Player Discussion Mike Matheson

[HabsCode]

Top 15 in points tied to Streit in a season (Habs history) at currently 62. You goof keep shitting on him

 

[ChesterNimitz]

First Hughes era player with 60 pts.

Habs offense would be bottom 3 without him.

They would be unwatchable.

How many players on our team, defence or forward, could score the goal he did against the Senators? How many other players in the league could?

 

[Zilo44]

They would be unwatchable.

How many players on our team, defence or forward, could score the goal he did against the Senators? How many other players in the league could?

I think the production of Suzuki, Caufield, Slaf etc would have suffered from the lack of support from the backend

 

[CAUFIELD]

Can’t see Mike traded without one of the 2 below happening :

1. Ridiculous offer we can’t refuse
2. Someone shows internally ready to take his spot .

 

[Saundies]

 

[Sunfyre]

No, three seasons is three seasons, no matter how many games you play, lol. They've been playing, practicing, etc for three years with pro teams.

That’s what I call commitment. Reminds me of a certain someone who was bringing up Slafs Liiga stats lol. You going to die on this hill!

 

[Mrb1p]

View attachment 851916

Lmao that's really it.

 

[Mrb1p]

Right. So after Tuesday, you'll consider Hutson to have a season of pro experience eh

There are bad takes and then there is this...

We can agree to disagree here.

Carry on.

That's just an asinine comparison. Spending 12 months in a pro environment = playing a season.

Mike Matheson this season sacrificed defense for offense to prove he could produce offensively. I would like to see him find balance next season. Of course, that means the Habs need a dman that can share the offensive load.

Matheson makes very suspect decisions that costs the team. Can he cut down on those?

That's fair. How do you explain his 5 other seasons prior? Why was he so bad defensively then?

First Hughes era player with 60 pts.

Habs offense would be bottom 3 without him.

No the Habs wouldn't be bottom 3 without him. He contributed very little to the score sheet at 5v5.

His on-ice shot attempt is lower than every Habs D.
His fenwick is lower than every D except Savard.
His goal % is the lowest on the team.
He has the worst raw differential
He has the worst raw shot differential
His goals created on rebounds is a team worse.

He's basically last or bottom two in every single offensive (and of course defensive) stats at 5v5.

 

[Miller Time]

That's just an asinine comparison. Spending 12 months in a pro environment = playing a season.

The word "playing" doesn't mean what you think it means apparently.

Dach did not "play a season" this past year, he played 2 games.

 

[Mrb1p]

The word "playing" doesn't mean what you think it means apparently.

Dach did not "play a season" this past year, he played 2 games.

You keep using the absolute dumbest comparisons. You just used guys that spent months outside of the team influence. None of Guhle, Harris, Xhekaj, etc spent more than a few weeks away from the team. You're ridiculous and you should feel ashamed of being so disingenuous.

 

[Deebs]

You keep using the absolute dumbest comparisons. You just used guys that spent months outside of the team influence. None of Guhle, Harris, Xhekaj, etc spent more than a few weeks away from the team. You're ridiculous and you should feel ashamed of being so disingenuous.

Being around the team isn't the same as playing in the games. It's great they did, as they gain knowledge off the ice. As we've known for decades, these players need in game experience to take that step forward in their careers. I can't say I've heard anyone but yourself state otherwise but maybe it's true.

 

[Mrb1p]

Being around the team isn't the same as playing in the games. It's great they did, as they gain knowledge off the ice. As we've known for decades, these players need in game experience to take that step forward in their careers. I can't say I've heard anyone but yourself state otherwise but maybe it's true.

No it's not, but missing 10 games doesn't somehow absolve you of a pro season. Guhle is gonna be a 3rd year pro, Harris is gonna be a 3rd year pro, Barron is gonna be a 4th year pro, Kovacevic is a vet at this point with 5 pro seasons under his belt. X played 2 pro seasons, he's gonna be at 3. Them missing ~ 20-30 games doesn't make them "not pros" or keeps them on a rookie status, it's asinine.

 

[Pat Riot]

No it's not, but missing 10 games doesn't somehow absolve you of a pro season. Guhle is gonna be a 3rd year pro, Harris is gonna be a 3rd year pro, Barron is gonna be a 4th year pro, Kovacevic is a vet at this point with 5 pro seasons under his belt. X played 2 pro seasons, he's gonna be at 3. Them missing ~ 20-30 games doesn't make them "not pros" or keeps them on a rookie status, it's asinine.

maybe we should talk about games experience because year as pro can be confusing. With 4th year pro you make it sound like Barron is a seasoned vet but with only 92 games in the show hes still very green.

