Player Discussion Mike Matheson

[Mrb1p]

Reminder that Matheson is a 5 on 5 net negative with a goal differential of -15. Hes by far the worst on the team.

Guhle, who plays more than him at 5v5 is a -10, even though theyve mostly been deployed together.

Savard, who plays 1 minute less at 5v5 is a -4.

Stop trying to bend the narrative to make Matheson "look" good. He doesnt. The only way to make him look good is if you consider his play away from 5 on 5 and 5 on 4 hockey, which is a very niche specialty.

 

[Miller Time]

The simple answer is his skillset is not suited for a top-flight power play.
It's not about what he has been able to accomplish but what he hasn't.
The last place you want to see erratic play is on your PP.
I never get a sense of stability when he's out there.

I don't share your assessment.

He's not as effective as elite #1Dmen running PP, sure, but he's not paid like one nor should anyone be under any illusions that he is 1.

It seems to me that the issue is misplaced expectations rather than a fair assessment of the player.

Few teams have a #2, and even fewer a #3, that is a better overall hockey player than Matheson imo.

I doubt that the Habs see him as their #1 when the roster is at cup contention, for now, he's providing as or better value than any veteran dman in the league under 6M.

 

[Rapala]

I don't share your assessment.

He's not as effective as elite #1Dmen running PP, sure, but he's not paid like one nor should anyone be under any illusions that he is 1.

It seems to me that the issue is misplaced expectations rather than a fair assessment of the player.

Few teams have a #2, and even fewer a #3, that is a better overall hockey player than Matheson imo.

I doubt that the Habs see him as their #1 when the roster is at cup contention, for now, he's providing as or better value than any veteran dman in the league under 6M.

You don't have to but it doesn't change the facts.
Our PP which is terrible breaks down in the same place(s) all the time.
You tell me what is so special about Matheson on our PP?

 

[26Mats]

Reminder that Matheson is a 5 on 5 net negative with a goal differential of -15. Hes by far the worst on the team.

Guhle, who plays more than him at 5v5 is a -10, even though theyve mostly been deployed together.

Savard, who plays 1 minute less at 5v5 is a -4.

Stop trying to bend the narrative to make Matheson "look" good. He doesnt. The only way to make him look good is if you consider his play away from 5 on 5 and 5 on 4 hockey, which is a very niche specialty.

What are the team leaders in that stat for the forwards?

Overall, Suzuki and Slafkovsky are 3rd and 4th worst on the team in plus minus. Next is Newhok. But they're not the worst players on the team. Far from it.

 

[Mrb1p]

What are the team leaders in that stat for the forwards?

Overall, Suzuki and Slafkovsky are 3rd and 4th worst on the team in plus minus. Next is Newhok. But they're not the worst players on the team. Far from it.

Gallagher, anderson and Evans.

Suzuki is 2nd at 5v5 with +6, Caufield leads the team at +12.

Suzuki is a -12 in 3 on 3 and 4 on 4 combined. Matheson is -15.

Note that this isnt +/-.

 

[Miller Time]

You don't have to but it doesn't change the facts.
Our PP which is terrible breaks down in the same place(s) all the time.
You tell me what is so special about Matheson on our PP?

?
Among dmen
PP sh% - 17th in NHL (20+ shots)
PP pts - 8th
PPP/60 - 18th in NHL (40+ games, 1+min/g)

Not sure what your concerned about. He's been as or more effective on the PP as anyone could reasonably expect

 

[Rapala]

Lightweight dust

 

[Mrb1p]

My boy mothersmilk directly responsible for 3 goals against, but I guess he had a 2nd A and an assist on a breakaway, so hes a net positive.

 

[Kudo Shinichi]

I hope the people who hate on Matheson are gonna be patient with Hutson. A young offensive only type with very questionable defensive upside is unlikely to be a fan favourite with those guys, they certainly aren't known for their ability to chill and let kids develop either.

If Lane produces the same offensively as Matheson that's a great development story already, I'd say theres a decent chance he never reaches those numbers. I can also imagine many scenarios where Hutson is much much worse at D than our boy Mike here.

Not sure why we would want to throw MM away and bring in his much younger and less experienced mini-me if that's how this plays out.

Considering Subban was one of the most criticized player in this board despite being the best player on the team after Price, I'd say chances are pretty good that after a few years in the league, when Hutson will lose his golden boy status, he will start getting shitted on by a portion of this fan base.

