panthers. You'd rather be, well, look, shocker, team-thinking longer-term does better than team-thinking shorter term in trade. And actually, generally, in the shorter term as well. But that's always how it works.

Right. It's always like, oh, the logic is this will help them in the long term. They might sacrifice in the short term, and in reality, they generally wind up doing better much quick. occur than you think. I've been around the Canucks long enough to know that the Canucks make a move that I know is a disaster, but I have to be a little bit polite about it and my first take on it. So I'm like, it makes them better today, but, and then I focus on the long term risks.

And then, like, within a week, the deal. All of those risks are materializing. All of them, right? Like Louis Erickson, Louis Erickson makes them better in the short term. But, man, the latter stages of those contract is, he was never good, right? All of Recman-Larson makes them better next season. But, man, they were one year away from being out of Capel. Boom.

It never works. I think the only time you can actually rationalize and get away with it is if you're a legitimate Stanley Cup team. Because then even if it doesn't pan out, you're not going to fall off because it was a luxury item to begin with. I'm old enough to remember people like reacting with wild sticker shock when the Chicago Blackhawks traded first for Antoine Vermet. Right.

And it's like, who cares? They have no future beyond this year. Like you win now or you never win again. And they won that year. And so it goes. I mean, you pay that price every time out. Yeah. Every time out.

Florida and Calgary, I think, are both really good teams. You know, I mean, I think Calgary is the second or third best team in the West. I thought you're going to say the second best team of that trade. Of the two teams. Of those two teams, they're number two. Yeah, very, very flight of the concords there, right? Depending on the trade, I bet you are definitely in the top three. Right.

Best teams in the trade. Yeah. I think both of those teams are good. The results haven't matched. Yeah. But I think the, you know, the Panthers are what? I don't think the Panthers will finish the season more than 10 points back of the Boston Bruins after 82 games. Yeah, the 31st in the team shooting percentage right now and all of their underlying metrics are better than they were last year offensively when they were the best offensive team we ever seen.

They're going to be fine. And then Calgary, too. Calgary is not getting saves, but you have Lidar and Markstrom. They're going to be totally fine in that. You know, I'm not sure if they're going to be as dynamic offensively. I think they might have taken a bigger step back than we thought. But the logic of adding a top pair defender and, you know, them just being one of the most least permissive teams in the league, I still think that holds. It's just that their goaltending hasn't earned them those results yet.

Yeah, you know what's interesting from the Panthers perspective? I think part of the bet there was this hubris that they'd had deservedly so from the past couple years of plugging and playing, right? In terms of like everyone we put into the system has the best year. they have, so we'll figure it out. And on the one hand, you look at the numbers that they're getting from like Josh Mahura and making it work defensively. We thought the defensive depth would be a big issue. All of recblad misses a bunch of time, they've been perfectly fine. Yeah, they're okay. They're so good at plugging holes on the blue line with castoffs. It's incredible. At the same time, their commitment to the stall bit is so strange because that's literally been the one flaw

of every single thing they've done. You know what? Zito seems to do this, though, all the time. There's always like a Joe Thornton. Yeah. You know, and then once the games matter later in the year, those guys don't seem to play. Yeah, I guess so. But they've done it multiple years in a row. They've had like a guy like that around. Yeah.

Well, they're taking the joke about going to Florida to retire. Just way too, way too literally. Well, not as literally as they did remember when it was like the Joe Newendike, Gary Roberts, Florida Panthers. And it was like, oh, boy. Yeah. Anyway, I think both teams will be fine. I like Florida's side of the trade slightly better. But I also think Calgary, like the thing is, is I think Calgary.

is I think Calgary is the second best team in the West, despite how they've played to this point. I think they're the second best team in the West. Definitely not. They're not better than Colorado. I like them better. The actual Colorado Avalanche we're going to see in a playoff series or this version on November 24th or 5th or whatever.

I mean, all I can do is analyze this version. I know, but Nishushchev and Lianna and Scott will be back. Okay. And then if they make a trade for a center, then I'm willing to hear it. But, I mean, also you're going to have at least one, if not two of their defenders injured. Yeah. You know, like, I don't know.

At the end of the day, too, who am I going to feel more comfortable in a playoff series? Francoz or Markstrom. I know it doesn't matter that much, but it's like, come on. There, I genuinely, I think right now that the flames are the second best team in the West behind only Vegas.

Whereas for me, the Panthers would be a little further down that list, right? I mean, you'd have to take the devils, the hurricanes. Do you think we spent enough time talking about, like, the talent imbalance between the two conferences. I don't think we spend enough time talking about how far and away the devils are the best team in the league right now.

Yeah. Like, I mean, I know they've got a lot of attention, the wagon t-shirts and on and on. This podcast spends a lot of time talking about it. I mean, there's no one close right now. Yeah. It's scary. They look like the abs two years ago. And how fun they are to watch.

