Habs' Bottom Six

[BaseballCoach]

The Habs' bottom six is seriously under-rated. Lots of fans crap on our lack of depth as what holds the team back from contention.

This past year, the Habs had TWELVE forwards score 10 or more goals. How does that stack up against all these other teams with "much more depth"?

From top of the league to bottom:
10 Winnipeg
..8 Washington
10 Vegas
..7 Toronto
..8 Dallas
..7 Los Angeles
..7 Tampa Bay
10 Colorado
..9 Edmonton
10 Carolina
..9 Florida
..9 Ottawa
..9 Minnesota
..7 Saint Louis
..7 Calgary
..9 New Jersey
12 Montreal
..6 Vancouver
..9 Utah
..8 Columbus
10 Detroit
10 New York Rangers
..7 New York Islanders
..9 Pittsburgh
..9 Anaheim
..9 Buffalo
..9 Seattle
..8 Boston
..9 Philadelphia
..6 Nashville
..7 Chicago
..8 San José

Habs had 12 ten-goal scorers (and both guys who had only ten missed significant time).
Six teams had 10, and four finished top 10 points-wise in the NHL.
Eleven teams had 9.
Five teams had 8.
Seven teams had 7.
Two teams had 6.

The average team had 8.50 ten goal scorers. The Habs entire fourth line scored like third liners.

Our problems were not bottom-six fault. We were short in second line scoring, We were short in defencemen scoring. And we gave up too many goals, especially prior to Carrier's acquisition and the Dobes/Primeau swap.

Our goaltending should improve organically. Demidov has arrived to boost the 2nd line. Get us one more top 6 F and one more top 4 D, and we should be a contender within a year or max two. And our overall depth is a major reason.

 

[LaP]

The Habs' bottom six is seriously under-rated. Lots of fans crap on our lack of depth as what holds the team back from contention.

This past year, the Habs had TWELVE forwards score 10 or more goals. How does that stack up against all these other teams with "much more depth"?

From top of the league to bottom:
10 Winnipeg
..8 Washington
10 Vegas
..7 Toronto
..8 Dallas
..7 Los Angeles
..7 Tampa Bay
10 Colorado
..9 Edmonton
10 Carolina
..9 Florida
..9 Ottawa
..9 Minnesota
..7 Saint Louis
..7 Calgary
..9 New Jersey
12 Montreal
..6 Vancouver
..9 Utah
..8 Columbus
10 Detroit
10 New York Rangers
..7 New York Islanders
..9 Pittsburgh
..9 Anaheim
..9 Buffalo
..9 Seattle
..8 Boston
..9 Philadelphia
..6 Nashville
..7 Chicago
..8 San José

Habs had 12 ten-goal scorers (and both guys who had only ten missed significant time).
Six teams had 10, and four finished top 10 points-wise in the NHL.
Eleven teams had 9.
Five teams had 8.
Seven teams had 7.
Two teams had 6.

The average team had 8.50 ten goal scorers. The Habs entire fourth line scored like third liners.

Our problems were not bottom-six fault. We were short in second line scoring, We were short in defencemen scoring. And we gave up too many goals, especially prior to Carrier's acquisition and the Dobes/Primeau swap.

Our goaltending should improve organically. Demidov has arrived to boost the 2nd line. Get us one more top 6 F and one more top 4 D, and we should be a contender within a year or max two. And our overall depth is a major reason.

You would need to take into account the TOI in this analysis. Dvorak was a 2nd line center for the last 30 games. With over 16 minutes of TOI in his last 30 games not sure it's fair to consider him a bottom 6 player. That's a lot of TOI for a bottom 6 player. Also Gallagher played on average 1:30 on the PP which again is a lot for a bottom 6 player.

Lars Eller was a very dominant 3rd line player who played on the Caps 2nd line quite a few times with Backstrom's injuries and he had over 16 minutes of TOI only 4 seasons in his career. He also got over 1:30 of TOI on the PP only twice.

 

[le_sean]

The problem is calling the Newhook/Laine/Dach trio the 2nd line when they sucked so much the Dvorak line had to become the de facto 2nd line, which they are not good enough for either. Get a real 2nd line to push Gallagher and Anderson to actual 3rd liners, and we have something.

Also once Armia broke his hand, the 4th line became incredibly average. Habs need someone other than Pezzetta as the 13th forward.

 

[yianik]

You would need to take into account the TOI in this analysis. Dvorak was a 2nd line center for the last 30 games. With over 16 minutes of TOI not sure it's fair to consider him a bottom 6 player. That'S a lot fo TOI for a bottom 6 player. Also Gallagher played on avareg 1:30 on the PP which again is a lot for a bottom 6 player.

I guess the big picture is we had 12 ten goal scorers , and thats depth scoring.

 

[LaP]

I guess the big picture is we had 12 ten goal scorers , and thats depth scoring.

