Player Discussion Mike Matheson

[Mrb1p]

Lol

Pretty sure WAR stats are supposed to already factor in deployment and you do realize that the issue with a small sample size is that it can't say whether that level of play will be sustainable and not that it will say someone is doing great when they are actually doing bad. So for Barron the stats should have told us he was bad because he was, the sample size argument would say we can't say he'll always be that bad because the sample size is too small to make that kind of prediction.

And frankly at this point I feel I should just respond with Guhle not having a big enough sample size compared to Matheson. I mean the difference in TOI between Guhle and Struble was about 300 minutes, the difference between Matheson and Guhle is about 900. But sure sample size, sample size, sample size whenever something doesn't fit your narrative.

Meh, dishonest at best.

Go off and prove to us Matheson is even remotely close to Guhle or Hutson

 

[Sorinth]

Meh, dishonest at best.

Go off and prove to us Matheson is even remotely close to Guhle or Hutson

Yes your arguments are dishonest at best, and I don't need to prove Matheson is close, the head coach obviously agrees with me which is why Matheson gets the minutes he does. Hutson arguably has overtaken him which is shown in the usage, and hopefully Guhle will be able to overtake him soon. But even if/when that happens there's still a spot for Matheson since we want more quality D not less.

 

[Mrb1p]

Yes your arguments are dishonest at best, and I don't need to prove Matheson is close, the head coach obviously agrees with me which is why Matheson gets the minutes he does. Hutson arguably has overtaken him which is shown in the usage, and hopefully Guhle will be able to overtake him soon. But even if/when that happens there's still a spot for Matheson since we want more quality D not less.

So, I back up my arguments with multiple stats.

You back yours up with an appeal to authority?

 

[HabsCowboysOwn]

Bum should have been traded after his flash in the pan 60 pts season for max value, the sooner he gets off this team the better.

 

[Sorinth]

So, I back up my arguments with multiple stats.

You back yours up with an appeal to authority?

Stats that say not only was Barron better then Carrier was, Carrier was in fact worse then an AHL callup would have been. Stats that say without Lane Hutson we would have had only 2 less wins last season.

Oh and since you'll no doubt scream sample size again, the number's you showed were for the whole season including Barron's time in Nashville. So it's actually very comparable to Guhle in both games played and TOI.

Backing up your argument with bad stats doesn't help your case. The dishonest part is claiming sample size problems covers everything you don't want to accept even though the sample size is very close to the thing you claim it proves.

 

[Mrb1p]

Stats that say not only was Barron better then Carrier was, Carrier was in fact worse then an AHL callup would have been. Stats that say without Lane Hutson we would have had only 2 less wins last season.

Oh and since you'll no doubt scream sample size again, the number's you showed were for the whole season including Barron's time in Nashville. So it's actually very comparable to Guhle in both games played and TOI.

Backing up your argument with bad stats doesn't help your case. The dishonest part is claiming sample size problems covers everything you don't want to accept even though the sample size is very close to the thing you claim it proves.

Sample size as in, players playing less, lmao. Barron barely played and its a sample of 60ish games. We have 400+ games of Matheson and 200+ of Guhle that support my claims.

 

[BLONG7]

Yes your arguments are dishonest at best, and I don't need to prove Matheson is close, the head coach obviously agrees with me which is why Matheson gets the minutes he does. Hutson arguably has overtaken him which is shown in the usage, and hopefully Guhle will be able to overtake him soon. But even if/when that happens there's still a spot for Matheson since we want more quality D not less.

MSL does some strange things.........not sure that's the hill you wanna die on.

 

[Sorinth]

MSL does some strange things.........not sure that's the hill you wanna die on.

So instead I should discard what I see when watching the game because somebody somewhere came up with a stat that says Barron was great and Matheson was bad?

Are you sure that's the hill you want to die on?

 

[BLONG7]

So instead I should discard what I see when watching the game because somebody somewhere came up with a stat that says Barron was great and Matheson was bad?

