The Hockey PDOcast - We're Back!

Episode Date: December 28, 2022

Dimitri has The Score's John Matisz on the show to answer listener questions about the definition of the MVP award, changes to the playoff format, Buffalo's future outlook, why the Panthers look less potent offensively, and how the Bruins are using their goalies.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.

Progressing to the mean since 2015. It's the Hockey PEDEOCast with your host, Dmitri Filipovich. Welcome to the Hockey PEOCast. My name is Dimitri Philipovich. And joining me on today's episode of the show is my good buddy John Mattis. John. What's going on, man? Dimitri, happy holidays to you, to the listeners.

It's a festive type of year, part of the year here. Looking forward to digging in on some mailbag questions. It is. Yeah, we're back. We're back from our extended holidays. holiday break. I took like 10 days off or so, which is great because I needed the time to recharge. It was great to spend quality time with the family and do all that, had a great holiday season. At the same time, though, I feel a bit rusty. So hopefully you're going to, you're going to help

me out here. And also the listeners are going to help us out because, as you said, we solicited some questions they came through with some great stuff. And so we'll kind of grease the skids here and get into it and ease back into the action with some fun kind of thought-provoking questions from them. So let's get started with it. Here's a fun one to get us. out of the gate. Jeff Arbin asks, if you could redefine the heart trophy to fulfill exactly what you want to see out of it, what would it be? So I guess the way I look at this is we got to start with the current definition so that we're all on the same page. So current definition is that the heart goes to the player adjudged to be the most valuable to his team. So MVP of his team,

who, you know, really embodies that? I'm okay with that definition. I think it's a really difficult award to make everyone happy about. You could go with most outstanding, but we do have the title of Lindsay for that, which obviously the players vote on. So that would be silly if we sort of went with the same definition for that, but it was the writers voting.

So I'm kind of okay with the MVP. being the main focus of the award. But some of the issues that come up now is that, well, one, it seems to devalue a guy like Connor McDavid where we see him do spectacular things all the time year after year. And we sort of, we're not sure what to do with him, especially when he's got a Leon Drysidal with him. I think if he was just alone, it might make it easier. But so that's, you know, kind of this issue in the corner.

And then another one is the whole idea of, does the player have to make the playoffs or not? That always seems to come up. And then the last thing, I have sort of three, you know, bones to pick, if you will, is the lack of goalies and defensemen represented in the hard trophy winners of the last 20-some-odd years. The last goalie to win was Kerry Price in 2015. So it's been a while. And then with defensemen, I mean, it goes way back to 2000 with Chris Pronger. So it's one of those things where I see the definition and I don't hate it, but I feel like the results aren't necessarily what I'd like to see.

And also within the sort of pecking order or of the universe of NHL Awards, it kind of becomes the de facto offensive forward award because you've got the defensive forward award. You've got the Norse for the defensemen. And then you've got the Vesna. So it's like, okay, we always default to, you know, let's sort by points. and that's we go from there. At least that's sort of like what it always looks like. I don't actually do that when I vote, but that certainly factors in where you're like,

okay, McDavid doesn't really qualify for any of these other ones. So we're obviously going to give him some extra love just to use him as an example. What do you think? Well, the reason why I wanted to start it off with this one is you and I, the last time we did a show together.

We did a full awards ballot through like 25 games or so and we started off with the heart. As listeners probably remember, you hijacked my show. You started with, that with that category first right off the gate as opposed to saving it for the very end. And so we got into that and we did like 15 minutes, I think, on Jason Roberts and reverse Connor McDavid at the time. And I think ultimately there's, I think Jeff's question here is framed

correctly in terms of redefining it because I think it kind of, if you actually wanted to get to something more concrete, you need to do so. I don't think there's any motivation to do so because ultimately that gray area our interpretation is kind of a feature or not a bug in this instance, right? It creates more conversation and arguments and back and forth as opposed to if we went truly by quote unquote most valuable. We don't necessarily have a figure like this yet that we all are comfortable with using regularly. But like in MLB, if you just sort by wins above replacement, you have the most valuable player and then you could just basically sort that and there's no real nuance or context there.

You're still going to have debates and people are going to be latching onto their favorite players and, you know, the most interesting stories of like the guy that came out of nowhere, all of a sudden to reach that level as opposed to a player who's wanted him back to back years. Like, like we have with Connor McDavid. But I think ultimately I always view it through the lens of like Eileen best player

or like just most, most impressive player. But I get what you're saying in terms of that's kind of what the Ted Lindsay's supposed to account for and this is different. But ultimately, I struggle with most valuable for a lot of the reasons you outlined. The biggest one for me is goalies are the most valuable. If we're going most valuable,

it's just going to be the three players that we list in the Vezna. Would it not be? Well, I guess the counter point to that is that they don't play all the games, right? So we already have an issue with, say, Connor McDavid playing 25 minutes a night. You know, he's not on the floor like an NBA player for 90% of the game, but it's closer to 40, 50%. So there's already an issue. issue there a little bit. And then you look at goalies, it's like Shisterkin last year. I put him