Yeah. They're playing a different, like, I watch the Canucks and then I watch the Devils or more frequently I watch the Devils and then I watch the Canucks. And I'm like, these aren't not the same sport. Yeah. These teams aren't playing the same. same sport. So anyway, at the end of the day, I think Calgary's got a cleaner shot to go further in the short term, even though the long-term deal that Florida made has aged better out of the gate.

Here's another question from the inbox, by the way. Is Austin Matthews a two-way player? Oh, and so this is a follow-up. This is dating back to our first discussion before the break. 20 minutes ago or whatever. Yeah. He is. Because he the past couple years has been legitimately good defensively in terms of not only the impact that he's driving but the physical way in terms of how he's playing how he gets deep in the zone wins battles takeaways back checking everything like he's been doing everything you'd like to see to qualify as actually being good defensively to go along with offensively he was on my selky ballot last year yeah he wouldn't be if i was voting today for this season i don't think he's

been the same... Because he hasn't scored enough goals. No, because he hasn't been the same assertive presence game in game out. I know a big part of what's happening with Matthews right now is shooting percentage base, but also a big part of it is very rarely do I tune in and see him being out there grabbing the game by the scruff of its neck and just like asserting himself as the best player on the ice, something that I thought he did game in, game out last season, and a big reason why I put him on my Selke ballot and had him ahead of Connor McDavid for heart. Before you get mad at me, the players agreed they gave Matthews the Lindsay.

There's like revisionist history that the Matthews winning the heart last year was like a terrible call. Right. Because of what's happened this season or in what McDavid did in the playoffs. The players agreed. Yeah. Matthews won the Lindsay too. Stop it. Anyway. This season, this season I've been left a little cool. Like I think it's fair to talk about the fact that a quarter of the way through the season, William Nealander has been the Maple Leaf's best player. Like, Marner's on this big point streak, and Matthews just isn't throwing his fastball night in, night out. Maybe there's something with the wrist, maybe there's something up.

Yeah. But that's true. Like, that's been true watching that team play. So I think he's a great two-way player. I think he anticipates the game extraordinarily well and can do some outrageous things. I have a memory watching him in Vancouver. And Travis Hamanick, it's a partial change. And Matthews is the last.

guy out and the puck goes into the corner and Travis Hammondick gets it and Matthews instead of going after the defenseman like he usually would takes a look behind him sees that there's a forward slashing and he traces the forward instead of going after the defender right and when Hamannick sends the pass up Matthews just picks it off and gets a scoring chance out of it and I just thought that is next level intelligence like you know he's like oh this guy's not a great passer I'm going to victimize him. It's a bet against Travis Hammond. It's a bet against but all in real time, processing it. And it's just brilliant. Like I just,

I remember watching it go down, watching him shoulder check, watching him match his speed to the forward slashing as he moved slowly across the blue line. And thinking that is a play that like two guys in the entire league can make. You know, like there's just no one else who thinks of the game like that. That's wild

stuff. So yeah, I mean when you can play at that level, which we've seen Matthews do, you were a two-way player. I just don't think we've seen that level. of ingenuity and dominance from him on a shift-out and shift-out basis yet this season. You know what I will say, though, when we're talking about Matthews, McDavid, best players in the world, asserting themselves physically, my preseason take of my favorite player to watch is Nathan McKinn.

No, it's Nathan McKinnon. Oh, man. It's so true because you watch, even against the Canucks in the most recent game, he has these shifts where he just starts rumbling around, and you're just like, this is unlike. anything else in the sport. Like, it's just so violent. Like, he had, he had that one shift in, I believe it was like the second period or something against the Knox where he like, he first, he like went on a solo dash coast to coast. Oh, that was outrageous. I know. And like,

I think Pedersen tried to check him and he basically just like kicked his stick away. Um, and then yeah, the power play shift where he was just like hammering every, like it was just, yeah. It's not the best, but it's the most like, I can't look away because something crazy is happening right now. He is definitely the angriest skater. Yes. Ever. Yeah, he hates the ice. Hates it. And I also like the contrast. One thing I like about watching the abs, I like the contrast between the shorter player skating, like the most angry person in the world. And then the really big guy in Miko Ranton, who's just like so smooth. Yeah. You know, like Nathan McKinnon entering the zone, he enters like a hammer. And Miko Rantan cuts through defenders like they're butter, like he's a butter knife. It's just the funniest contrast in size and style in the league. And I can't get enough of watching. I love that. All right. You have the mailbox pulled up on,

I'll let you host a little bit since I hosted your show today. Sure. First of all, someone texts in to note that James Reimer is playing on Sunday. So I just want to, there you go. Well, that's because on your show on Kodok's talk, we talked about whether he was going to be in for the Knoch's game this weekend.