 

[TheBuriedHab]

Considering Subban was one of the most criticized player in this board despite being the best player on the team after Price, I'd say chances are pretty good that after a few years in the league, when Hutson will lose his golden boy status, he will start getting shitted on by a portion of this fan base.

Yes, the cycle is hilarious. The little pea brains will have a new shiny toy that we drafted in the third round of the 2027 draft and we need to move Hutson to make room.

 

[GlassesJacketShirt]

My boy mothersmilk directly responsible for 3 goals against, but I guess he had a 2nd A and an assist on a breakaway, so hes a net positive.

Decided to listen to TSN690 postgame because I'm a masochist, and the guest joining the broadcast defended Matheson by invoking Raymond Bourque's errors as part of a passionate plea to indicate Matheson's mistakes are aligned with other defenders playing top minutes, that he's been phenomenal since the all-star break and by far net a positive.

Despite me finding that hilarious, I still wouldn't put Matheson anywhere near Anderson as far as futility. Matheson is highly flawed player who is improperly deployed; Anderson should have been outright scratched so many times as this point.

 

[MasterD]

Decided to listen to TSN690 postgame because I'm a masochist, and the guest joining the broadcast defended Matheson by invoking Raymond Bourque's errors as part of a passionate plea to indicate Matheson's mistakes are aligned with other defenders playing top minutes, that he's been phenomenal since the all-star break and by far net a positive.

Despite me finding that hilarious, I still wouldn't put Matheson anywhere near Anderson as far as futility. Matheson is highly flawed player who is improperly deployed; Anderson should have been outright scratched so many times as this point.

Anderson has cashed in checked out a LONG TIME AGO. He's the definition of net negative.

Then again, Armia was exactly the same way last year, so there's hope he can find his groove again. But he needs a good old passionate ass whooping.

 

[Lafleurs Guy]

I hope the people who hate on Matheson are gonna be patient with Hutson.

They won’t be. We already have guys suggesting we trade away Caufield.

 

[Rapala]

?
Among dmen
PP sh% - 17th in NHL (20+ shots)
PP pts - 8th
PPP/60 - 18th in NHL (40+ games, 1+min/g)

Not sure what your concerned about. He's been as or more effective on the PP as anyone could reasonably expect

Starting at the bottom floor we are on the 7th of 31 floors.
Once again what exactly is Matheson doing that everyone is so enamored with?
His numbers aren't moving the needle at all.
I haven't even looked at the shorties many of which he can be held directly responsible for.
There is absolutely no doubt in my mind we already have better options than Mike Matheson for PP1.
It boggles my mind that we haven't tried any of them given how bad we have been for so long.

 

[Captain Mountain]

Starting at the bottom floor we are on the 7th of 31 floors.
Once again what exactly is Matheson doing that everyone is so enamored with?
His numbers aren't moving the needle at all.
I haven't even looked at the shorties many of which he can be held directly responsible for.
There is absolutely no doubt in my mind we already have better options than Mike Matheson for PP1.
It boggles my mind that we haven't tried any of them given how bad we have been for so long.

The problem with your assessment is it assumes there are "better options" than Matheson without any sort of evidence. You choose to dismiss Matheson's PP production, but offer nothing other than the PP has Matheson on it and is bad and your opinion is that he has a role in it.

No one thinks Matheson should be among the most used D-man in the NHL (at 5v5, the PP and the PK). Its pretty obvious he's being overplayed. But Montreal has tried other guys in tough minutes and the only guy that hasn't been awful is Guhle. And its not even that Guhle has been good, its that he can handle the minutes and play responsible hockey.

People rightly complain about the lack of forward depth, but Montreal's D depth is just as bad. And until more young guys can show they can handle PP2/PK2/top-4 ES minutes consistently, then Montreal's still going to overplay guys like Matheson and Savard. Which is what they're around for in the first place - to let those guys not be thrown into tougher situations than necessary.

 

[Rapala]

The problem with your assessment is it assumes there are "better options" than Matheson without any sort of evidence. You choose to dismiss Matheson's PP production, but offer nothing other than the PP has Matheson on it and is bad and your opinion is that he has a role in it.

