Around the NHL 2022-2023 *Mod warning in effect pg145

[ChicagoBlues]

Perron's PPG today was the exact same type of PPG he'd score with the Blues.

 

[Frenzy31]

Perron was excellent on the PP. But our PP seems to continue to go. Just a little worried about 5v5.

 

[ChicagoBlues]

Perron was excellent on the PP. But our PP seems to continue to go. Just a little worried about 5v5.

7 of our 11 goals are at ES aren’t they? 1 of those was 3 on 3.

2 PPG and 2 ENG

That’s not alarming, yet.

 

[BlueDream]

7 of our 11 goals are at ES aren’t they? 1 of those was 3 on 3.

2 PPG and 2 ENG

That’s not alarming, yet.

Correct. There’s nothing to be worried about at all.

 

[Brian39]

Since 2000, 5 times a team has won Cup within 5 years after losing in the SCF. Only twice during that same period has a team won a Cup within 5 years of having 1st overall pick. So it certainly does seem that making long playoff run and falling short is better path towards winning a Cup than being crappy and getting top pick is.

Edit: I should have finished reading the thread before commenting. @oPlaiD made basically the exact same post as me but days earlier.

Tanking is far from a guarantee of success, but I don't think that 'did you win a Cup within 5 years' is a useful criteria for analyzing that point. I also don't think that analyzing only the teams who got the 1st overall pick is all that useful. Tanking isn't just about getting the #1 overall. It is about getting one (or more) top picks in the hope of acquiring a couple building blocks to build around for 10-15 years.

A successful 1st overall pick helps your franchise for way longer than 5 years. The 1st overall gives you an opportunity to get a guy who should play (at worst) 7 years for your franchise. Assuming you can lock them into even a single long-term deal you are talking about 10+ years. The Pens got three Cups out of the Crosby-led core of top draft picks but only one of those three Cups counts for your criteria. Same thing with the Hawks.

The Avs had their own 1st overall and 4th overall picks leading the way to their Cup win (MacKinnon and Makar). They had no chance of getting guys of that caliber without being basement dwellers.

Tampa had their own 1st overall and 2nd overall picks for their Cup wins. They have a hell of a lot of other talent, but Hedman is the backbone of that group and Stamkos was a stud in that 2nd Cup win.

We didn't have a 1st overall pick on the roster, but we did have Petro leading the team in ice time as our former 4th overall pick.

The Caps had their 1st and 4th overall picks leading the way (Ovi and Backstrom). They were from a decade-old tank, but that was the core that they built around.

The Pens had the Sid/Malkin duo still leading the way for all 3 Cups.

The Hawks had the Kane/Toewes duo leading the way for all 3 Cups.

The Kings didn't have a 1st overall, but Doughty was a 2nd overall pick and was a monster on both runs. They also used a 5th overall and a 7th to acquire Carter and Richards.

The Bruins had a 2nd overall on the roster (Seguin), but he was very much a passenger on their Cup run so I think it is fair to count them in the 'didn't need to tank' group.

The Red Wings won their Cups with an elite core drafted late and then a bunch of Hall of Famers that were purchased largely before the salary cap made that strategy impossible.

The Ducks didn't have a tank-led group.

The Hurricanes had a 2nd overall pick in Eric Staal leading the way in 2005.

Having elite draft talent was less of a necessity pre-salary-cap and just after the existence of a cap. The Pens were the first tank-core team to win the Cup in 2009 and since then it has very clearly been the model. The Bruins in 2011 and our team in 2019 are the only teams in the last 14 years that didn't rely on at least one of their own top 2 picks as a foundational piece of the Cup team.

 

[Bye Bye Blueston]

Edit: I should have finished reading the thread before commenting. @oPlaiD made basically the exact same post as me but days earlier.