 

[Deebs]

No it's not, but missing 10 games doesn't somehow absolve you of a pro season. Guhle is gonna be a 3rd year pro, Harris is gonna be a 3rd year pro, Barron is gonna be a 4th year pro, Kovacevic is a vet at this point with 5 pro seasons under his belt. X played 2 pro seasons, he's gonna be at 3. Them missing ~ 20-30 games doesn't make them "not pros" or keeps them on a rookie status, it's asinine.

Years played or not, the key is amount of games. They talk about 300 games for defensemen being the norm (on average, not every player is the same of course) where they are truly comfortable in the league and really find their footing. All of that is great news as all of our defensemen still have a ways to go before they reach their true potential.

 

[Mrb1p]

maybe we should talk about games experience because year as pro can be confusing. With 4th year pro you make it sound like Barron is a seasoned vet but with only 92 games in the show hes still very green.

Barron has played 92 games, which is well beyond "rookie" at this point and he's also played 100+ games in the AHL. He's green in age, but his experience isn't of one being a rookie. Barron is also the 2nd worst case we have. Realistically being a rookie is a lot more about being around the team than playing games. The discrepancy in games between AHL and NHL doesn't make you forget everything, it's not an all-new sport. Yes there's adjustments to be made, but not 300 games of adjustments.

Years played or not, the key is amount of games. They talk about 300 games for defensemen being the norm (on average, not every player is the same of course) where they are truly comfortable in the league and really find their footing. All of that is great news as all of our defensemen still have a ways to go before they reach their true potential.

The 300 games thing is to see a final product. We shouldn't confuse final product with being green. Matheson is still progressing as a player and he's 29. Realistically, he hasn't been green since his 2nd year in Florida.


We just have to trust the kids at some point. Acting like these guys aren't pro players or ready for responsibilities is just so... I don't know. The forward Corp is also very young and funny enough we had no one talking about not trading Monahan because they were too green.

 

[BaseballCoach]

No it's not, but missing 10 games doesn't somehow absolve you of a pro season. Guhle is gonna be a 3rd year pro, Harris is gonna be a 3rd year pro, Barron is gonna be a 4th year pro, Kovacevic is a vet at this point with 5 pro seasons under his belt. X played 2 pro seasons, he's gonna be at 3. Them missing ~ 20-30 games doesn't make them "not pros" or keeps them on a rookie status, it's asinine.

Yes it's wrong to consider Guhle, Xhekaj, Harris and Barron as rookies, but not wrong to conisider Struble as a rookie.

That being said, Guhle, Xhekaj, Harris and Barron do presumably have more "room to grow" than players who have played 164 games already (i.e. two full seasons).

Kovacevic is probably nearing his plateau.

 

[Mrb1p]

Yes it's wrong to consider Guhle, Xhekaj, Harris and Barron as rookies, but not wrong to conisider Struble as a rookie.

That being said, Guhle, Xhekaj, Harris and Barron do presumably have more "room to grow" than players who have played 164 games already (i.e. two full seasons).

Kovacevic is probably nearing his plateau.

Room to grow =/= being green. Guhle is routinely going out there and playing against Mcdavid and Crosby and winning, yet he still has a lot of runway. Struble has 50 games of experience yet he's been mostly a good defensive player. Yes, age and experience is important, but pigeon-holeing ourselves into thinking it's an absolute barrier is completely stupid. This blue line is talented and doesn't need Matheson to survive, it would need another vet at RD, but the discrepancy between that vets value and Matheson is huge.

 

[BaseballCoach]

We just have to trust the kids at some point. Acting like these guys aren't pro players or ready for responsibilities is just so... I don't know. The forward Corp is also very young and funny enough we had no one talking about not trading Monahan because they were too green.

If we got the return we got for Monahan, I'd trade Savard.

Matheson would require a much higher return. A defenceman who is top-10 offensively and inconsistent defensively should get you a top-15/20 forward offensively but who is questionable defensively.

Forwards who league-wide are close to the 15th most productive but suspect defensively include:

• Brayden Point (16th and -13)
• Jesper Bratt (21st and -7)
• Matthew Barzal (22nd and -4)

All three earn 60-100% more than Matheson.

Mikey should get a heckuva lot more than Monahan got us.

 

[Mrb1p]

If we got the return we got for Monahan, I'd trade Savard.