Are you sure that's the hill you want to die on?

Relax man, MSL does some strange crap.
So does Matheson at times..............and yet he can be one of the best skaters on the team.
He can stay or go................perspective.

 

[Sorinth]

Sample size as in, players playing less, lmao. Barron barely played and its a sample of 60ish games. We have 400+ games of Matheson and 200+ of Guhle that support my claims.

If 60 games aren't enough to tell you that Barron was bad last season I don't think more games are going to help.

But fine, if the only thing that matters is advanced stats for the past 3 years, here's Point Share from hockey-reference.com

Player	2024-2025	2024-2023	2023-2022
Mike Matheson	5.3	6.7	5.4
Kaiden Guhle	4.0	3.1	1.4
Lane Hutson	8.9	-	-

 

[Mrb1p]

If 60 games aren't enough to tell you that Barron was bad last season I don't think more games are going to help.

But fine, if the only thing that matters is advanced stats for the past 3 years, here's Point Share from hockey-reference.com

Player	2024-2025	2024-2023	2023-2022
Mike Matheson	5.3	6.7	5.4
Kaiden Guhle	4.0	3.1	1.4
Lane Hutson	8.9	-	-

Point hsares aren't actual statistics. Theres a reason no one uses them.

 

[Sorinth]

Point hsares aren't actual statistics. Theres a reason no one uses them.

And WAR is? Give me a break.

 

[Mrb1p]

And WAR is? Give me a break.

Both are flawed, but WAR is more accurate. Point shares is severly outdated and nobody uses it.

 

[Sorinth]

Both are flawed, but WAR is more accurate. Point shares is severly outdated and nobody uses it.

Not sure you have much of a leg to stand on in terms of accuracy given the very obviously nonsensical rankings you posted.

 

[StCaufield]

His offensive numbers only dropped off once Hutson was given his offensive minutes (pp mostly), and he can point at Guhle and ask for his money considering his usage on the team.

Exactly. That’s why he doesn’t get a raise

 

[koivalev]

I really really hope they don't re-sign Matheson. Guhle-Carrier and Struble-Hutson (not ideal to have him on the right long term, but they did have a nearly 60% xGF%) have the top 4 locked down, so Matheson would have to be on the 3rd pairing blocking multiple of Xhekaj, Engstrom, Reinbacher, Mailloux, Konyushkov in 2026. Just doesn't make sense to me.

 

[Scriptor]

I really really hope they don't re-sign Matheson. Guhle-Carrier and Struble-Hutson (not ideal to have him on the right long term, but they did have a nearly 60% xGF%) have the top 4 locked down, so Matheson would have to be on the 3rd pairing blocking multiple of Xhekaj, Engstrom, Reinbacher, Mailloux, Konyushkov in 2026. Just doesn't make sense to me.

In the NHL, injuries are a real thing. Reinbacher and Guhle last season, Matheson, even, a few years back, are recent proof of that. I like the idea of having matheson around for a few more seasons, as a safety net, in case of injuries, to prevent the D-Corps to fall apart as the team continues to try to progress to another level.

If you can convert Matheson for an equivalent D, in the same age range, only on the right side,wewould definitely be better, but that isn't a Carrier-like addition.It means a bigger, more mobile, fasterRHD who can support the rush and create some offense, both at even strength and on the PP.

Even when he doesn't create offense, Matheson's ability to carry the puck from inside his own zone to the offensive zones a welcome relief when the pressure is on in our own zone. It's a good option to have to get the puck into the O-zone.

Matheson is not a premiere D in this league, and certainly has the flaw of getting occasionally caught out of position, or coughing up the puck unexpectedly, but he is paid only 4.875M for the positive that he brings and is definitely providing better value than he is getting paid for.

A lot of the problem when analyzing Matheson is the wrong expectations attributed to the player. Of course, perhaps some of that has to do with the lack of NHL-ready depth in the lineup and the hesd coach attributing top-pairing minutes to Matheson.

