Speculation: Caps Roster General Discussion (Coaching/FAs/Cap/Lines etc) - 2022-23 Season Part 1: Free Agent Edition

[crab]

I’m glad to hear Hagelin is better from a health point but it’s going to be frustrating to watch him get more ice time than McMicheal. Hagelin was awful last season and coming off a serious injury shouldn’t improve things.

 

[max21]

I’m glad to hear Hagelin is better from a health point but it’s going to be frustrating to watch him get more ice time than McMicheal. Hagelin was awful last season and coming off a serious injury shouldn’t improve things.

I can see him now on a breakaway hitting glass, I can’t remember if his PK prowess was missed that much or not.

 

[CapitalsCupReality]

Why do you always add extra qualifiers the second and third time around? “Show me youth” becomes “show me young regulars” and now this has to suddenly be right out of camp, and we can’t just look at last year over the course of the year?

In that case I guess Siegenthaler and Chara is a good place to start

Try following along….I don’t feel like wasting time explaining the conversation….bye.

 

[CapitalsCupReality]

I’m glad to hear Hagelin is better from a health point but it’s going to be frustrating to watch him get more ice time than McMicheal. Hagelin was awful last season and coming off a serious injury shouldn’t improve things.

They don’t even play the same role…..CMM likely isn’t even competing with Hagelin…just sayin….

I think the concern that most of us have is that there won't really be an even playing field for McMichael this preseason when he's competing for a spot. That was certainly the case last season, when he was clearly a better option than guys like Eller and Hagelin for most of the season yet still regularly rode the pine in favor of the latter two.

They need impact top 6 players. Maybe McMichael can be that guy. It's an open question IMO. But we know that Eller/Johansson/Hagelin certainly aren't those guys. For a team that has slipped further and further away from contention, I'd rather go with the mystery box that stands to improve as the year goes on.

The even playing field is the exhibition games. If he dominates….he wins a roster spot.

He sucked at wing, and doesn’t fill the role Hags did, so it’s not a like comparison.

 

[Ridley Simon]

Hags is an easy trade candidate if need be. So is Eller.

I’m not saying they will get traded, but as pending UFA’s, it would be easy. Eller would get a decent return. Hagelin…..could, depending on other team needs. A contender that has a putrid PK would give up something for him, IMO. His track record is still sterling in that regard.

 

[g00n]

A lot of the differences we get hung up on as fans are seemingly nuances that don't matter as much to the coaches.

To take up tex's flag a bit here, if the coaches see a clear advantage provided by one player over another, don't you think they'd joyfully embrace that?

If any younger player can show he's an obvious step up from a veteran he's going to win the roster spot. But if it's a close race then most coaches who aren't rebuilding are going to favor the veteran because they know they can trust the guy more in unplanned situations, due to that thing called "experience".

This line of thinking isn't an appeal to authority, but rather to reason and the obvious self-interest of the coaches. Why would any coach fighting to keep his job arbitrarily play veterans over younger, clearly better players?

It makes no sense and imo is just fan preference and paranoia.

 

[Langway]

Hard to figure Hagelin has much value with Motte unsigned, though Cup pedigree likely has value for some. Still, I'd think they might either need to bundle something modest along with him, retain a bit or be prepared to take on someone else's cap issue since few teams can fit him as-is. DET/WPG seem like exceptions but then, again, you'd think Motte would draw interest. Hags may have slight value for a select list as a depth PK/culture add and then realistically present more eventual trade value at the deadline should teams fold.

But I think Lavi likely values Hagelin on the checking line still and I don't doubt he sees a defensive role for Eller as well. As much as the pre-season provides opportunity for players it's also still in part about roles and that's where I'm also dodgy Lavi would back McMichael at center unless he simply cannot deny him. That's probably the level he'll have to display to make it. As much as it's about taking the best player it's also about fit and identity and we know what the pretty clear preference is there generally.

 

[HTFN]

A lot of the differences we get hung up on as fans are seemingly nuances that don't matter as much to the coaches.

To take up tex's flag a bit here, if the coaches see a clear advantage provided by one player over another, don't you think they'd joyfully embrace that?

If any younger player can show he's an obvious step up from a veteran he's going to win the roster spot. But if it's a close race then most coaches who aren't rebuilding are going to favor the veteran because they know they can trust the guy more in unplanned situations, due to that thing called "experience".

This line of thinking isn't an appeal to authority, but rather to reason and the obvious self-interest of the coaches. Why would any coach fighting to keep his job arbitrarily play veterans over younger, clearly better players?

It makes no sense and imo is just fan preference and paranoia.

it all still amounts to assuming they'd take the better option if there's a better option. It also calls into question what the actual standard is for some of these advantages (how valuable is Hagelin's "200 foot game" if there's no offense for example) and what the benefit is of creating a closed loop where experience can only be acquired after gaining valuable experience first

when the Penguins lose a thousand man games to injury and find other guys they can play with it doesn't seem like it takes them 8 more months to find room for them. If they can do that regularly and Laviolette can get a reputation for the opposite across multiple organizations it may not be as simple as not seeing what they see.