Tanking is far from a guarantee of success, but I don't think that 'did you win a Cup within 5 years' is a useful criteria for analyzing that point. I also don't think that analyzing only the teams who got the 1st overall pick is all that useful. Tanking isn't just about getting the #1 overall. It is about getting one (or more) top picks in the hope of acquiring a couple building blocks to build around for 10-15 years.

A successful 1st overall pick helps your franchise for way longer than 5 years. The 1st overall gives you an opportunity to get a guy who should play (at worst) 7 years for your franchise. Assuming you can lock them into even a single long-term deal you are talking about 10+ years. The Pens got three Cups out of the Crosby-led core of top draft picks but only one of those three Cups counts for your criteria. Same thing with the Hawks.

The Avs had their own 1st overall and 4th overall picks leading the way to their Cup win (MacKinnon and Makar). They had no chance of getting guys of that caliber without being basement dwellers.

Tampa had their own 1st overall and 2nd overall picks for their Cup wins. They have a hell of a lot of other talent, but Hedman is the backbone of that group and Stamkos was a stud in that 2nd Cup win.

We didn't have a 1st overall pick on the roster, but we did have Petro leading the team in ice time as our former 4th overall pick.

The Caps had their 1st and 4th overall picks leading the way (Ovi and Backstrom). They were from a decade-old tank, but that was the core that they built around.

The Pens had the Sid/Malkin duo still leading the way for all 3 Cups.

The Hawks had the Kane/Toewes duo leading the way for all 3 Cups.

The Kings didn't have a 1st overall, but Doughty was a 2nd overall pick and was a monster on both runs. They also used a 5th overall and a 7th to acquire Carter and Richards.

The Bruins had a 2nd overall on the roster (Seguin), but he was very much a passenger on their Cup run so I think it is fair to count them in the 'didn't need to tank' group.

The Red Wings won their Cups with an elite core drafted late and then a bunch of Hall of Famers that were purchased largely before the salary cap made that strategy impossible.

The Ducks didn't have a tank-led group.

The Hurricanes had a 2nd overall pick in Eric Staal leading the way in 2005.

Having elite draft talent was less of a necessity pre-salary-cap and just after the existence of a cap. The Pens were the first tank-core team to win the Cup in 2009 and since then it has very clearly been the model. The Bruins in 2011 and our team in 2019 are the only teams in the last 14 years that didn't rely on at least one of their own top 2 picks as a foundational piece of the Cup team.

Maybe I wasn't clear. I'm not suggesting that teams can win without top talent. You obviously need talent to win. But fanbases always have this debate, should we make move to improve team to try to win or should we blow it all up. Blues are one of top teams in league and some folks on here think we should blow it up. That makes no sense.

My point is twofold: one, that if you have a good team you should try to win. two, I used 5-year window intentionally because as you point out, if you tank and rebuild it could take a looonnnnngggggggg time before it pays off. Who wants that? It's no fun to watch team lose for a decade. Unless you are bad, or mediocre and old and clearly going nowhere, I think winning is better path to winning in near term and the data seems to bear that out.

 

[Brian39]

I'm very happy to see Chicago sitting at 3-2 at the moment. I don't think they will hang around in the playoff race all that long, so I want to see them bank points and reduce their chances at a top 3 pick. I think Arizona and San Jose are as bad as their current records suggest, so I like seeing them already sporting decent cushions on Chicago for the race to the bottom. Arizona is already 4 points back of the Hawks and San Jose is an impressive 2 points back of the Hawks despite playing 3 extra games. I think those are the only 3 management groups that actively want their teams to lose right now, so hopefully Chicago can continue failing to do so for a while.

I feel bad for Vancouver fans. Their season is already on the brink and they don't exactly have an easy schedule this week. Carolina tonight, on the road against Seattle on Thursday and then at home again against the Penguins on Friday. That crowd is (rightfully) on a hair trigger right now and both teams they play at home have the ability to score in bunches. Seattle isn't a great team, but the Canucks are the closest thing they have to a rival and they probably recognize the fanbase-building-value to kicking them when they are down. They are better than the results they've gotten so far, but they already look broken and none of their 3 games this week have the look of an 'easy' get right game. They absolutely need to go at least 1-1-1.