Matheson would require a much higher return. A defenceman who is top-10 offensively and inconsistent defensively should get you a top-15/20 forward offensively but who is questionable defensively.

Forwards who league-wide are close to the 15th most productive but suspect defensively include:

• Brayden Point (16th and -13)
• Jesper Bratt (21st and -7)
• Matthew Barzal (22nd and -4)

All three earn 60-100% more than Matheson.

Mikey should get a heckuva lot more than Monahan got us.

There's no way you just equated Brayden point to Matheson. Theres absolutely no way.

Then theres Gustafsson, TDA and Gost as examples. You're out to lunch. I don't know what you're even saying. I'm baffled. I can't even argue a counter point because I'm sure you won't even read it.

 

[McGuires Corndog]

If we got the return we got for Monahan, I'd trade Savard.

Matheson would require a much higher return. A defenceman who is top-10 offensively and inconsistent defensively should get you a top-15/20 forward offensively but who is questionable defensively.

Forwards who league-wide are close to the 15th most productive but suspect defensively include:

• Brayden Point (16th and -13)
• Jesper Bratt (21st and -7)
• Matthew Barzal (22nd and -4)

All three earn 60-100% more than Matheson.

Mikey should get a heckuva lot more than Monahan got us.

In absolutely no world is Matheson an equivalent to any of the players you listed there.

His defensive game is just too flawed to return a forward of that caliber.

 

[BaseballCoach]

How do you explain his 5 other seasons prior? Why was he so bad defensively then?

Matheson was not bad defensively his two years in Pittsburgh, nor his first season in Montreal.

 

[BaseballCoach]

There's no way you just equated Brayden point to Matheson. Theres absolutely no way.

Then theres Gustafsson, TDA and Gost as examples. You're out to lunch. I don't know what you're even saying. I'm baffled. I can't even argue a counter point because I'm sure you won't even read it.

What I'm saying is that Matheson with his contract should fetch a higher return than Monahan did.

As an aside, while Point is a great player, I do feel he is overpaid given his careless attitude to defence. Still, I don't expect TB to trade him for Matheson.

What I am trying to do with real examples is show you just how noteworthy it is to have a top-10 scoring defenceman. If we are going to trade him, we should get a fair return from a team that could benefit from his skillset at an affordable AAV.

 

[Mrb1p]

Matheson was not bad defensively his two years in Pittsburgh, nor his first season in Montreal.

Wtf u mean not bad? There's literal article ridiculing him out there.

What I'm saying is that Matheson with his contract should fetch a higher return than Monahan did.

As an aside, while Point is a great player, I do feel he is overpaid given his careless attitude to defence. Still, I don't expect TB to trade him for Matheson.

What I am trying to do with real examples is show you just how noteworthy it is to have a top-10 scoring defenceman. If we are going to trade him, we should get a fair return from a team that could benefit from his skillset at an affordable AAV.

Brayden Point has finished top 10 in Selke votes 3 times in his career? Have you ever watched a single hockey game in your life? I'm sorry but you deserve to be ridiculed for this. Brayden point is a multiple time 40+ goals scorer and one of the best playoff performer in league history.

I feel like I'm arguing with a climate crisis denier here, nothing tangible is coming out of this.

 

[Miller Time]

You keep using the absolute dumbest comparisons. You just used guys that spent months outside of the team influence. None of Guhle, Harris, Xhekaj, etc spent more than a few weeks away from the team. You're ridiculous and you should feel ashamed of being so disingenuous.

Ahh are you getting upset? Sorry this is so difficult for you...

A dictionary or thesaurus might help with your challenges in understanding the words you're using

Either way, your take was terrible, not much more to it. I've been pretty direct, nothing disingenuous about it.

 

[BaseballCoach]

Wtf u mean not bad? There's literal article ridiculing him out there.

2020-2021 Pittsburgh +9
2021-2022 Pittsburgh +12
2022-2023 Montreal +7

His entire career prior to this season, he was +2 in 465 games. This is not the resumé of a "bad" defenceman. His one rocky year in Florida he was played on his wrong side.

Occasional glaring gaffes are not what automatically makes you "bad". Larry Robinson had plenty of those too, around one per game. But he was GREAT in other things and in the Hall of Fame.

Matheson is obviously not Robinson, but realistically he is above average at breaking up plays, busting a cycle, and denying zone entry. His overall defensive game is not "bad" despite the embarassing gaffes that got him ridiculed in articles sometimes.