Someone points out that Carolina is frequently used as an example of how to manage the cap properly, but they've wondered if sooner or later their strategy of moving, anyone out was going to catch up with them. This is in the context of our earlier Horvatt discussions from Nathan and Poco. What do you think? What classifies this example for this? Who have they moved out? Well, it's not moving out.

It's like letting them go? Yeah. It's the, it's the... Like letting Vinny Trochik go the summer. Trocheck, Dougie Hamilton. Yeah. Anthony DiAngelo. Mm-hmm.

You know, I guess like goalies, right? Nadelcovich. Yeah. They don't, they don't care about. losing their goalies, they don't care about losing UFAs, they're happy to just sort of, and they don't also monetize them on the trade market. They just replace them and keep on coming. What's your thoughts?

Will that eventually catch up to them strategy-wise? I mean, certainly when you lose a player for nothing, it stings, but the whole thesis behind what they're doing is maintaining flexibility so that they can just find the next guy, whether it's someone who just is lost in the shuffling. can't be afforded by their current team or whether they're looking to rebuild their stock. And so I don't know if it will until teams start acting accordingly, right? Like the reason why it's successful is because it's so unique compared to how most teams function where NHL teams act so emotionally and irrationally sometimes where they get so

invested in a homegrown product that they've drafted, developed, seen kind of develop into their prime that they wind up regrettably paying for their less productive seasons as they enter their 30s. And the hurricanes just don't do that. So I don't think so until the rest of the league catches up. So it's an advantage based less on their ability to replace and more on everyone else's fondness. Yeah, they're betting against the other 31 franchises.

And based on the way teams generally function in NHL, I'd say that's a good strategy. Yeah. Would you agree? I would agree. But it does matter that you're consistently able to replace guys. Like, yes. And I do think the Trocheque loss, while not. necessarily like I don't think it's a mistake by any means right no chance it is um you know I

mean what's what's up with the Rangers why are they not are they just coming back to Earth and doing what they should have done last season yeah I don't know their their numbers are strange like they things have dried up quite a bit offensively they don't fine like when I've seen them they've actually looked more encouraging to me than than last year but yeah me too but that's because but that's because I was certain they were first round fodder all last year. You know, they're slightly older, but I don't, I don't think they've taken the step. Like their first week of the season, I was like, oh, my God, I might have been way wrong

about the Rangers. They look like a team that could level up really quickly with the quality of their young blue line. And they really have not delivered on that promise. They feel like they're stagnating. Anyway, the... Well, let's keep talking about the hurricanes. Yeah, the hurricanes, though...

Think about this summer, though. They do miss Trocheck. They do. I do. Like, Cocheney Emmy, I don't think, is a long-term answer at second line center. Yes, but we have to treat all of these, like you can't, you can't evaluate it in a vacuum. No, I know. It's not do you miss Trochuk?

It's, do you miss the next five years of any trochuk? Probably not. Probably not. And their ability to go and basically add Brent Burns, who's posting great numbers predictably for them with Jacob Slavin on the top air for literally nothing is because they do stuff like that. Or to get paid for Max Patchretti, who we haven't even seen. Yeah. Right.

Who will help. I'll answer a lot of those questions we had previously of putting the puck in the net. that's something he does really well. Really well. And provide speed as well, assuming his Achilles holds up. Yeah, plus they have two left, two righties playing on the same third pair, and it's great. Yeah. So I don't think it'll come back to bite them.

I understand they haven't necessarily want to Stanley Cup. So. Haven't necessarily. No, no, I mean, in terms of like treating them as the goal standard for how to run a team or how to manage your team, I get why people sometimes push back on that. But I don't know. They're pretty smart. Someone says, by the way, us talking about angry or violent skating is proof we're nerds.

Correct. Super fair. Why is that the case? What's wrong with talking about violent skating? I have no idea. I have no other way to describe what Nathan McEan does on the ice surface as angry and violent. It's proof for nerds. I don't know.

And so someone asks, why do we never talk about the Bruins? Are they not doing as good, if not better than the devils? They are. They're amazing. Yeah, they're amazing. Yeah, they're out of home again today. Yeah. They're outrageous.

I just, I do think the devils are materially more unique. I disagree with that. Really? Yeah. I think the stuff the Bruins do in terms of what we discussed, like how they attack you from a geometry perspective, like the angles they use, the way they move the puck around, they're moving at the offensive zone, which the Canucks saw and were victimized by pretty significantly in the game they played against them in Boston.

Like you see like how they can kind of expose you in that regard with the way they operate. So it's not, it's much more of a skill-based game than I think we like to admit, especially with their best players. Oh, well, it definitely is with that perfect. And I think it's unique. Like the set plays, they run off of draws. I just did a whole podcast basically on Patrice Berger on what he does so uniquely with Matt Porter. And so I think they are unique in a completely different way.