Colorado isn't looking like last year's dominant group, but I wouldn't quite call them a 1 line team when healthy. They are going to have to tread water as a 1 line team (that has an elite D group) for a few months. But they will get Landeskog back and I will be very surprised if they don't add a legit top 6 player at the deadline. With that said, I do think there is a difference between last year's slow start and this year's. Kuemper was mediocre to start the year last year and then rounded into .920 goaltending for the rest of the year. I'm much less confident in their current tandem's ability to do that.

I think Dallas is legit. Oettinger obviously isn't going to be a a .959 goalie all year, but they look better than last year's group in front of him. We're really early, but the Central is shaping up to be fun this year. I think the top spot is legitimately up for grabs with Landeskog being out for 3+ months.

Calgary looks good. I wouldn't have guessed that they would be 4-1 with Markstrom sporting an .882 in 4 starts.

 

[Brian39]

Maybe I wasn't clear. I'm not suggesting that teams can win without top talent. You obviously need talent to win. But fanbases always have this debate, should we make move to improve team to try to win or should we blow it all up. Blues are one of top teams in league and some folks on here think we should blow it up. That makes no sense.

My point is twofold: one, that if you have a good team you should try to win. two, I used 5-year window intentionally because as you point out, if you tank and rebuild it could take a looonnnnngggggggg time before it pays off. Who wants that? It's no fun to watch team lose for a decade. Unless you are bad, or mediocre and old and clearly going nowhere, I think winning is better path to winning in near term and the data seems to bear that out.

Agreed. I'm very much against the idea of tanking right now. The West is too wide-open for me to throw the towel in with this current group.

To be fair, I think most (if not all) the people on this board are also against a legit tank. Most of the 'we should sell' voices on here have been talking about a 2016/17-2017/18 style retool instead of a full-blown tear down.

 

[Bye Bye Blueston]

Agreed. I'm very much against the idea of tanking right now. The West is too wide-open for me to throw the towel in with this current group.

To be fair, I think most (if not all) the people on this board are also against a legit tank. Most of the 'we should sell' voices on here have been talking about a 2016/17-2017/18 style retool instead of a full-blown tear down.

Not only shouldn’t we sell, I think we should go for it. We have ability to be best in west and beyond that who knows. Next year will likely be step back. Who knows when we will be as good as this year again. If there is player that can help us get over the top, this is year to do it.

 

[PocketNines]

Dallas has the dangerous defense-goalie combo that can knock a team out if they get timely scoring. But their offense is not great, and Seguin and Benn are missing that ROR/MacKinnon gene.

I don't think Colorado has the goaltending even when they add top 6 scoring at the deadline.

It would be great to stay healthy, win the division and see Dallas meet Colorado in round 1 while the Blues play LA/Nashville wild card.

 

[Brian39]

Not only shouldn’t we sell, I think we should go for it. We have ability to be best in west and beyond that who knows. Next year will likely be step back. Who knows when we will be as good as this year again. If there is player that can help us get over the top, this is year to do it.

I'm not ready to add just yet.

I want to see a larger sample size from the top 4. Leddy has been great as a Blue, but it has been just 32 total games when you include the playoffs. We've got him playing 23 minutes a night and he hasn't averaged above 22 a night in 5 years.

I also want to see whether Neighbours can force his way into consistent 3rd line usage as a genuine contributor. He's clearly working his ass off to stick around and he does a lot to endear himself to teammates/coaches.

If we need a substantial upgrade, it is likely at the expense of one of these guys. ROR, Buch, Tarasenko, Saad, Kyrou, Thomas, Schenn and Barbie probably aren't getting bumped out of the top 9. Krug-Faulk has proven to be an excellent 2nd pair with the usage Berube gives them, so any top 4 upgrade would only be truly needed if Leddy falters.