It is. But we also did not have a 2nd line or a 4th line. Dvorak, Dach / Newhook and Evans TOI was very similar. TOI wise we basically ran a 1st lines and three 3rd lines. You would expect a 1st line center to play close to 21 minutes, a 2nd line center around 18 minutes, a 3rd line center around 15 minutes and a 4th line center not more than 12ish minutes.

Dvorak 15:15 over the full season
Evans 15:33
Newhook 15:08
Dach 15:40

 

[BaseballCoach]

You would need to take into account the TOI in this analysis. Dvorak was a 2nd line center for the last 30 games. With over 16 minutes of TOI in his last 30 games not sure it's fair to consider him a bottom 6 player. That's a lot of TOI for a bottom 6 player. Also Gallagher played on average 1:30 on the PP which again is a lot for a bottom 6 player.

Lars Eller was a very dominant 3rd line player who played on the Caps 2nd line quite a few times with Backstrom's injuries and he had over 16 minutes of TOI only 4 seasons in his career. He also got over 1:30 of TOI on the PP only twice.

I hear you but please allow me some rebuttal.

Time on ice is a red herring when we talk about all tweelve forwards. Every team spreasds out the same total minutes, virtually.

Gallagher got a bit of PP time, yes, but actually most teams have a seventh forward with PP2 time since st least one PP unit plays with four forwards. Gallagher's limited PP time is not unusual and is not why all of our twelve forwards scored 10 or more goals.

The real reason is that our bottom six players have more offensive skill than average, by quite a margin. Most teams have 2 or 3 or even 4 Pezzettas dressing every night.

If this team succeeds in building a good second line next season, watch out.

 

[yianik]

It is. But we also did not have a 2nd line or a 4th line. Dvorak, Dach / Newhook and Evans TOI was very similar. TOI wise we basically ran a 1st lines and three 3rd lines. You would expect a 1st line center to play close to 21 minutes, a 2nd line center around 18 minutes, a 3rd line center around 15 minutes and a 4th line center not more than 12ish minutes.

Dvorak 15:15 over the full season
Evans 15:33
Newhook 15:08
Dach 15:40

Yes , I see what you are getting at.

 

[LaP]

I hear you but please allow me some rebuttal.

Time on ice is a red herring when we talk about all tweelve forwards. Every team spreasds out the same total minutes, virtually.

Gallagher got a bit of PP time, yes, but actually most teams have a seventh forward with PP2 time since st least one PP unit plays with four forwards. Gallagher's limited PP time is not unusual and is not why all of our twelve forwards scored 10 or more goals.

The real reason is that our bottom six players have more offensive skill than average, by quite a margin. Most teams have 2 or 3 or even 4 Pezzettas dressing every night.

If this team succeeds in building a good second line next season, watch out.

Yes but the fact remains it's very hard to score 10 goals from the 4th line and our only forward with a TOI that i would consider normal for a 4th line was Heineman.

If we ignore players who did not play 40 games
- Colorado have 3 players who played less than 13 minutes.
- Dallas have 3 too
- Edmonton have 2 with another who played exactly 13:00
- LA got 4
- Caps have 2 with another who played 13:02

We had only 1 and the other guy with the lowest TOI after that got 13:55 so almost 14 minutes.

If we ignore players who did not play 40 games
- Colorado have 6 players who played over 16 minutes
- Dallas have 4
- Edmonton have 4
- LA got 8
- Caps have 6

We had only 3

I mean inevitably if you reduce the TOI of your so called "2nd line" to give it to your so called "4th line" it will increase the chances for you to have 10+ goals scorers.

I'm not trying to dish the bottom 6 and i agree with you our bottom 6 had more skills than usual and it's because well the Dvorak's line got paid 16.25 millions total i mean i think it's fair to say no other teams invest that much money on a bottom 6 line. The reality is those guys were signed by MB to be our 2nd line but simply have failed to be one. When we will have to pay Demidov, Hutson, the goalies, that 2nd line center and that top 4 RHD we wont be able to afford such a expensive bottom 6 line and we'll have to fill the 4th line with guys paid a millions or so.

 

[WeThreeKings]

The problem here is that while we had good depth scoring this year, depth scorers like that tend to not score very much in the playoffs and there's too many guys on that bottom 6 who were just net-zeros from a physical perspective.

We need more William Carriers and Mathieu Olivier's and less Dvoraks.

 

[BaseballCoach]

Yes but the fact remains it's very hard to score 10 goals from the 4th line and our only forward with a TOI that i would consider normal for a 4th line was Heineman.

If we ignore players who did not play 40 games
- Colorado have 3 players who played less than 13 minutes.
- Dallas have 3 too
- Edmonton have 2 with another who played exactly 13:00
- LA got 4
- Caps have 2 with another who played 13:02

We had only 1 and the other guy with the lowest TOI after that got 13:55 so almost 14 minutes.