on my ballot. I think I had him third because it was just absurd what he did. But it was hard to sort of leap all the way to second or first based on, I don't have it in front of me how many games he played, but I think it was 50 something. Where it's like, okay, well, what happened in the other 30 games? So it's not the goalie's fault, but I think that's a factor there. Because you're totally right. I mean, let's face it, the sport is rigged to give the most value to the goalie, whether that's negative value or positive value. So they always certainly should be in consideration. And then on the point of the Lindsay, I think that,

not that the question is saying there's this huge issue with the heart, but I wonder if big picture, if we think of all the awards and the sort of value us as a hockey role, gives them. I wonder if we're sleeping on the Lindsay a little bit, where it's like, whoever talks about the Ted Lindsay and maybe we should be. And I'm saying this as someone who votes as a writer and who obviously really values the process and cares about it. But like, the players are voting for the Lindsay. And I feel like no one even touches on that in terms of, you know, what kind of clout we're giving it or what type of esteem we're giving it. So maybe a part

of it is that too where it's like, okay, the heart is what it is. But like, the Lindsay, we should hold that up in and around the heart as these really high-end awards. Well, you know who loves the Ted Lindsay? Me, back in 2011, when Daniel Sidin deservedly won the Ted Lindsay and Corey Perry stole the heart trophy from him. And so I still have not let that go over a decade later. And so, yeah, I mean, it's interesting. Like, I think judging that kind of trying to quantify the value. you can mean so many different things and that's part of the fun of it. It can also be frustrating.

I'm with you. I really don't like when we punish great players for playing with other great players or like their teammates also putting up big point totals and then that's somehow diminishing their greatness. It's it's like, oh no, you have to be in a really terrible situation for you to be valuable. There's probably a reason why teammates of great players are also doing very well and it's because of that individual's greatness and that is ultimately what is incredibly valuable about them. Yeah, and another thing to consider is just, I guess, you know, what statistics you're using

and then also what we should be doing with the end of season all-star teams. Like I know I'm going off on a bit of a side road here, but you're a fan of the low post, I assume, and the NBA podcast. So they love, Zach Lowe loves talking about the end of season awards and especially the first team, all-star, second team, et cetera.

And I feel like the, the discourse around the NHL end-of-season all-star teams is almost non-existent, when really that's a place where you can actually, I guess add to a guy's legacy more than like, oh, he finished fifth and Norris voting. It's like, okay, he made the second team

all-star team. That sign of kind of gives me more or gives it more value long-term, I think, anyways. And you've got your certain spots to fill. And I just feel like we're not really focusing on that NFC's an all-star selection as much as maybe we should. And again, I'm kind of grabbing this from below post-podcasts where they focus on it. And I go, you know what? In hockey, we just almost ignore it. What's that all about? Oh, you're right. I, for a for life of me, I couldn't tell you, like, who was on which all-star team as recently as last year,

let alone a couple years ago, whereas in NBA, it's a big part of a player's resume, especially when they're entering the Hall of Fame, right? It's like, oh, how many times was he deemed to be one of the five or 10 or 15 best players in the league? And the NHL, you'd think considering how many more players are important, like, that would be a better way to account for that and also give credit to great seasons players are having, as opposed to trying to narrow it down to three guys and it basically being like, I was just sorting by who has the most points.

So I'm with you. There's a lot to, a lot to chew on there. All right. Next question from Alex. What are your thoughts regarding adding NBA-style playing games to the NHL where seven to 10 seeds have to play to qualify for the actual playoffs? So first, I guess we should note what the NBA style playing is.

So it goes, the seventh seed plays the eighth seed to determine the seventh seed. going into the playoffs. And then the loser of that seven versus eight will play the winner of nine versus 10 in the standing to determine the eighth seed. So it's a bit of a like convoluted thing. But I think that's a pretty smart way to do it. And I have a few thoughts on this.

So bear with me, Dimitre. So first of all, I would rather do a play in tournament than adding two more games to the regular season. I know that's been thrown out there. Greg Wischinsky had a report, whatever, a couple weeks ago that the NHLs, considering an 84 game regular season. My thought on that is just no, like 82 is plenty. If we're going to add games added to the start of the playoffs,

not the end of the regular season. As for this play in tournaments, I find it's a bit of a tough one to really get behind fully just because depending on the season, the difference between the team that finished seventh in the Eastern Conference or 10th in the Eastern Conference can be really wide. I was looking at it from last year's perspective, 21, 22, and Boston had 107 points during 7th,

and then Columbus has 81 points in their 10th. I mean, is it fair for Boston to have to go through this playing around when Columbus didn't really deserve to be considered for the playoffs? Yes. That said, you could make the argument that if Columbus had known that there was going to be a play in a round, they would have maybe bought at the deadline and tried to make 10th or kind of recalibrated their expectations for the year.