For now, I just want to see how the next 2-3 months plays out and then I'll react to that. I don't want to add a guy just to add a guy. But at the moment, I'm leaning more toward adding than anything else. I like what I've seen from the Blues so far this year.

 

[Bye Bye Blueston]

I'm not ready to add just yet.

I want to see a larger sample size from the top 4. Leddy has been great as a Blue, but it has been just 32 total games when you include the playoffs. We've got him playing 23 minutes a night and he hasn't averaged above 22 a night in 5 years.

I also want to see whether Neighbours can force his way into consistent 3rd line usage as a genuine contributor. He's clearly working his ass off to stick around and he does a lot to endear himself to teammates/coaches.

If we need a substantial upgrade, it is likely at the expense of one of these guys. ROR, Buch, Tarasenko, Saad, Kyrou, Thomas, Schenn and Barbie probably aren't getting bumped out of the top 9. Krug-Faulk has proven to be an excellent 2nd pair with the usage Berube gives them, so any top 4 upgrade would only be truly needed if Leddy falters.

For now, I just want to see how the next 2-3 months plays out and then I'll react to that. I don't want to add a guy just to add a guy. But at the moment, I'm leaning more toward adding than anything else. I like what I've seen from the Blues so far this year.

I think next few months will answer lot of questions as to what to add, but unless Marco is coming back full strength definitely need another d for 3rd pairing at minimum.

 

[Brian39]

I think next few months will answer lot of questions as to what to add, but unless Marco is coming back full strength definitely need another d for 3rd pairing at minimum.

If I had to make the decision now I'd agree.

However, I'm willing to give Mikkola an extended chance to lock down the #5 role and I'm willing to give Bortz a chance to round back into form as a competent #6 guy. At the end of the day, Mikkola is currently a +2 and Bortz is currently even. If they are still hovering in that space after 30+ games, then it will be hard to say that they aren't good enough to be a sheltered 3rd pair.

Ultimately, I think you are correct that we will be looking to acquire a #4/5 type of player at the deadline as our rental upgrade. But I'm willing to keep my mind open to those two changing my mind.

 

[Bye Bye Blueston]

If I had to make the decision now I'd agree.

However, I'm willing to give Mikkola an extended chance to lock down the #5 role and I'm willing to give Bortz a chance to round back into form as a competent #6 guy. At the end of the day, Mikkola is currently a +2 and Bortz is currently even. If they are still hovering in that space after 30+ games, then it will be hard to say that they aren't good enough to be a sheltered 3rd pair.

Ultimately, I think you are correct that we will be looking to acquire a #4/5 type of player at the deadline as our rental upgrade. But I'm willing to keep my mind open to those two changing my mind.

I'm willing to believe that Miko can handle his role, but Borts ain't getting any younger. He looks a bit worse every year. Ideally he is our 7th and plays sporadically. I don't think him playing well for a few weeks changes that.

 

[ChicagoBlues]

I agree with waiting 2-3 months and see how it all shakes out. I don’t see ROR and Kyrou gelling, but maybe they can.

 

[Brian39]

I'm willing to believe that Miko can handle his role, but Borts ain't getting any younger. He looks a bit worse every year. Ideally he is our 7th and plays sporadically. I don't think him playing well for a few weeks changes that.

I think he was a perfectly fine #6 last year. He was an above average penalty killer all season and that continued into the playoffs. The wheels will come off eventually, but if he plays like a 3rd pairing guy over the next couple months then I don't think it would be fair to say that he just had a few weeks of plays as a competent #6. He's absolutely clinging onto that role/job, but I don't think he's lost his grip yet.

We could certainly upgrade over him, but if he is looking on par with last season by the midway point (big if) then I wouldn't want to spend more than a 3rd to do it. If he looks the way he's looked so far, then I think you explore the possibility of packaging next year's 2nd to try and get a legit #4/5 caliber guy.

