Speculation: Acq./Rost. Bldg./Cap/Lines etc. Part LXXVIII (It's Working! Let's Fix It.)

[Langway]

It's quit the head scratcher to suggest a one goal series couldn't have gone either way. I guess I don't understand that logic.

Either way means 50/50. I don't think that was quite a 50/50 series.

By their own admission they lacked motivation down the stretch and it showed. They were a tight team, mostly playing flat and holding on to the just enough mentality. The possession numbers don't even really enter into it for me. It was more their crispness and passing. For me that's the bellwether...always has been. Their structure and discipline can keep games close but if they're going to have the juice to punch through it's their poise, crispness and passing that will make the difference. We've seen that lately and they'll need to continue to refine those areas (along with trying for more dirty goals as well).

 

[BobRouse]

the shooting percentage going in the tank every playoffs is not being snake bit. Its the weight of carrying the Caps playoff rep on their backs. Being snake bit v Montreal I could buy that. One time. Everytime is another story.

They all know about it. You can bet that Orpik and Williams in particular heard from their hockey friends about it when they signed their contracts and hadn't played a game yet.

While I think that is a small factor I do not agree with this. By 1990 the Caps were known as chokers where the same thing was said...they couldn't score in the playoffs/had weak goaltending.

But they did just fine that year shooting wise and it was only a series of significant injuries that stopped them.

By 98 they had solidified their choker rep (having lost in 92 to Pens and 93 to Isles in series they should have won among others)...it didn't go in the tank then.

If what you say is true then the 90 and 98 teams should not have done well.

 

[g00n]

While I think that is a small factor I do not agree with this. By 1990 the Caps were known as chokers where the same thing was said...they couldn't score in the playoffs/had weak goaltending.

But they did just fine that year shooting wise and it was only a series of significant injuries that stopped them.

By 98 they had solidified their choker rep (having lost in 92 to Pens and 93 to Isles in series they should have won among others)...it didn't go in the tank then.

If what you say is true then the 90 and 98 teams should not have done well.

IMO there's a bit of connection to the long-term history but this group probably sees itself as the Ovie era team that has its own history of choking in the playoffs. They came in to the hype of Gmgm and Ted's master rebuild plan with an eye toward some kind of dynasty on the backs of the Young Guns. There's been a lot of expectation for the last decade or so and they haven't produced. THAT is what weighs the most now, especially as Ovie gets older and coach after coach falls away.

 

[CapitalsCupReality]

Their play clearly degraded and their motivational issues lands squarely on the core leaders and the coach IMO.

It's not like we were living on lucky bounces against the Pens. In fact one or two lucky bounces our way and it's a different series. Carrying the play by a small margin doesn't always guarantee success. To say the series could have gone either way is NOT saying they played the Pens evenly. They were outplayed by a decent amount and still barely lost a 1G series. Guys needed to step up just a bit and they didn't. When was the last time we could call a Caps team "clutch", 98?

 

[BobRouse]

IMO there's a bit of connection to the long-term history but this group probably sees itself as the Ovie era team that has its own history of choking in the playoffs. They came in to the hype of Gmgm and Ted's master rebuild plan with an eye toward some kind of dynasty on the backs of the Young Guns. There's been a lot of expectation for the last decade or so and they haven't produced. THAT is what weighs the most now, especially as Ovie gets older and coach after coach falls away.

What I'm saying is that it was WORSE for the 90 team and the 98 team. The 90 team was basically the same team that lost in soul crushing fashion to an inferior Flyer's team the year before. It didn't seem to affect them as much.

The 98 team (Kolzig/Oates/Kono/Witt/Gonchar) had just 1 playoff series victory under their belts in 94 and far more soul crushing failures (4OT loss to Pitt a couple years before)

Those teams should have been burdened just as much no?

There were ALOT of expectations around those 80s teams with multiple Hall of Famers in their primes. This team has Ovechkin true..but what other sure fire HoFers?

The 80s teams had Langway, Stevens, Murphy, Gartner/Dino and guys who were not far off like Hunter.

Its easy to forget since we are so far removed. Back then there wasn't nearly as much parity either yet we still found ways to lose 7 game series to Kelly Hrudey making 72 saves on 74 shots in quadrouple OT

 

[Langway]

IMO there's a bit of connection to the long-term history but this group probably sees itself as the Ovie era team that has its own history of choking in the playoffs. They came in to the hype of Gmgm and Ted's master rebuild plan with an eye toward some kind of dynasty on the backs of the Young Guns. There's been a lot of expectation for the last decade or so and they haven't produced. THAT is what weighs the most now, especially as Ovie gets older and coach after coach falls away.