So, you know, maybe if the playing around were to be introduced, we would see teams act differently during the year and try to get into the top 10 versus the top eight. So it's a bit of a chicken and the egg thing, like, okay, we wouldn't really know what it would look like until it was instituted. And then my last thought, Demetri, before you jump in, so part of Gary Bettman's push back to the playing around, discussion is that he says there's basically no need to fix what they already have,

this phenomenal first round, this, this, this sort of, uh, just the way it's set up. Right. At the NHL office, which I like, I do love the first round. I think I like the idea of having half the league go in the playoffs, half the league not, 16 out of 32. But I would weigh, so, you know, that's fine. but I would also way rather have the playoff format to be one verse 8, two versus go back to that versus this bracket they've created out of nowhere.

They're trying to establish, you know, regional rivalries, which just isn't happening. I think that's the main issue with the playoffs. It's not necessarily like we need to add in a couple games before the first round. And also I'm a little puzzled by Betman's rationale behind not wanting, you know, playing games because he's so. saying, you know, it would devalue or dilute the regular season and dilute obviously the playoffs because you're adding more games. But I mean, everything, his whole

job is focused on profit, right? Like you see what Jersey guys. You see it with the digital ads. I'm surprised and you never know what's actually going on behind the scenes. Like, obviously he's got a strategy here. But I'm surprised that he's taking that route where he's saying like if it's not broken, don't fix it because think of all the gate revenue they would get from these additional playoff games. So those are all my thoughts, Demetri. take it away. There's a lot to unpack there. I think ultimately where I come down on this is I understand the potential risk of playing games, the amount of randomness and shenanigans that could ensue in terms of a team that's undeserving that's like, especially in a really drastic era where the 10th seat is like comically far away from actually being one of the best eight teams in their own conference. having their goalie just get randomly hot for one game or two games and depriving us and then forcing us to watch them play another seven game series when it's like,

all right, I don't need to see seven more games of this team. Here's a thing, though. The current system already kind of does that. I understand it not to that degree clearly, but if you're going to get so precious about us needing to maintain a meritocracy and rewarding the best teams, then we would place much more benefit

and a claim to regular season success, right? Like what's more important? Being awesome for 82 games where you're playing everyone and you have to go through all these injuries and, you know, back to backs and a full 82 game schedule or just winning a bunch of like short best of seven sprints. It's clearly the 82 game set, 82 game season yet no one really cares about that. The president's trophy doesn't ultimately matter. It's actually kind of a joke at this point where it's a, I couldn't tell you who won the

President's trophy three or four years ago, similar to what we were talking about with the All-Star teams, and that should be a much bigger deal. I can, I can rattle off every single Stanley Cup champion for the past, like, 30 years. And so if you're going to kind of go through it through the lens of, all right, I really care about having the best teams come out on top, well, then we should totally change the system entirely to begin with. So it unpacks that. You can't kind of be talking out both sides of your mouth in the sense that what you're

saying for Gary Bevin, right? it's like, no, our system's great right now, but also we don't want to do this thing because it's going to create all of these unforeseen circumstances. Like it's either one or the other, in my opinion. Yeah, it really bugs me the, you know, like if you look at the Atlantic, for example, it seems like every year they've got two, maybe three teams of the top five of points in the entire league. And then we're not seeing one of, we're only seeing one of those teams advanced to the second round. It just, it doesn't make a ton of sense. I'm surprised there's not more pushback from NHLGMs. and board of governors and whatnot where that that was instituted i want to say about 10 years ago

maybe a little less and it still remains and it doesn't seem like there's been a big push to go back to the one verse eight but that seems like the logical step uh versus the i don't hate the play what do you like ultimately do you like the play an idea like in theory the excitement um like does it have some some appeal to you of course it's an entertainment product right so what's more entertaining than you have to watch this one game because it's going to determine whether you're out of the playoffs or getting another lifeline. Also, it expands the door for if you're on that on that bubble, all of a sudden, I think you're going to see teams talking themselves much more into not necessarily becoming buyers if they're like the 10th or 11th best team in their conference, but not necessarily just like fully tearing it down. I think we're constantly in this pursuit, whether we're talking, bouncing around gold system ideas or what have you, to make some of these games matter down the stretch for as many teams as possible as opposed to just basically half the league.

And I think this at least kind of lumps in some of those teams as well where all of a sudden it gives them reason to, gives their fans reason to care about these games, to go to the games. And I think ultimately from a revenue perspective, like you're talking about how making money is what's most important for Gary Bettman. And I feel like this is the way to do it, right? Like how much more fan interest would you drum up in some of these markets if these games actually matter down the strategy as opposed to like, oh, we might get Connor Bredard. We have a 7% chance of doing so. Like I think it certainly provides more strategy, more potential scenarios. And I'm all for it. Like I think I think it checks a lot of boxes.

Well, I would certainly look into it if I'm the NHL. I mean, you're looking at the other major leagues in the States and Canada. NFL, MLB, NBA, they've all gone in the direction of expanded playoffs in some way or another. So there's got to be something there. I mean, there's probably a way to have a different spin on it as the NHL, but it seems logical, especially when you've grown to 32 teams to at least consider. And again, like I see both sides to this, but if they're not even sitting down and, you know, modeling or whatever they need to do to figure things out, I think they're doing themselves at a disservice.