Like I think what the devils are doing in terms of the team speed and the way they're just constantly attacking is more aesthetically pleasing. But I'd say both are pretty unique. Yeah, fair enough. I just, I think the devils are, the devils have a shot at just being unhittable. In a way,

I just think the Bruins are a really interesting, smart, competent team. They're like the best version of what we consider to be a hockey team. But the devils feel like they have a chance to be something else. The devils, the devils have a chance to be fastball. incarnate. They have a chance to be the aves from the last three years. You know, I mean, it just feels different to me. Their gear is so high right now. Well, and I'd say from a, from a team

building perspective, the devil succeeding would be really good because they've also done a couple of very admirable things, right? One, they stuck, they stuck with it and were pretty patient as after a couple years of pretty brutal disappointment based on preseason expectations. Two, they were pretty smart about maintaining flexibility so that this summer they could go and identify players they really wanted to bring in. Yeah. And they would generally like, they play a very modern way in terms of just everyone skates really fast.

And they, their defensive approaches were just like not going to let you get the puck. So every time I hear someone's sight, I don't know if they're a playoff team because you look at that goal tending and it just doesn't do it for me. It's like, it doesn't matter. Okay. Well, that goalie faces 22 shots every night. A lot of them are from the perimeter. And last year, Darcy Kemp,

with one eye won a Stanley Cup. So I don't understand what we're talking about here. You look at the list of goalies. Other than Andre de Nadevaselevsky, who's such an anomaly in every, like, we don't talk about that enough. The durability factor. The fact that he was a top 20 draft pick, which you don't take goalies top 20. They gave him a $9.5 million annual deal.

And basically in doing so, relegated themselves to punting the backup position for eternity, which teams don't do in today's NHL. And that he's like a physical freak. You just can't compare what the Lightning have in Andre Basilevsky to like a blueprint for what teams need to have to win a Stanley Cup. You're right. And otherwise, all the goalies that have won the past however many years have not been guys. You would have gone into that season being like, this is a Stanley Cup winning caliber goal. It's generally some rando who like has bounced around.

Yeah, Bennington. I mean, Holpey didn't start that postseason. No, I know. And had a horrible regular season. And you wouldn't have gone into that playoff around being like Holpies the guy. No, definitely not. In fact, it was the first time in five years you would have said. like hope he's not the guy.

Right, who actually was like one of the greatest playoff performers of his generation. Right. And then all of a sudden, yeah. No, it's interesting. The, yeah, I mean. Sorry for that rant. No, no, it's a good one and a necessary one.

Yeah, I just think the devils are a potential outlier here. Like, I think pole to pole, they have a chance to be better by a margin than anyone else. And that's not to say that they're going to win out in the playoffs. I just think they're at a gear that I don't think anyone else is hitting. And the Bruins, I just think, are the best of, like, when I say they're less unique, what I really mean is they're like the best version of what we consider to be a normal hockey team. Right. Whereas the devils, to me, have a chance to be something different.

So if you are the devils. Also, also, can we just really quickly before we go, I got to give some credit. The devils don't get enough credit for fixing their defense. Yes. And that's the mistake. Everyone else who looks good on paper failed to make. How did they do it? They did not draft the players.

No, they had cap space. Yeah. And picks. That's it. Yeah, not even premium picks, though. What did they trade a third or a fourth for Jonas Seagenthaler? Yeah. And then a third and a failed first round pick.

A failed first round pick. Like they drafted the defender who didn't work out who they were quick to move for John Marino. And then seconds for Graves. I mean, what's the difference between Ottawa? and New Jersey. I mean, there's a lot of them. But the main one, one team went out about upgrading their defense.

One of them didn't and just enjoyed the headlines. And that is today's episode of the Hockeypedia. Tom, this was a blast, man. I'm glad we got to do this. My pleasure. Love to spike the ball on hot Pierre Summer before we go. We've got a minute here. Plug some stuff.

Where can people check you out and give us all that good stuff? I'm on these here, Airwaves, SportsNet 650. Every day, Monday, 2 Friday, noon to 2 p.m. And, of course, on your. favorite podcast catchers at Canucks Talk is the show obviously at the athletic as well athletic. com and you can follow me on Twitter at Thomas Strands. Don't miss the athletics black Friday sale. Best sale of the year. Well, this is a blast. You and I are on every week and hopefully we'll get you on the PDO cast here soon. If you enjoy today's show, anytime, my friend. Please go smash that five-star

button wherever you listen to the podcast. We'll be back Monday with more here on the feed. Thank you for listening. Have a great weekend. This has been the Hockeypedio cast on the sports. internet radio network.