I very much agree with this. Organizational history is a footnote but it's not living history per se. It's not something that weighs on them because they didn't live it. No one is around to answer for what happened to those other teams. Whereas the living history of the past nine years remains a big part of this team's pulse. It should be what motivates them and puts a chip on their shoulder rather than weigh them down. If it weighs them down when it matters that's perhaps the only sign you need to go with a fundamentally different mix. Teams just run their course and, in addition to sheer declining performance, this is a significant part of it as well IMO.

They're going to have to change the mix this summer regardless but I'd tend to be less cautious about it should the same old script be acted out. I'm not sure I totally believe Friedman's flat cap suggestion but if he's right it's going to put even more pressure on MacLellan and perhaps force even more difficult decisions.

 

[hockeykicker]

 

[txpd]

The 98 team was an also ran team that had little to no expectations of any kind of a playoff run.

You have got to consider the impact that the team's playoff history and the full part of that history that the Ovechkin era teams have earned.

No sooner than the Caps get a lead in a playoff series and the media starts asking the players and the coaches about it. For two seasons Trotz blows it off and it repeats.
Not only do the Capitals have to face it, but you cant limit the impact on the opposition. They know that if they can land a punch they have a chance to tighten the Caps up. They don't get beaten down.

 

[bur and 666 others]

Kuznetsov named nhl first star of the month

it's puzzling me why they named him the first star while marchand who has the same amount of points in less games, but more goals is the second

 

[twabby]

it's puzzling me why they named him the first star while marchand who has the same amount of points in less games, but more goals is the second

Because wins

 

[txpd]

it's puzzling me why they named him the first star while marchand who has the same amount of points in less games, but more goals is the second

Dirty leg whip maybe?

 

[Calicaps]

Because wins

This.

 

[RandyHolt]

Good posts Langway. Our play was sloppy lazy and listless for months, and it continued into the post season. Posters say we almost beat the pens... but then didn't we almost lose to the Flyers? They barely even made the playoffs. Our play this last loff sucked. I contend if it weren't for a 50% PP rate vs Philly, a Simmonds penalty, Philly slow to yank it's leaky ass G, we may not have even beaten them.

If we lost game 5 vs Pitt, would then we have been schooled? The series was lost early in game 6. I think its funny how some get bent over a word for which there is no clear definition. To think a series was close because we didn't get one or 2 bounces go our way.... that is the way playoff series are won and lost. It is the modern game.

"They were outplayed by a decent amount" - it's nice to hear someone else admit it. I contend it wasn't just we were outplayed, our system was inferior. Proof positive is that Barry set out to change it.

 

[Corby78]

So nice to see, considering we were getting zero offense from the blueline early this year.

Niskanen (4/24/28)
Carlson (5/20/25)
Orlov (2/22/26)

 

[RandyHolt]

Dont forget about Schmidt. It's not as noticeable but before this year was a career .19 pts/game, this year is at .30.

I think seeing the norrisesque play of our defensemen is proof positive of major changes. There was a game or 2 where it looked like Bruce tried to employ the Finnish 5 interchangeable parts offense, but I cannot recall ever seeing Caps defensemen used this way over such a large period of time.

DMen aggressively partaking in offense causes chaos. I wish advanced stats could track it. Instead of last years - Dmen very aggressively risk stepping up in center vs the rush (note: generating no offense, and allowing odd mans instead) our D are very aggressive in the O zone instead. All allowed to act as forwards on the rush, and long after.

Quite frankly, Barry's offense had gotten very boring to watch. If it won us a cup, that is one thing, but it failed him again last year, and it has failed him his entire career. I thought you couldn't teach an old hockdog new tricks. Obviously that Pitt loss opened up a lot of eyes. Way to go Barry, I didn't think he had it in him to change his stripes like this.

 

[BobRouse]

I have a love hate relationship with Schmidt. At times he is awe inspiring in how he lugs the puck.

Other times he is a turnover machine in our own zone.

I have to temper that and remind myself that he is still just a whelp in defensemen terms and this really is the first year where he doesn't have to look over his back and be taken out of the lineup when he has a bad game.

I like that we have 4 D that can generate excellent offense especially when we are trailing.

 

[hockeykicker]

Guess they doing something right

 

[g00n]

Great system.

 

[twabby]

I wonder how much Holtby would be paid on the open market if he were a UFA after this season. My guess would be like $9 million for many years.