Well, look at what like the NFL, for example, in the past couple of years. I mean, they expand to the regular season schedule, which I'm fully against the NHL replicating. Yes. But they made finishing first in your conference in the both AFC, NFC much more important because that's the only team that gets the buy in round one. So you have to play one fewer game, lower chance of injury, lower chance of shenanigans where a random team gets up early and then holds on and upsets you. And so that's incredibly valuable, right? And that makes you succeeding in the regular season more important. And so I'm, if you're taking one thing from this topic for it's, I think the league needs to do a better job of making the teams to finish atop their conferences have a bigger advantage than just whole mice advantage throughout their portion of the bracket because that's a nice perk.

But ultimately, I don't think it's as big of a game changer, especially like maybe in terms of making more money for the owners. But in terms of the team increasing the team's likelihood of actually succeeding in these playoffs series, like I'd like to see. them have a bigger advantage than just that. That's fair. Okay, one more quick one here before we go to break. Peter C. Amandais asks, how many pieces away are the Buffalo Sabres? Now, I toss this one in for two reasons. One, because I want to continue my Cal Ripkin-esque streak of mentioning the Buffalo Sabres on the PDO cast,

which I think has spanned every single episode so far the season. But two, you're also potentially, I know weather permitting, we'll see it might be put on hold for you to go to Buffalo and watch this team live, but I know you're working on something about Jack Quinn as well. And so I kind of thought we could lump that in here and talk about them a little bit before we go to break. Yeah, sure. Well, so pieces away. I mean, from one, of course, right?

Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah. Well, I guess we could start with what they have. I mean, they have a superstar center. I think we've established that both, you know, you on your podcast and the greater hockey world. that Tage Thompson is legit. Two-star defense, and I think there's no denying that Owen Power and Rasmus Dahlin are fantastic linchpins on the back end.

And then you've got Matthias Samuelson, you've got Alex Tuck, you've got lots of other youthful pieces, whether it's Jack Quinn, J.J. Peturka, Dylan Cousins, they've got a bunch of other prospects coming through. So, I mean, the core, the base, the foundation, I think is super strong. What they need, though, I mean, they don't have a long-term starter at this point.

Will it be Devin Levy? Will it be Ouka-Pekulukaman? I don't know. To be determined on that front, I think in order for them to really solidify their defense long-term, obviously three tremendous pieces, but if they can get that fourth top-four defensemen,

you know, people have brought up Jacob Chikrin. I don't know if that works in terms of the handedness. That's a third, or sorry, a fourth lefty out of four. I don't know how I feel about that. But, you know, someone in that sort of mold a little older maybe like in his mid-20s or whatever who can who can slide in and and fulfill that that four spot I think that's high on the to-do list and the thing is that they I'll throw a couple other things at you so they only

have one bad contract that's Jeff Skinner and it's not looking bad this season specifically so we'll see how that ages but not a lot holding them back whether it's free agency trades moving forward. That's a huge plus. They have the youngest opening day roster, which, you know, it says a lot of things. It says clearly they weren't trying to push their chips into the middle of the table this year by any means. And two, it shows that they're going to have a bunch of stumbles across this season and seasons moving forward where it's just, it's just the way it works in sports. The youngest teams rarely rise to the top. So those are those are the things that come to on in terms of like the high level and I don't know that's not specifically I guess answering how

many pieces but I guess it would be at least two major ones that starter and that top 4d and then from there obviously the depth needs to be filled out yeah I'm I'm perfectly comfortable I know these are a famous last words but I I'm perfectly comfortable being like incredibly heavy on buffalo saber stock moving forward um I know there's been some stops and starts. I think this is an entirely different scenario with the pieces they have. I'll give you some stats here that I drummed up while thinking about this question. So with Mattia Samuelson in the lineup,

they're 13, 5, and 1 with a plus 35 goal differential so far this season. Not that Mattia Samuelson alone is responsible for that, but I think it shows what you're saying in terms of when they have their best players, particularly their defensemen in the lineup and available. like that high end of their roster moves the needle significantly, right? This isn't like a bunch of random. And all of those players are their youngest, most important players too, right?

This isn't like a fun story whereas it's a bunch of random castaways on an expansion team that have come together. It's like, oh, this is a fun narrative. Like, no, these are like young guys who are only going to get better and they're currently driving the results. So I think that's highly encouraging along those lines with Owen Power or Asm Staling on the ice at 5-on-5 this season. they're up 62 to 42, which shows like, I think the only thing that's really been holding them back

beyond some questionable goaltending, although like Craig Anderson in particular has done an incredibly admirable job for them given the circumstances. All of their worst five-on-five players are off the books by the end of next season and like aren't, I don't think in this team's future plans, whether it's Victor Orlifson, Casey Middlestad, Jacob Bryson, like some of these like depth players, right? and not to knock those guys, I just think, like, they're going to be replaced by the time this team reaches whatever pinnacle it's hoping to reach, which is going to be in a couple years from now.