 

[HTFN]

Try following along….I don’t feel like wasting time explaining the conversation….bye.

You don't feel like wasting time explaining the conversation, just dragging it all over the place and asking questions you don't actually want answered? What about multi-quoting you and unpacking your word choice is giving you the impression that I haven't been following, and how is Chara/Siegenthaler not exactly what you asked for?

 

[g00n]

it all still amounts to assuming they'd take the better option if there's a better option.

Why not make this assumption with a fair amount of confidence? There's a clear logical and professional argument for it.

Why WOULDN'T a top tier professional coach operate the way I've described? If the only answer is "he supposedly hates rookies and young players" then that seems like a pretty flimsy set of evidence. That seems like more of the same fan perception and bias I was talking about wrt nuance that doesn't move the actual needle.

 

[HTFN]

Why not make this assumption with a fair amount of confidence?

Why WOULDN'T a top tier professional coach operate the way I've described? If the only answer is "he supposedly hates rookies and young players" then that seems like a pretty flimsy set of evidence.

who is saying only?

personally I don't think it's hate, I think he's risk averse to a fault and it limits his ability to recognize when the win condition shifts. There comes a point in games you're losing where risky offense is still more valuable to your win percentage than safe defense. Laviolette misses that mark a lot and demonstrates it often with his deployments, and it lost them games (like this one, except they were even winning this)

Framing this like he's intentionally doing a stupider thing just to do it is a choice I guess, but I'm not seeing where you're getting that from

 

[g00n]

who is saying only?

personally I don't think it's hate, I think he's risk averse to a fault and it limits his ability to recognize when the win condition shifts. There comes a point in games you're losing where risky offense is still more valuable to your win percentage than safe defense. Laviolette misses that mark a lot and demonstrates it often with his deployments, and it lost them games (like this one, except they were even winning this)

Framing this like he's intentionally doing a stupider thing just to do it is a choice I guess, but I'm not seeing where you're getting that from

The complaint around here has long been "Lavi hates rookies and young players". It came from Nashville and possibly earlier, and it's a fan narrative. I'm not making it up.

It seems like you're talking about something different...late game deployment strategy in general is not the same as making roster decisions regarding rookies vs veterans.

Maybe it CAN inform roster decisions but if you have a coach that's either snubbing CLEARLY better young players in favor of shitty veterans in general, or just for late game defensive preference, you probably objectively have a bad coach who will eventually be fired after that strategy backfires enough times that whatever excuses he trots out in discussions with his GM and President fall flat.

I don't have first hand knowledge but I have to believe Lavi's roster and deployment choices have been dissected in this context many, many times. If a coach has clearly better offensive stars and he refuses to use them he's going to run afoul of the front office, especially after shitting out in the 1st round several years in a row.

So again, back to the point, which is mostly constant complaining about CMM's ice time....if these younger players were clearly standing out to the staff as much better options in some way I'm sure the coaches and FO would respond accordingly, rather standing pat out of some stubborn presumed preference for veterans at all costs.

They have a very clear self-interest in NOT being pig-headed dummies who elevate shitty players over good ones, and if they're ignoring that self-interest then eventually it will bite them all in the ass.

Are we saying Lavi is a bad coach who needs to be fired because he's not playing CMM?

And if the issue is late-game deployment, then we have to assume it's what the Caps FO wants, again because we can be reasonably sure they're talking about this sort of thing constantly.

 

[CapitalsCupReality]

You don't feel like wasting time explaining the conversation, just dragging it all over the place and asking questions you don't actually want answered? What about multi-quoting you and unpacking your word choice is giving you the impression that I haven't been following, and how is Chara/Siegenthaler not exactly what you asked for?

Feel free to message me directly so I can mansplain things for you if you really need the help. Not wasting time here.

 

[HTFN]

Feel free to message me directly so I can mansplain things for you if you really need the help. Not wasting time here.

“Show me where this has happened”
“No not like that, I’m done here”

You won’t mansplain much of anything if you can’t nut up and say your piece without going private, really can’t see how that’s time better spent either. I’ll humor you if you want but so far you’ve wasted plenty of my time just in the process of taking you seriously.

 

[CapitalsCupReality]

“Show me where this has happened”
“No not like that, I’m done here”

You won’t mansplain much of anything if you can’t nut up and say your piece without going private, really can’t see how that’s time better spent either. I’ll humor you if you want but so far you’ve wasted plenty of my time just in the process of taking you seriously.

Whatever…I don’t need your validation. Just don’t feel like mucking up the thread. Now I don’t feel like wasting any time on you, so move on.

 

[g00n]

On the plus side, I think this is the farthest into the offseason we've gone before things got shitty

 

[Langway]

Lapierre may help eventually but it feels like this is a very significant issue going forward given their forward make-up and style of play. Vets like Ovechkin & Oshie are only likely to get weaker in that area and that seemingly should lead to weaker 5v5 production. Anything interesting within their forward microstats in this regard, @twabby?