No one thinks Matheson should be among the most used D-man in the NHL (at 5v5, the PP and the PK). Its pretty obvious he's being overplayed. But Montreal has tried other guys in tough minutes and the only guy that hasn't been awful is Guhle. And its not even that Guhle has been good, its that he can handle the minutes and play responsible hockey.

People rightly complain about the lack of forward depth, but Montreal's D depth is just as bad. And until more young guys can show they can handle PP2/PK2/top-4 ES minutes consistently, then Montreal's still going to overplay guys like Matheson and Savard. Which is what they're around for in the first place - to let those guys not be thrown into tougher situations than necessary.

There is absolutely nothing wrong with my assessment.
There isn't a good PP out there that has a Matheson holding down the most crucial position
and the last line of defense. His puck handling alone is evidence enough.

The proof will come when a change is made.
Until then nobody can say I'm wrong.

 

[Captain Mountain]

There is absolutely nothing wrong with my assessment.
There isn't a good PP out there that has a Matheson holding down the most crucial position
and the last line of defense. His puck handling alone is evidence enough.

The proof will come when a change is made.
Until then nobody can say I'm wrong.

Plenty of people can say you're wrong, you just don't care. Which is fair enough, but not really an argument. Nobody can say you're right either because trust me bro isn't an argument.

And frankly, if Matheson misses time again and the PP is still awful with other D, then your argument that "we already have better options than Mike Matheson for PP1" would be proven wrong.

 

[Mrb1p]

The problem with your assessment is it assumes there are "better options" than Matheson without any sort of evidence. You choose to dismiss Matheson's PP production, but offer nothing other than the PP has Matheson on it and is bad and your opinion is that he has a role in it.

No one thinks Matheson should be among the most used D-man in the NHL (at 5v5, the PP and the PK). Its pretty obvious he's being overplayed. But Montreal has tried other guys in tough minutes and the only guy that hasn't been awful is Guhle. And its not even that Guhle has been good, its that he can handle the minutes and play responsible hockey.

People rightly complain about the lack of forward depth, but Montreal's D depth is just as bad. And until more young guys can show they can handle PP2/PK2/top-4 ES minutes consistently, then Montreal's still going to overplay guys like Matheson and Savard. Which is what they're around for in the first place - to let those guys not be thrown into tougher situations than necessary.

Imagine scoring this as your first NHL goal, in your 8th game, and you don't see a single PP shift for the next ... 70 ? games.


Saying "we don't have better options' is akin to americans saying "we have no choices but to vote for the bipartisanship.".

 

[Mrb1p]

Plenty of people can say you're wrong, you just don't care. Which is fair enough, but not really an argument. Nobody can say you're right either because trust me bro isn't an argument.

And frankly, if Matheson misses time again and the PP is still awful with other D, then your argument that "we already have better options than Mike Matheson for PP1" would be proven wrong.

Is this your argument ? Wideman was used for 50% of the PP time while Matheson was down. He took 2 shots on net.

Surely this isn't the argument you're trying to make.

 

[dcyhabs]

The main thing Matheson's performance shows lately is that he really needs Guhle out there. Ideally Matheson would be on the second pairing taking easier minutes defensively and second wave power play. Matheson has the tools to be a top pairing D but he's not putting them together. Even so he'd be a good middle D if the habs had a top pairing. If he plays behind Guhle/Reinbacher and a power play specialist he'll be fine.

I'd hope that the coach could try to fix his game more if he weren't their main minute eater. Matheson would be a top D if he judged risk/reward better, but that's tough to change.

 

[admiralcadillac]

This board is way too hard on Matheson lol it’s ridiculous

 

[Tyson]

You don't have to but it doesn't change the facts.
Our PP which is terrible breaks down in the same place(s) all the time.
You tell me what is so special about Matheson on our PP?

Might be time to put the shovel down

 

[Rapala]

Might be time to put the shovel down

Might be time to find a proper solution cause he ain't it.

 

[Tyson]

Might be time to find a proper solution cause he ain't it.

He may not be it, that I can agree to. He is in the wrong chair through no fault of his own and the fact that he will end up with around 60 points is nothing to sneer at either, especially at his salary.

 

[Rapala]

He may not be it, that I can agree to. He is in the wrong chair through no fault of his own and the fact that he will end up with around 60 points is nothing to sneer at either, especially at his salary.

I have nothing bad to say about his point production he's been present.
I'm really only slightly peeved we haven't tried someone else given the overall lackluster results.