And I think that's highly encouraging as well, like that flexibility, they're not tied up into any of these really big mistakes. And then the other one that I wanted to note here was for all the love that Tage Thompson understandably gets, especially from myself and that top line in general, those three that you mentioned, Quinn, Paturka, and Cousins, right? Cousins is the elder statesman of that line. He's turning 22 in February. They've played 155-15 minutes together this season,

and they've already generated 11 goals together with a 60% high-danger chance and expected goal share. And so I think with all of these pieces in place, they're scoring the most goals in the league of anyone. Now, they're giving up a lot as well. It's made for a really fun, chaotic, high-scoring environment. I think that's totally fine. I think they're going to have, to answer Peter's question here

more kind of clearly. I think they're going to have one or two real chances, whether it's rest of this season, off season into next year to like take a big home run cut swing in a trade, right? Because they have so many young players. You look at the world juniors that are going on right now, how many guys are a Buffalo Savers prospect,

all the draft capital they have as well. They're going to basically be able to acquire any player they identify and want to that's even remotely available, just because they're going to be able to covenant Godfather they're off or anyone. And so I think ultimately how they approach that and who they choose is going to determine this and whether I don't think Jacob Jacob Jekron is enough of a needle mover, although I am very interested in it for a lot of reasons, as I've noted on the podcast before, but they're going to have chances to do so. And I think that is ultimately going to determine like what the trajectory

is for them and the timeline is for them over the next couple of years. I did this preseason feature on Alex talking to it was sort of about the savers as well. It was this longer deep dive into them and talked to Kevin Adams, talk to Don Granato and you really get the feel that they're, and this is, you know, for the PDO cast, obviously an analytics driven show. This, this sounds hokey. It sounds, you know, just high in the sky, but like they are focused on fixing the culture. I mean, this team has the longest playoff throughout NHL history currently at 11, 11 seasons. And in the last nine seasons, they've been last place four times. And they've missed the playoffs by an average of 26 points a year. And it goes actually to 29 if you include the bubble playoffs when they just

technically missed the cut as whatever, the 27th team. So it's pretty wild. And they have zero cups in the history of their franchise. So there's a lot of sort of angst. There's a lot of sort of like tension. And so they're trying to sort of dispel that. That's part of this process. they're trying to move forward and more of a turn the page mentality. And Kevin Adams loves to use the word build versus rebuild. And it makes you roll your eyes. It's very sort of intangible focused. But I think it's actually like, I think it's fair.

It's like, okay, a lot of the players on the roster were not around for those previous 11 playoffless seasons. Obviously, some of them were around for a few of them. but if they look at it more from the lens of like Ikel's gone Reinhardt's gone we're moving on to this new stage and the slate is clean I think the idea of building something versus rebuilding it goes a long way

and I just I just there's something about the group that is lighter is young as we mentioned like the amount of guys 23 and younger is outrageous on this team and I think that it's almost like they have so many prospects and young NHLers that have high-end potential, that it's going to be hard for them to screw this up. Like, as bad as, or as sort of weird as that sounds for a franchise that has screwed up the rebuild

in the past. Yeah. They just have, they have a nice runway here. And there's no pressure. Obviously, they'd like to make the playoffs sooner than later, but I think they're going about it the right way in terms of the slow and steady.

And I think Don Granato is the right coach at this time. I think Kevin Adams has done some good work. So I'm pretty high on them long term. Like they feel like almost like a New Jersey Devils 2.0 in terms of like maybe they won't pop until two seasons from now. But when they pop, I mean, they're going to be a real force. That's kind of how I'm looking at them. Yeah, the breadcrumbs are there.

And I think there's a lot of reason to be excited. And what you mentioned there, I don't think is hokey. I don't know if that's going to surprise you or not. But I do like having players that want to be there and having better vibes and also like just a sense of professionalism with his organization. I think back to all the mistakes they've made over the years and one I keep going back to and it's kind of like a small one in the grand scheme of things. But like at the start of the pandemic, remember they like let go of everyone, which other other organizations did as well. But they like accidentally like fired their like head of IT or something and then like quickly panicked and we're like, oh man, like this guy probably has like a lot of like passwords and everything and they like hired them back. It's just like it's just stuff where it's like a professional organization should not be doing this and making these mistakes. And I think it's just like establishing that culture of like good things. And I think it's just like establishing that culture of like good. thoughtful decision making and having a plan and executing it is incredibly important. So I think that it's clearly they're on the right track.

And so I'm all for it. All right, John, we're going to take a quick break here. And then when we come back, we're going to keep chatting and answering listener questions. You are listening to the Hockey P.D.O. cast streaming on the Sports Night Radio Network. We're back here on the Hockeypedio guest with John Mattis. John, let's keep going through the listener questions. So Val Nachushkin and Joyer here, which is a great name asks, why don't the Panthers feel as dangerous this year?