 

[twabby]

Lapierre may help eventually but it feels like this is a very significant issue going forward given their forward make-up and style of play. Vets like Ovechkin & Oshie are only likely to get weaker in that area and that seemingly should lead to weaker 5v5 production. Anything interesting within their forward microstats in this regard, @twabby?

As a team they're actually 12th in entries, though at 18th in terms of possession entry percentage and even lower at 27th in terms of successful entry percentage.

Here are their percentiles broken down by player:

(note: it appears that Backstrom and Mantha didn't have enough games tracked in order to be included in the database)

The thing that stands out to me is that their forwards in general have a poor entry success rate, while their defensemen are quite a bit better aside from Carlson. Strome, Johansson, and Hagelin are the only forwards who rate above average in this stat, while 4 of their 6 defensemen rate above average. And in Hagelin's case it appears that most of his entries come via dump in.

Not that it's a new development, but Ovechkin probably shouldn't be carrying the mail at this point in his career. I'm interested to see if Connor Brown can be more of a puck retriever than Wilson has been, and if Kuznetsov/Ovechkin choose to dump it in a bit more often and let Brown do some work in the corners. If Johansson had a bit more to his game besides entries like shooting or playmaking he seems like he could be a good match alongside Ovechkin, but he just doesn't bring enough in areas aside from entries to warrant a top 6 spot.

I'm with you: the forwards' inability to gain the zone with possession at a high rate is concerning.

 

[Devil Dancer]

What do the three columns mean? The headers aren't self explanatory.

 

[twabby]

What do the three columns mean? The headers aren't self explanatory.

From here: JFresh x AllThreeZones Microstat Player Cards Explainer

Entries: The number of times a player entered the offensive zone with the puck (either carrying it in, passing it in, or dumping it in). Indicates a player’s workload in entering the zone.

Entry % w/possession: The rate with which a player enters the zone with possession (carrying or passing as opposed to dumping the puck in) relative to his total zone entries. On average, a forward will enter with possession about 55% of the time.

Entry success rate: A player’s rate of success when attempting to enter the offensive zone. On average, a forward will be able to enter the zone in some fashion on 88% of his attempts. Players who are more ambitious with their entries (e.g. trying to go one-on-one instead of dumping it in) might succeed less often.

I think the last definition is kind of important and it probably explains why Kuznetsov's entry success rate is somewhat poor while Hagelin's is pretty good. Kuznetsov rarely dumps it in and as a result his success rate is lower. It'd be nice if they did some sort of weighted average since we know that controlled entries lead to more offense than dump-ins. For example, Connor McDavid only ranks in the 59th percentile in terms of entry success percentage though I think most people would agree he's way better than average at entering the zone. Same with Nathan MacKinnon, who is only in the 40th percentile.

 

[Corby78]

From here: JFresh x AllThreeZones Microstat Player Cards Explainer

Entries: The number of times a player entered the offensive zone with the puck (either carrying it in, passing it in, or dumping it in). Indicates a player’s workload in entering the zone.

Entry % w/possession: The rate with which a player enters the zone with possession (carrying or passing as opposed to dumping the puck in) relative to his total zone entries. On average, a forward will enter with possession about 55% of the time.

Entry success rate: A player’s rate of success when attempting to enter the offensive zone. On average, a forward will be able to enter the zone in some fashion on 88% of his attempts. Players who are more ambitious with their entries (e.g. trying to go one-on-one instead of dumping it in) might succeed less often.

I think the last definition is kind of important and it probably explains why Kuznetsov's entry success rate is somewhat poor while Hagelin's is pretty good. Kuznetsov rarely dumps it in and as a result his success rate is lower. It'd be nice if they did some sort of weighted average since we know that controlled entries lead to more offense than dump-ins. For example, Connor McDavid only ranks in the 59th percentile in terms of entry success percentage though I think most people would agree he's way better than average at entering the zone. Same with Nathan MacKinnon, who is only in the 40th percentile.

So because the data is messed up, the graph is meaningless.

 

[twabby]

So because the data is messed up, the graph is meaningless.

The data is fine. All hail the data.

 

[Langway]

This strikes me as a key area toward becoming more multi-dimensional come playoff time offensively. Not that they absolutely can't win playing a more defensive-minded checking game but that route needs to be dead on and they're, at best, likely one or two defensive pieces short of having that capability. As an older group I'm also increasingly less sure that an attrition game is viable.

I tend to doubt Strome is capable of taking on a heavier zone entry role due to his speed so it's likely to be a fairly similar group in that regard. Brown adds another energy guy and forechecker to the mix but I'm not sure how much that adds ultimately. Probably still not enough to the point of making them dangerous enough. Why is WIlson not more formidable in this area? It isn't lack of speed like some. Tactics play a part but he's a player that should be more able to create room for himself than he manages. There's keeping it simple and going to work but against a similarly experienced and balanced opponent that doesn't tend to be enough of a separating differentiator.

I'm intrigued by this year's group but some additional tweaking seems necessary.

 

[Raikkonen]

perhaps Wilson isn't that young anymore

 

[g00n]

September is too late to start offseason angst. It's time to switch to unreasonable optimism.