 

[Bye Bye Blueston]

I think he was a perfectly fine #6 last year. He was an above average penalty killer all season and that continued into the playoffs. The wheels will come off eventually, but if he plays like a 3rd pairing guy over the next couple months then I don't think it would be fair to say that he just had a few weeks of plays as a competent #6. He's absolutely clinging onto that role/job, but I don't think he's lost his grip yet.

We could certainly upgrade over him, but if he is looking on par with last season by the midway point (big if) then I wouldn't want to spend more than a 3rd to do it. If he looks the way he's looked so far, then I think you explore the possibility of packaging next year's 2nd to try and get a legit #4/5 caliber guy.

I think that is exactly what you want. Someone better than Miko so Miko becomes #6. And someone that can fill in top 4 capably if someone gets hurt. Gavrikov or Soucy or Orlov if Caps slip, someone like that.

 

[Brian39]

I think that is exactly what you want. Someone better than Miko so Miko becomes #6. And someone that can fill in top 4 capably if someone gets hurt. Gavrikov or Soucy or Orlov if Caps slip, someone like that.

I think those teams will all be striving for the 1st+good prospect package for those players and will likely end up getting either the 1st or a good prospect in the eventual package. If (and again, big if) Bortz and Mikko are a genuinely competent 3rd pair, I'm not interested in paying that kind of price to upgrade a pair that you only want playing 12-15 minutes a night in the playoffs.

 

[Stealth JD]

Shesterkin, Sorokin & Vasilevskiy are in the short conversation for best goalie in the world; established 1B vets like Varlamov & Bobrovsky are still getting it done, after having paved the way for the next generation like Askarov and Daniil Tarasov (and hopefully Zherenko). Is this the Golden Age of Russian goaltending? Finland used to be the goaltending machine, but my goodness has Russia put out some talent in the past 10 years.

 

[BlueDream]

I think that is exactly what you want. Someone better than Miko so Miko becomes #6. And someone that can fill in top 4 capably if someone gets hurt. Gavrikov or Soucy or Orlov if Caps slip, someone like that.

I’d be alright with that.

My ideal scenario though is that Tucker pushes himself into a spot. He’s off to another good start in Springfield and Tucker-Mikkola could be a fine 3rd pair. Mikkola would be on his off-side but that probably would have happened anyways if Perunovich didn’t get hurt.

Main reason I want to see this is because if Mikkola prices himself out of our plans next Summer as a cap casualty, I could see Tucker-Kessel both making the team as the 3rd pair. So would be nice to see one of them get some experience this season, and Tucker seems closer.

 

[MissouriMook]

I agree with waiting 2-3 months and see how it all shakes out. I don’t see ROR and Kyrou gelling, but maybe they can.

If this works, and I still think that's a big IF, it will work offensively because ROR and Saad adapt to Kyrou speeding into the zone and dragging the D into their own zone, and ROR and Saad are able to come in a stride or two behind and clean up the chaos Kyrou is creating. It could also depend on how adept Saad and ROR (and our D pairs for that matter) become at springing Kyrou out of our zone or through the neutral zone to begin the transition.

On the defensive side, Kyrou is never going to be a guy who wins a lot of puck battles with physicality. What he can do to help the team (and himself) is to learn from ROR on how to win puck battles through stick position and craftiness, then make better decisions with the puck when he does drag it out of a scrum. Where better to learn to be better at those things than on the wing of one of the best in the game?

 

[PocketNines]

I think those teams will all be striving for the 1st+good prospect package for those players and will likely end up getting either the 1st or a good prospect in the eventual package. If (and again, big if) Bortz and Mikko are a genuinely competent 3rd pair, I'm not interested in paying that kind of price to upgrade a pair that you only want playing 12-15 minutes a night in the playoffs.

IF the top 4 is fully healthy which is rare. I would prefer the Blues go in feeling like they're insured against a game plan where it's "degrade a Blues top 4 defenseman and they're in a tough spot."