Last year it seemed like no lead was safe against them and they could score at any moment. They didn't really seem to have that this year. I'm really curious your take on us because I've got a lot of thoughts on it. Sure. Well, I think on a high level, we can't discount the fact that they traded Huberto and Wigger for Kachuk. Just based on, you know, that's two players out the door that pushed the pace that were always going north. And then Kachuk, who's more of a, you know, grinded out down low kind of guy. effective, but I think just literally two for one, that has an effect. Marchment leaving,

again, another personnel thing, Drew leaving. These are two guys that would move the puck in the right direction, especially Marchman in terms of the way that he plays off the rush. So that's what jumped up to mind originally. Because I think last year, one of their major strengths was that they were a sort of a strength in numbers kind of team. Each line would push the pace. Each line would attack. It was very relentless, wave after wave.

And I feel like, you know, as a side note, watching the Panthers broadcast, they have that camera angle that's like really on the rink. It felt like they were going maybe faster than they were. There's something about that angle

that just like makes it look so intense and so, you know, like just fast. Yeah, close to the action. Yeah. Yeah, it's funny. It's funny that way. And I mean, like, we can't, we can't discount the fact that their coach changed. I mean, you went from Quenville and Brunette, who had a similar vibe to Paul Maurice, who has his faults. And I think also, just one last note before you jump in is, I think it's just also really difficult to repeat a historically good season as far as what this question is referring to being so incredibly dangerous. is night after night, coming back when you're down by two, three goals constantly, especially when their power play hasn't been clicking to the same degree.

Like, you have to go back and review the tape and review the box scores. But I imagine some of those comebacks were, you know, Bark Cobb and Hubert are working it on the power play to get them either back even or, you know, that one goal behind. And then the last point would just be like their goalies have been, this year, but they're certainly not stealing the show. And again, in this scenario where you've got odd man rush rush is going one way and then back the other way against your goalies, which was happening a lot with the Panthers. Like, you need stoppers. You need guys who are

going to fare well on those situations. And I wouldn't say that Prabowski and night, you know, had numbers that were off the charts last year. But this year, they're roughly around expected, a little below expected as far as say percentage and allowing goals. that they shouldn't or should. So that's what jumps off the page for me. Yeah, I think, well, some of the, some of the epic comebacks they authored last year where they were like down three, four, five goals. And then I remember the one game they played against the Devils last year where in

New Jersey, they just had like no business winning that game. And all of a sudden just came back out and over with a flurry. And those are cool in the moment. But like, even in today's goal scoring environment where there are more multi-goal comebacks. I just think relying on that as as like a big part of your resume is always risky. And I think that's a component of it. You mentioned the Paul Maurice factor. I don't want to get into a full thing because I could do a full show on that. But I for one, having followed the Winnipeg Jets over the past handful of years, can't say I'm totally surprised by the results. But here's

a thing. Natural Stattrick has them down for a higher rate or pretty much identical to last year where they were first in the league and everything. Shot attempts, shot on goals, shots on goals, sorry, high danger chances and expected goals generated. They're either the same or better in all of those than last year. Now, they're down to 13th

and actual goals scored because their shooting percentages dip from 11 to 8.8%. I'm skeptical on a lot of those generation numbers, not like the shots, like they're clearly generating a high volume of things. I think the way their personnel has changed,

was you mentioned. I think the way they've played it as a result as well has changed. And if you look at, you look a little closer, like Stephen Valcette sent me data from clear set analytics. They went from first in expected goals generated off the rush to 14th. They went from first in breakaways generated to 25th this year, right? Like they're clearly changed the way.

Now you send me some stuff from sport logic as well that you have access to. And I believe only the Bruins generated. more off the cycle in terms of chances than they do this season, which like they were good at that last year as well. But to me, I think that's, that was part of the logic beyond just the contract status and the age of the trade they made this offseason was they wanted to diversify their offensive approach and change the way they play. And Matthew Kachuk is one of the best players in the league at playing from below the goal line and creating as a playmaker from there. And so I think all of that makes sense. I can't say like it's, it's a bit disappointing because they were so fun last

year. So it's a bit disappointing in that regard. I think they're better than their results have shown so far this year. I think it's also okay because this was always going to be a bit of a bridge year for them in the grand scheme of things, at least functionally, right? Like, if you look, Patrick Orenkis, 5.3 million expires this at that after the season. They gain $5.3 million in cap savings with buyouts expiring for both, I believe, Scott Darling and Keith Yandel, right? I think it's going to be tough to do still. I imagine. imagine the moment they gave Spencer Knight the extension they did. They basically were like, we have to trade Sergey

Vibrovsky no matter the price this offseason, right? I know there's a lot of hoops to jump through to facilitate that, but you're not going to be paying $14.5 million to the goaltending position. Like that's just not going to happen, right? And so after they pay Bobrovsky's signing bonus this off season, I believe he's only old like $17 million in real cash over his final three seasons, which is not nothing, but much more manageable. It's going to cost them a lot to get out from that,

but I think there's going to be motivation to do so. And so the point I'm trying to make here is, like, I'm still actually encouraged because of what Matthew Kachuk has looked like in a Panthers uniform and what he's shown so far. I still think in the grand scheme of things, it was the right business decision and right hockey move. Now, unfortunately, they were always going to take a bit of a step back this year. like you look at how close to the cap they are right there's been nice where they have injuries

they just like can't dress a full lineup they have no wiggle room whatsoever they basically need everyone to be healthy at all times and as soon as someone drops off all of a sudden the depth chart is completely in shambles and so i think that's going to remedy itself a bit over time moving into the future and so i'm still encouraged by them but it's clearly disappointing that they're just not nearly as fun as they were last season yeah i think you hit the nail on the head with the transition year And wouldn't it be amazing to be on the wall with Bill Zito this summer? And, you know, whether he's talking to ownership or just with his internal team in the front office, trying to map out like.