Carrier also gets those minutes, but plays a simple game with much less risk attached to it. It certainly isn't the performance you would expect from a 1st pairing D, but it is defensively sound and effective as means to buy time staying out of trouble against the opponents' best players and allowing other lines and pairings to exploit weaker opposition later.

That's what needs be done when you aren't icing stallions. Let the work horse keep pulling the plough slowly, but steadily.

However, if fans were being honest, they'd need to recognize that the shutdown pairing of Matheson - Carrier had a role to play in keeping the Habs in playoff contention for a while last season (with Guhle out due to injury) and fans need to recognize that Matheson was graciously willing to step back without complaining once Hutson took over on PP1.

St-Louis was right to wait a little before passing the baton, for team harmony, and so Hutson didn't just have everything handed over to him on a silver platter.

 

[Redux91]

In the NHL, injuries are a real thing. Reinbacher and Guhle last season, Matheson, even, a few years back, are recent proof of that. I like the idea of having matheson around for a few more seasons, as a safety net, in case of injuries, to prevent the D-Corps to fall apart as the team continues to try to progress to another level.

If you can convert Matheson for an equivalent D, in the same age range, only on the right side,wewould definitely be better, but that isn't a Carrier-like addition.It means a bigger, more mobile, fasterRHD who can support the rush and create some offense, both at even strength and on the PP.

Even when he doesn't create offense, Matheson's ability to carry the puck from inside his own zone to the offensive zones a welcome relief when the pressure is on in our own zone. It's a good option to have to get the puck into the O-zone.

Matheson is not a premiere D in this league, and certainly has the flaw of getting occasionally caught out of position, or coughing up the puck unexpectedly, but he is paid only 4.875M for the positive that he brings and is definitely providing better value than he is getting paid for.

A lot of the problem when analyzing Matheson is the wrong expectations attributed to the player. Of course, perhaps some of that has to do with the lack of NHL-ready depth in the lineup and the hesd coach attributing top-pairing minutes to Matheson.

Carrier also gets those minutes, but plays a simple game with much less risk attached to it. It certainly isn't the performance you would expect from a 1st pairing D, but it is defensively sound and effective as means to buy time staying out of trouble against the opponents' best players and allowing other lines and pairings to exploit weaker opposition later.

That's what needs be done when you aren't icing stallions. Let the work horse keep pulling the plough slowly, but steadily.

However, if fans were being honest, they'd need to recognize that the shutdown pairing of Matheson - Carrier had a role to play in keeping the Habs in playoff contention for a while last season (with Guhle out due to injury) and fans need to recognize that Matheson was graciously willing to step back without complaining once Hutson took over on PP1.

St-Louis was right to wait a little before passing the baton, for team harmony, and so Hutson didn't just have everything handed over to him on a silver platter.

No.

 

[Scriptor]

Sample size as in, players playing less, lmao. Barron barely played and its a sample of 60ish games. We have 400+ games of Matheson and 200+ of Guhle that support my claims.

Actually, not very much supports your claims, but, keep having fun.

 

[koivalev]

In the NHL, injuries are a real thing. Reinbacher and Guhle last season, Matheson, even, a few years back, are recent proof of that. I like the idea of having matheson around for a few more seasons, as a safety net, in case of injuries, to prevent the D-Corps to fall apart as the team continues to try to progress to another level.

If you can convert Matheson for an equivalent D, in the same age range, only on the right side,wewould definitely be better, but that isn't a Carrier-like addition.It means a bigger, more mobile, fasterRHD who can support the rush and create some offense, both at even strength and on the PP.

Even when he doesn't create offense, Matheson's ability to carry the puck from inside his own zone to the offensive zones a welcome relief when the pressure is on in our own zone. It's a good option to have to get the puck into the O-zone.