If they spend a 2024 2d/3d + B prospect to get this player, I hope just as much playoff insurance for the top 4 as it is for the bottom pairing going forward in time.

My rebuttable presumption is Mikkola is NOT the guy to be the #5, and I see Bortuzzo the same way you do. I'm totally good with giving Mikkola several months to audition while the pro scouts look around the league for options.

 

[ChicagoBlues]

If this works, and I still think that's a big IF, it will work offensively because ROR and Saad adapt to Kyrou speeding into the zone and dragging the D into their own zone, and ROR and Saad are able to come in a stride or two behind and clean up the chaos Kyrou is creating. It could also depend on how adept Saad and ROR (and our D pairs for that matter) become at springing Kyrou out of our zone or through the neutral zone to begin the transition.

On the defensive side, Kyrou is never going to be a guy who wins a lot of puck battles with physicality. What he can do to help the team (and himself) is to learn from ROR on how to win puck battles through stick position and craftiness, then make better decisions with the puck when he does drag it out of a scrum. Where better to learn to be better at those things than on the wing of one of the best in the game?

So, what I hear you saying is that ROR and Saad can adjust their games to match Kyrou's dynamic play.

That's not a bad plan if that's what the coach wants and if ROR and Saad are willing.

But let's back up for a sec.

Chief wants Kyrou on PP#1 duties and to be paired up with ROR on the 1st line. At 5v5, I don't think those two are understanding each other and I haven't seen enough of the PP to know what the plan is. Kyrou has gotten a couple good looks and has missed, but his shot is fine.

The coach wants a particular look for a bit and we're stuck with it until he changes his mind.

With all that blah blah said, I want Kyrou with Thomas. Those two have chemistry already and should be cemented as line partners.

With Perron gone, we need to shuffle and test the pairs that work best.

But JK and RT should be glued together. Or was it cemented?

 

[MissouriMook]

So, what I hear you saying is that ROR and Saad can adjust their games to match Kyrou's dynamic play.

That's not a bad plan if that's what the coach wants and if ROR and Saad are willing.

But let's back up for a sec.

Chief wants Kyrou on PP#1 duties and to be paired up with ROR on the 1st line. At 5v5, I don't think those two are understanding each other and I haven't seen enough of the PP to know what the plan is. Kyrou has gotten a couple good looks and has missed, but his shot is fine.

The coach wants a particular look for a bit and we're stuck with it until he changes his mind.

With all that blah blah said, I want Kyrou with Thomas. Those two have chemistry already and should be cemented as line partners.

With Perron gone, we need to shuffle and test the pairs that work best.

But JK and RT should be glued together. Or was it cemented?

I don't think you should be asking yourself if Chief wants ROR and Kyrou together as much as you should be asking if he has a reason for NOT wanting to put Kyrou and Thomas together as is your wish. It may very well be that he is looking to spread the speed and dynamics that Kyrou and Thomas bring around a bit rather than having it on one line and leaving two of the other three top lines wanting for a speed element.

I don't know that this is necessarily Chief being stubborn and trying to make this work, even if it does seem like square peg meets round hole. I think he is just trying to see what it looks like, and if some of the defensive traits of guys like ROR and Saad can rub off on Kyrou and, at the same time, give those two a reason to step their game up a little bit to try to "keep up with the kid" in a more transition-based style rather than playing more of a cycle game. More than anything, I think Chief values versatility in his forward group so that he has 3-4 lines that can all play the kind of game he thinks they need to play in a given situation or against a particular opponent.

 

[PocketNines]

An initial group of UFA defensemen to keep an eye on to see if they might be a fit in case their teams miss and they're not extended by the deadline:

Gavrikov (27) – Columbus
Zub (27) – Ottawa
Orlov (31) – Washington
Mayfield (30) – NYI

I could easily see 5 teams from the Atlantic and only CAR, NYR, PIT from the Metro getting in this year.