Glad he decided to become a Vezina winner after he signed his contract in Washington.

 

[PB12]

So the 4th period trade deadline top 25 came out today. They are saying we could be interested in the following
Hanzal
Vanek
Vrbata
Doan

http://www.thefourthperiod.com/trade_deadline/top25/index.html

 

[twabby]

Pass on Hanzal and Doan. I'd kick the tires on Vanek and Vrbata.

 

[BobRouse]

So the 4th period trade deadline top 25 came out today. They are saying we could be interested in the following
Hanzal
Vanek
Vrbata
Doan

http://www.thefourthperiod.com/trade_deadline/top25/index.html

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/capitals-insider/wp/2017/02/01/what-will-the-capitals-do-at-the-trade-deadline-in-a-month-perhaps-nothing/?utm_term=.ba3a8fa6ae2c

“We get guys at the trade deadline every year, and it takes guys a while to assimilate to your team and your culture,†Capitals Coach Barry Trotz said. “It really became clear to me just looking at Lars Eller. We got him in the summer. We made that sort of trade in the summer, which we probably had done other years at the trade deadline. The first 20 games, probably he would say he wasn’t as good as he could be. Now, you watch him, and it’s totally different. So, maybe our trade deadline, we learned something from that. Maybe you don’t have to tinker as much because you can get stuff done in the summer.â€


“Earlier in the season, we wanted to look at our depth in our whole organization,†Trotz said. “I pulled some guys out, and I got a really good feel for where we are organizationally. It really is a benefit to us going into the trade deadline knowing our depth, not trying to guess at our depth. We were able to leave a little bit of flexibility if we need to add something at the end of the year.â€

“You see so many guys that are traded for pretty high picks and have very minimal impact,†Trotz said.

 

[Langway]

Barberio claimed by Colorado at the top of the claim list.

I wouldn't doubt them looking at someone like Rob Scuderi or someone else that hits waivers closer to the deadline. Scuderi already cleared so he could play in Hershey until needed, mentor there and serve as the #8 unless his play isn't cutting it. It's along the lines of the Gleason/Weber pickups anyway. Zbynek Michalek is another option that's already cleared (though ARI would need to retain some salary). Reirden coached both in PIT.

Limited supply and high demand should shoot up prices for the likes of Shattenkirk, Kulikov and Franson and they don't need anyone of that ability. Stone, Streit and Oduya may move and provide better value but could still be too costly. Maybe Quincey? Tyutin on the cheap? I like Smith/DET if available so there are some depth options provided those teams sell but we'll see. It'd be better to add someone that could stick around beyond this season given potential for turnover...even if they may be a reserve initially. I think that's where they're headed. At least outwardly they seem pretty content up front.

 

[trick9]

So the 4th period trade deadline top 25 came out today. They are saying we could be interested in the following
Hanzal
Vanek
Vrbata
Doan

http://www.thefourthperiod.com/trade_deadline/top25/index.html

Alec Martinez would have been a really good addition atleast before this season, assuming he'd actually be available. I haven't really watched the Kings so far this season but by stat watching seems like he's been given more minutes (even more than Muzzin) but he's been bleeding goals against. Maybe someone who has seen him more has an better opinion.

Always striked to me as a guy who was very reliable and a very good puck-moving D for the Kings. Was very good in some of their Cup runs too. Propably not at his best playing against top lines but very good option to have on the middle-pairing. Reminds me of Niskanen from his days in Dallas.

 

[Little Psycho]

Alec Martinez would have been a really good addition atleast before this season, assuming he'd actually be available. I haven't really watched the Kings so far this season but by stat watching seems like he's been given more minutes (even more than Muzzin) but he's been bleeding goals against. Maybe someone who has seen him more has an better opinion.

Always striked to me as a guy who was very reliable and a very good puck-moving D for the Kings. Was very good in some of their Cup runs too. Propably not at his best playing against top lines but very good option to have on the middle-pairing. Reminds me of Niskanen from his days in Dallas.

Kings fan here. Sutter had Muzzin and Matinez paired together for most of this season, and has recently broke it up pairing Muzzin and Doughty together cos Muzzin is having a difficult year and has been terrible defensively. Don't know why it took so long to break them up, but Muzzin and Martinez (who is still playing on his off wing) just don't work together. At a point we would place bets on how many goals those two would be on the ice for. Martinez is our most offensive defensman, he's one of the top in points in OT. I don't know if Dean would be willing to trade him, but then again we have 5 left hand defensmen and 1 right. Who knows.