Matheson is not a premiere D in this league, and certainly has the flaw of getting occasionally caught out of position, or coughing up the puck unexpectedly, but he is paid only 4.875M for the positive that he brings and is definitely providing better value than he is getting paid for.

A lot of the problem when analyzing Matheson is the wrong expectations attributed to the player. Of course, perhaps some of that has to do with the lack of NHL-ready depth in the lineup and the hesd coach attributing top-pairing minutes to Matheson.

Carrier also gets those minutes, but plays a simple game with much less risk attached to it. It certainly isn't the performance you would expect from a 1st pairing D, but it is defensively sound and effective as means to buy time staying out of trouble against the opponents' best players and allowing other lines and pairings to exploit weaker opposition later.

That's what needs be done when you aren't icing stallions. Let the work horse keep pulling the plough slowly, but steadily.

However, if fans were being honest, they'd need to recognize that the shutdown pairing of Matheson - Carrier had a role to play in keeping the Habs in playoff contention for a while last season (with Guhle out due to injury) and fans need to recognize that Matheson was graciously willing to step back without complaining once Hutson took over on PP1.

St-Louis was right to wait a little before passing the baton, for team harmony, and so Hutson didn't just have everything handed over to him on a silver platter.

I'll push back on the whole Matheson-Carrier shut down pairing thing. Down the stretch (post 4-Nations, so since game 56 when Montreal was 1 game below .500), Matheson and Carrier had a 39.39 GF% and a 40.85 xGF% at 5 on 5.

That includes a 2.99 GA/60 at 5 on 5 (compared to 1.42 for Struble-Hutson, 2.68 for Xhekaj-Savard, 1.98 for Guhle-Hutson, and 1.63 for Struble-Savard).

Even if we do it by xGA/60, it becomes 2.96 vs 2.14, 3.25 (thank God Savard is gone), 3.66, and 2.95.

What that tells me is
A) Matheson and Carrier weren't shutting anything down
B) Hutson and Guhle need to not play together
C) Playing Savard at all down the stretch was a bewildering decision
D) Hutson is so goddamn good (in that span he was also 69.1 xGF% with Matheson and 78.03 xGF% with Carrier lmao, we're so lucky GMs are size queens)

 

[Mrb1p]

Actually, not very much supports your claims, but, keep having fun.

I can't post 5 different stats and you just ignore it lmao.

This is insane

 

[Mrb1p]

I'll push back on the whole Matheson-Carrier shut down pairing thing. Down the stretch (post 4-Nations, so since game 56 when Montreal was 1 game below .500), Matheson and Carrier had a 39.39 GF% and a 40.85 xGF% at 5 on 5.

That includes a 2.99 GA/60 at 5 on 5 (compared to 1.42 for Struble-Hutson, 2.68 for Xhekaj-Savard, 1.98 for Guhle-Hutson, and 1.63 for Struble-Savard).

Even if we do it by xGA/60, it becomes 2.96 vs 2.14, 3.25 (thank God Savard is gone), 3.66, and 2.95.

What that tells me is
A) Matheson and Carrier weren't shutting anything down
B) Hutson and Guhle need to not play together
C) Playing Savard at all down the stretch was a bewildering decision
D) Hutson is so goddamn good (in that span he was also 69.1 xGF% with Matheson and 78.03 xGF% with Carrier lmao, we're so lucky GMs are size queens)

Carrier went from having the best stats in the league when he was with Guhle to having the worst stats in the league with Matheson.

Gee whizz I wonder why!

 

[koivalev]

Carrier went from having the best stats in the league when he was with Guhle to having the worst stats in the league with Matheson.

Gee whizz I wonder why!

Feels like I'm watching a different player than others sometimes (don't even get me started on Habs fans on a certain website with an alien mascot)

 

[Mrb1p]

Feels like I'm watching a different player than others sometimes (don't even get me started on Habs fans on a certain website with an alien mascot)

Yes. Its insane lol.

