Player Discussion - Mike Matheson | Page 73 | HFBoards - NHL Message Board and Forum for National Hockey League
Toggle sidebar

Player Discussion Mike Matheson

Mrb1p said:
Which is what we allude to when we say he doesn't play well. You can't make 2-3 grade-A chances creating mistakes and be a good player. Well maybe you can, if say, like McDavid or Draisaitl, you create 4-5 for yourself. Matheson isn't that.
Click to expand...
The Oiler to compare him to is Bouchard who makes as many mistakes and put up 60 pts this year. Matheson also did that when he was on PP1.
 
I would accept Matheson on a 1 year extension as a 3rd pair.
Anything else and I lost my faith in HuGo.
 
Matheson isn't the problem, it's the depth on the right side. If we could have him play 15-17 minutes a night and eat minutes on the PK it would be totally fine. Guhle and Hutson take over as the top 2 LD next season anyways.

I would rather he was traded but if he's willing to sign here as a third pairing on a sweetheart deal I would have no problem with that. Don't give him a NMC or NTC and we're all set.
 
Walksss said:
Matheson isn't the problem, it's the depth on the right side. If we could have him play 15-17 minutes a night and eat minutes on the PK it would be totally fine. Guhle and Hutson take over as the top 2 LD next season anyways.

I would rather he was traded but if he's willing to sign here as a third pairing on a sweetheart deal I would have no problem with that. Don't give him a NMC or NTC and we're all set.
Click to expand...
He is a part of the problem , habs defensive aspect is not bad because he plays to much. Hes awful defensively , his mistakes and brainrot plays cost us more than often , it shows more since Price retired. Price made alot of Dman in our team look good.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Hickflyer and Redux91
McGees said:
I would accept Matheson on a 1 year extension as a 3rd pair.
Anything else and I lost my faith in HuGo.
Click to expand...
I could accept Matheson as a third pairing D if we had 4 guys better than him too. Personally, I think that would require us finding and playing AT LEAST two new top-4 d-men, EVEN IF one chooses to consider Guhle and Carrier as both better than Matheson to play against the top threats of the other team.

But if Matheson's new role just means playing Stuble and Xhekaj 22 minutes each in the top 4, I think our results will slip, not improve.

Now what is the prospect of getting these two new defencemen who will be #3 and #4 (or better)? Are these players available and if so, are we a better team after paying the required cost in trade capital and/or cap space?
 
Last edited:
I just don't see it happening.

Guhle and Hutson have staked long term claim to LD spots 1 and 2. Xhekaj, Struble and Engstrom are right there for LD3.

Unless they plan on keeping Hutson at RD, which doesn't make that much sense.. there's no way that Matheson long term makes sense, especially as an eventual 3rd pair LD which should be for an up and coming defenseman or a robust, shut-down D who plays PK.
 
  • Like
Reactions: morhilane
WeThreeKings said:
I just don't see it happening.

Guhle and Hutson have staked long term claim to LD spots 1 and 2. Xhekaj, Struble and Engstrom are right there for LD3.

Unless they plan on keeping Hutson at RD, which doesn't make that much sense.. there's no way that Matheson long term makes sense, especially as an eventual 3rd pair LD which should be for an up and coming defenseman or a robust, shut-down D who plays PK.
Click to expand...
Yeah the writings on the wall now, it's pretty clear
He can still 100% have a chair on an NHL team, for sure

But his chair on THIS team? It's gone now
Gotta move on, or it'll be a huuuuuge mistake and albatross contract
 
  • Like
Reactions: BLONG7 and WeThreeKings
Redux91 said:
Yeah the writings on the wall now, it's pretty clear
He can still 100% have a chair on an NHL team, for sure

But his chair on THIS team? It's gone now
Gotta move on, or it'll be a huuuuuge mistake and albatross contract
Click to expand...

Matheson for Andersson swap makes total sense for Calgary if they want to continue to push for playoffs.
 
  • Like
Reactions: overlords
BaseballCoach said:
I could accept Matheson as a third pairing D if we had 4 guys better than him too. Personally, I think that would require us finding and playing AT LEAST two new top-4 d-men, EVEN IF one chooses to consider Guhle and Carrier as both better than Matheson to play against the top threats of the other team.

But if Matheson's new role just means playing Stuble and Xhekaj 22 minutes each in the top 4, I think our results will slip, not improve.

Now what is the prospect of getting these two new defencemen who will be #3 and #4 (or better)? Are these players available and if so, are we a better team after paying the required cost in trade capital and/or cap space?
Click to expand...
Guhle has been playing against top threats for three years now, something you cant even say for Matheson? What are you even on?

Both Guhle and Carrier faced tougher competition this year, and they sure as shit did a much better job than Matheson AGAINST toughet opponents.

Some of you live in bizzaro world. Its like you dont even take the time to fact check your own beliefs.
 
I didn't like the idea of trading Matheson, but I think with the emergence of Hutson and if the possibility of acquiring a number 2 center or acquiring a heavy winger, he should be moved.
 
sampollock said:
he screws up way to much
Click to expand...
Matheson gets ice time of a #1 and should get the ice time of a second pairing. When you overplay a guy in the wrong chair you will see many screw ups.
This is the exact same way the Habs use to play Patrice Brisebois and the fans didn't like him either.
It's all about being in the right chair.
 
Tyson said:
Matheson gets ice time of a #1 and should get the ice time of a second pairing. When you overplay a guy in the wrong chair you will see many screw ups.
This is the exact same way the Habs use to play Patrice Brisebois and the fans didn't like him either.
It's all about being in the right chair.
Click to expand...
true
but I just dont have faith in him.. we see I guess
 
  • Like
Reactions: Tyson
WeThreeKings said:
Matheson for Andersson swap makes total sense for Calgary if they want to continue to push for playoffs.
Click to expand...
It makes sense, but I don't think that's a playoff move. Both players have slowed down considerably with 80+ games played. I don't think Matheson puts the Flames above others to get a playoff spot. Same on our side.
 
Redux91 said:
Yeah the writings on the wall now, it's pretty clear
He can still 100% have a chair on an NHL team, for sure

But his chair on THIS team? It's gone now
Gotta move on, or it'll be a huuuuuge mistake and albatross contract
Click to expand...
We can see why a Matheson who has endured all the losing, wants to stay though.........could there be a sweetheart discount deal in the waiting?? The team is on the upswing.....
The habs can't turn the D over to all the kids can they? We need some veteran type guys.
Matheson can skate like the wind...........in a modified role he could be a keeper??
 
WeThreeKings said:
Matheson for Andersson swap makes total sense for Calgary if they want to continue to push for playoffs.
Click to expand...
It makes sense for us, they would be doing us a favor or we would have to add a lot.

If they trade Andersson there will be a bidding war and no chance Matheson wins that bidding war, even if he’s willing to waive and extend
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 6 (members: 1, guests: 5)

Latest posts

Ad

Ad

Top Bottom