So the playoffs, yeah, didn't go as planned. We had this amazing regular season, but we feel like we're missing a different element. And obviously, Kachuk accomplishes that. And then there's the goalie situation, as you highlighted, 14.5. That's just especially, I think Bill Zito is a pretty good GM. I think he's pretty smart. That's certainly not a long-term plan. Like especially with, as you mentioned, the signing bonus kicking in,

I think that's pretty telegraphed what they're going to do there. So I wonder if Zito went to management or sorry, went to ownership and was like, give me a year here where, you know, hopefully we'll make the playoffs. Hopefully we went around whatever. But I need a year to sort of transition into this Kachuk era. And we'll really take off in 23, 24. And I give him credit in terms of having the foresight or the balls for lack of a better term to take a President's trophy winning team that didn't do very well in the playoffs and go,

what can we fix on the fly here? Because there's a lot of teams that will double down. And that's fine. Like if you really believe in your process, double down. But there's also different ways to look at it where he clearly decided this is just not going to work in terms of. of our ultimate goal of winning a cup. So that, I find that really intriguing is sort of the Bill Zito angle of this, where he's working on this timeline that maybe aligns more with 23, 24.

Well, I think you're right. It's also a bit of an easier to sell when the specific events occur the way they did in the sense of they finally won their first postseason series in ages. And then immediately just get absolutely embarrassed by your in-state rival and show that you have no real options for, you know, adjusting to what they did to you. And so I think it's a much easier sell of like, all right, well, we've seen sort of the limit of what we can do here. I think we should pivot here, especially with the contract status of Hubert O.

and Weger pending as well, not to mention a player of Matthew Kuchuk's caliber becoming available and, you know, including you as one of his three or four handpicked destinations that he wants to go to. I think like everything kind of was like a perfect storm to allow that to happen. But you're right. like it would have been I think much easier to basically just bury your head in the sand and be like all right let's plow ahead and try to do it again next year with the same group and I don't I still think even if they had done that they probably would not have had the same season they had last year because unfortunately hockey just doesn't work that way well and clearly the coaching change has something to do with all this as far as the ultimate plan they could easily gone with Andrew Burnett like the guy had a phenomenal success after Joel Quinvo left and he was never considered that, you know, the second coming or, you know, sort of second in line there immediately. He's a relatively new NHL head, or NHL coach in general. So for them to pivot away

from him, and I understand why he would do that, especially after how the playoffs panned out, as you said, with the lack of tactical changes. But it's still, it's still notable, but they, they went out and found this guy who's been in the league, Paul Maurice, for, I don't know, since the early 90s. Like, he's been the most employed coach, basically. for the past three, three decades or so. And, you know, you can criticize that move all you want, and you know, you and I probably would. But it's also clearly part of the master plan where Zito's got his eye on a different

playing style, a different brand of Panthers hockey. Yeah, I can scrub the word probably from that. I think I definitely, definitely will. All right. Let's end with this. Alex Dotson asks, what do you make of the Bruins commitment to a timeshare when both goalies are healthy? Allmark,

Almark shined when given the full workload, but they're back to a 50-50 split roughly with Swab and Healthy. Obviously, both are solid, wondering why Allmark isn't the clear number one. I think it's interesting to approach this question, both from the Bruins perspective, in terms of like their current playing environment

and how they're using the guys and also from a league perspective, right? Because I think right now you look and I believe at last check, like UCC, Soros is pacing to be the league leader in games played for goalies and it's like 64 games or something like then you got like Shasturkin in a hellabuck at like 61, 62 like obviously long gone are the days of 70 plus you're not going to see that. I think Allmark right. Almark right now is on pace for 56 or sorry yeah like 53 games so far this year. I think that's pretty much ideally

where I'd want my starting goalie to be at. So I really don't think it's it's much of an issue. but clearly when you're 191 and 1, right? Like as a Bruins train, you're probably like wondering why you're not just playing this guy every single night. I do think it's pretty logical, though. Yeah, I had the same thought process when I saw that question. And part of the, actually, the first thing that came in my head was like, you know, your team's doing well when?