 

[RandR]

In the NHL, injuries are a real thing. Reinbacher and Guhle last season, Matheson, even, a few years back, are recent proof of that. I like the idea of having matheson around for a few more seasons, as a safety net, in case of injuries, to prevent the D-Corps to fall apart as the team continues to try to progress to another level.

If you can convert Matheson for an equivalent D, in the same age range, only on the right side,wewould definitely be better, but that isn't a Carrier-like addition.It means a bigger, more mobile, fasterRHD who can support the rush and create some offense, both at even strength and on the PP.

Even when he doesn't create offense, Matheson's ability to carry the puck from inside his own zone to the offensive zones a welcome relief when the pressure is on in our own zone. It's a good option to have to get the puck into the O-zone.

Matheson is not a premiere D in this league, and certainly has the flaw of getting occasionally caught out of position, or coughing up the puck unexpectedly, but he is paid only 4.875M for the positive that he brings and is definitely providing better value than he is getting paid for.

A lot of the problem when analyzing Matheson is the wrong expectations attributed to the player. Of course, perhaps some of that has to do with the lack of NHL-ready depth in the lineup and the hesd coach attributing top-pairing minutes to Matheson.

Carrier also gets those minutes, but plays a simple game with much less risk attached to it. It certainly isn't the performance you would expect from a 1st pairing D, but it is defensively sound and effective as means to buy time staying out of trouble against the opponents' best players and allowing other lines and pairings to exploit weaker opposition later.

That's what needs be done when you aren't icing stallions. Let the work horse keep pulling the plough slowly, but steadily.

However, if fans were being honest, they'd need to recognize that the shutdown pairing of Matheson - Carrier had a role to play in keeping the Habs in playoff contention for a while last season (with Guhle out due to injury) and fans need to recognize that Matheson was graciously willing to step back without complaining once Hutson took over on PP1.

St-Louis was right to wait a little before passing the baton, for team harmony, and so Hutson didn't just have everything handed over to him on a silver platter.

I think this is an excellent post, covering many good points.

There were 2 problems in particular that the Habs had in previous season which they had to solve if they were to have any chance of making the playoffs last year.

- inability to get the puck out of their own zone when under pressure. Matheson and Carrier, in different ways, made a huge contribution there. In those situations, Matheson is really good as skating the puck out and Carrier is really good at making a simple and quick play as soon as he touches the puck (contrast that with Barron who seemed to take forever to decide what to do with the puck when he got it)

- winning one goal games. Others can look up the stats but the Habs had a terrible record in 1-goal games before last year. Contrast that with last year when I remember quite a few games where the Habs were up by a single goal into the third period and were able to preserve those wins. St-Louis trusted Matheson (and Savard) with big minutes in those games due to their experience. In those games there were more than a few times when Matheson was absolutely huge in late penalty kills, including multiple 4on3s or 5on3s (with Evans at C).

I also agree with the point about Matheson on the PP. There was a heck of a lot of impatient complaining on this board the few first games when St-Louis wasn't replacing Matheson with Hutson on PP1 from game one. Yes, it was inevitable that Hutson would eventually replace Matheson on PP1, but St-Louis was right to make Hutson earn it instead of being given it and was also right to respect how many points Matheson put up the year before before taking that role away from him.

The way I view Matheson is that he was important enough for the Habs for where they now sit in the league, without him they would not have made the playoffs last year, and I think St-Louis will want to be able to rely on his obvious strengths for another year or two. However, due to his obvious flaws and penchant for mistakes, the Habs will have to eventually move on from him and instead rely on their excellent group of young D players and prospects (especially Hutson, Guhle and Reinbacher) if they are going to evolve into cup contenders a couple or more years from now. That is what happened in Florida; he was in their top-4 at D when the Panthers got back into the playoffs for the first time in a few years in 2019-2020, but he made far too many mistakes in key moments and thus Florida had to move on from him before they could become a cup contender.