If we ignore players who did not play 40 games
- Colorado have 6 players who played over 16 minutes
- Dallas have 4
- Edmonton have 4
- LA got 8
- Caps have 6

We had only 3

I mean inevitably if you reduce the TOI of your so called "2nd line" to give it to your so called "4th line" it will increase the chances for you to have 10+ goals scorers.

I'm not trying to dish the bottom 6 and i agree with you our bottom 6 had more skills than usual and it's because well the Dvorak's line got paid 16.25 millions total i mean i think it's fair to say no other teams invest that much money on a bottom 6 line. The reality is those guys were signed by MB to be our 2nd line but simply have failed to be one. When we will pay Demidov, Hutson and the goalies we wont be able to afford such a expensive bottom 6 line and we'll have to fill the 4th line with guys paid a millions or so.

All you are proving is my point that our bottom six players do in fact have enough skill to play 13-15 minutes, rather than Pezzetta minutes. Even if you took away 1.5 minutes per game from each of Dvorak, Gallagher, Anderson, Armia, Evans and Heineman, they would still each have scored 10+ goals in 80 healthy games.

So again, while all skill upgrades are welcome, the focus should not be on upgrading the bottom six, but definitely on the second line.

 

[Ozmodiar]

I see Anderson sticking around after this contract. Otherwise, they’d just have to find similar.

Also, I see Beck as the center among they younger depth guys. (Excl Hage)

After Gally gone:

Heineman - Beck - Hage
Xhekaj - Evans - Anderson

Assumes 3 year bridge 2C, minimum, so Hage possibly there for only 1 year before moving to second line.

 

[Canadienna]

In a way I agree that our bottom 6 was adequate.

Common lines at 5v5:

Caufield - Suzuki - Slafkovsky was dominant. They outscored their opponents 50-28 over the season. Nearly 2 to 1.

Gallagher - Dvorak - Anderson was acceptable, even good, finishing with 21 GF and 18 GA.

Heineman - Evans - Armia were at 13GF and 11GA, and the various other renditions of the 4th line were either slightly negative or even.

The "2nd line" never really existed as a prolonged thing, but that's where we're regularly getting outscored, sometimes badly.

So my two takeaways are

A) that we had two good to decent bottom 6 lines (G/D/A line and H/E/A line) but that the moment they come out of the bottom 6 to try to fill that 2nd line spot they do badly.

B) That second line being unworkable is resulting in players playing above their ability, which to me still is a "depth" issue.

 

[Rob Sense]

It is. But we also did not have a 2nd line or a 4th line. Dvorak, Dach / Newhook and Evans TOI was very similar. TOI wise we basically ran a 1st lines and three 3rd lines. You would expect a 1st line center to play close to 21 minutes, a 2nd line center around 18 minutes, a 3rd line center around 15 minutes and a 4th line center not more than 12ish minutes.

Dvorak 15:15 over the full season
Evans 15:33
Newhook 15:08
Dach 15:40

So essentially we had three 3rd lines?

 

[26Mats]

The problem is calling the Newhook/Laine/Dach trio the 2nd line when they sucked so much the Dvorak line had to become the de facto 2nd line, which they are not good enough for either. Get a real 2nd line to push Gallagher and Anderson to actual 3rd liners, and we have something.

Also once Armia broke his hand, the 4th line became incredibly average. Habs need someone other than Pezzetta as the 13th forward.

We had other options than Pez (Kapanen and Beck), yet MSL still went with Armia. I think that was a mistake. Impossible for a line to contribute offensively with only two players playing with both hands.

I still think Dvo, Gally, and Andy were good as a 3rd line, were a good bottom six line.

 

[26Mats]

My bottom six next year is the same as this year's plus Dach on the wing and maybe Newhook. Dach replaces Armia, or forms a line with Newhook and Anderson. Newhook either replaces Dvo or Gally, or he himself is traded. So two of Newhook, Gally, and Dvo stay:

Gally/Newhook - Newhook/Dvo - Anderson
Heineman - Evans - Dach

or

Dach - Newhook - Anderson
Gally - Evans - Heineman

 

[Rapala]

So essentially we had three 3rd lines?

And that is where we have improved over what Lafleur called three 4th lines.

 

[Paradoxe]

In a way I agree that our bottom 6 was adequate.

Common lines at 5v5:

Caufield - Suzuki - Slafkovsky was dominant. They outscored their opponents 50-28 over the season. Nearly 2 to 1.

Gallagher - Dvorak - Anderson was acceptable, even good, finishing with 21 GF and 18 GA.

Heineman - Evans - Armia were at 13GF and 11GA, and the various other renditions of the 4th line were either slightly negative or even.

The "2nd line" never really existed as a prolonged thing, but that's where we're regularly getting outscored, sometimes badly.

So my two takeaways are

A) that we had two good to decent bottom 6 lines (G/D/A line and H/E/A line) but that the moment they come out of the bottom 6 to try to fill that 2nd line spot they do badly.

B) That second line being unworkable is resulting in players playing above their ability, which to me still is a "depth" issue.

I really like this comment!