Yeah. This is your biggest. Yeah. 27, four and three when both goalies, like, it's not like Swainman's played poorly and he had an injury. Like, his numbers are going to be worse just based on the lack of playing. time and then recovering from that injury. So the fact that Swayman, who's actually the up and come, or like sort of, I realize they signed Allmark as a free agent, but like Swainman's got a really high pedigree, real high ceiling there potentially. So I think it makes sense to to keep playing

it as not necessarily 50-50, but 64 to be because let's face it. I mean, you want Allmark to be in tip-top shape for the playoffs. And then you also want Swayman to be ready in case things go down the tube with Allmark. I mean, And I think best case scenario in the modern NHL is you have two goalies that are ready, that are trustworthy to play in the playoffs. Because we've seen, you know, whether there was an avalanche a few years ago getting down to Hutchison and that really tanking their cup chances or other teams over the years. I mean, it's weird things happen. It could be like, who was it? Saros got injured.

Was it last year? Yeah, of course. Yeah. Right before the playoffs. David, I can and Connor Ingram played. Yeah. Yeah, Nashville is screwed. So I think keeping them both warm, getting them reps, I think it makes a ton of sense.

It's not like Swayman is this, you know, journeyman or this, you know, backup that has never shown any great potential. Like, he's got the potential. I think you ride Allmark a little bit more, but I think it makes sense. And within the context of how goalie workloads have splintered, if you will, over the last five to ten years, I think it makes a ton of sense, sports science-wise, etc. So, I mean, it's really, like, the Bruins, it's really something. I think it's almost like gone underrated how amazing their season has been, losing four games in their first, or four regulation games, I should say, in their first 30-some-odd games.

Well, like, that's wild. Here's the thing. So Allmark's been playing pro hockey for, like, about a decade now, maybe even more. The 41 games he played last year was the only time he's ever played 40 plus the NHL. He played 56 games. in the AHL and NHL combined in 2016-17. That's the only time he's ever passed 50. So I said he's on pace for 53 starts this year.

I think that's fine. And even if he hits that, that'll, you know, that's going to represent a new high in a workload for him. And so I think that's one thing. I think the other thing is it doesn't really matter. Like, Swabin's good. He's a net positive and goals able to expect that he's around league average and say percentage. It's a defensive environment.

Like you or I could step in and be league average, I think, honestly. Like, I know that's not to diminish what they're doing, but they're giving up the fourth few as high danger chances, fifth few of shots, second few has expected goals against. Like, it's, it's clinical.

And so it's, it's, Allmark's been really good, but like, come on. It's a pretty, it's a pretty sweet spot to be in. And so I think it totally makes sense for them to be rotating them,

have a bigger picture in mind of being fresh for the playoffs. And if anything, they should be playing Allmark class, in my opinion. Sure. Yeah, I actually recently did just a bit of a short, Fezna breakdown.

And like, I wanted to give Allmark, all the praises in the world, but that defensive environment is incredible, especially compared to, say, what's going on on the island or Winnipeg. I realize that, you know, neither of those are the worst in the league. But by comparison, I was like, look what Halbuk's doing. Look what Sorokin's doing. And it's no, like, it's hard because you don't want to disc credit what Allmark's done. And even though wins are our team stat, like the guy is still won 19 games. Yeah, he's 191 and 1. It's pretty ridiculous. The thing with goalie wins,

is on one hand, team staff. And goalies are part of the team. So it's like you can't give it no value. But you can't just be around like, oh, he had the most wins. Just give him the Vezna. That's ridiculous. But like would the Bruins be where they're at without at least league average goal. Goaltending?

No, I don't think so. So like the goalies have carried their fair share and the environment's really nice. So the Bruins have something pretty special going on. Yeah. Yeah. I'm with you on that. All right, John, this is a blast. We got to some fun stuff.

Hopefully, hopefully you had a blast as well. Hopefully the listeners enjoyed it. I love all these questions they keep sending in. So we're going to keep doing these mailbags. I'll let you quickly plug some stuff before we get out of here, let people know where they can check out your work and what you're cooking up. Because I know you've also been a bit quiet here during the holidays deservedly.

So what do you got on the agenda? Yeah. So, well, first of all, it was great to see your listeners come through with all those questions. I've never done a mailbag episode with you, and they just came in hot and heavy, and it's, you know, Wednesday morning and between Christmas and New Year's. So, well done. A lot of Devils fans in there, too. Maybe next time we'll get to the Devils. Yes.

So props to them. And then also, thanks for having me on. And as for what I'm up to, I mean, as we mentioned earlier, doing something on Jack Quinn, kind of deep diving him, his background, his personality. and what he does on the ice most, most crucially, working on some other projects and doing something on Matt Boldie soon, one of your favorites. Yes, nice. And yeah, it'll be a busy month in terms of publishing from my end.

So follow me on Twitter. It's M-A-T-I-S-E-S-E-O-H-N, Mattis-John, my last name, my first name. And that's probably where you can find my work. So, again, appreciate it, Demetriene. Nice to catch up here. I love that. Oh, when you put the boldy piece, I will have you back on and we'll deep dive it

because I'll always look for any excuse to chat about that guy. This is a blast, man. If the listeners enjoyed it, they can help us out by smashing that five-star button wherever they listen to the show. And we will be back tomorrow with more of the HockeyPedio cast here on the Sports Night Radio Network.