Player Discussion Mike Matheson

[Mrb1p]

Matheson good ooga-booga

 

[Sorinth]

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)

Here's there OZ start % in that post 4-Nations period
Matheson 28.3%
Carrier 28.6%
Savard 41.9%
Xhekaj 44.5%
Guhle 57.3%
Struble 66.6%
Hutson 75.1%

Is it really any surprise that Matheson/Carrier were giving up more goals then Guhle, Struble, Hutson? In fact during that time for D who played a min of 10 games Hutson was 1st in the entire NHL and Matheson was last at 215th.

 

[koivalev]

Here's there OZ start % in that post 4-Nations period
Matheson 28.3%
Carrier 28.6%
Savard 41.9%
Xhekaj 44.5%
Guhle 57.3%
Struble 66.6%
Hutson 75.1%

Is it really any surprise that Matheson/Carrier were giving up more goals then Guhle, Struble, Hutson? In fact during that time for D who played a min of 10 games Hutson was 1st in the entire NHL and Matheson was last at 215th.

Most shifts start on the fly, ozs% has always been a bit of a red herring

 

[Sorinth]

Most shifts start on the fly, ozs% has always been a bit of a red herring

Yes the majority of shifts start on the fly but that's not the point because it's still a good measure of role simply because there is generally a good correlation with role. If there's a pairing that's your go to pairing for D zone starts, then it's likely that they are also going up against the opponent's best players even when it's an on the fly shift.

 

[koivalev]

Yes the majority of shifts start on the fly but that's not the point because it's still a good measure of role simply because there is generally a good correlation with role. If there's a pairing that's your go to pairing for D zone starts, then it's likely that they are also going up against the opponent's best players even when it's an on the fly shift.

And that would be fine to say they were valuable in a shut down role if they actually shut them down, but they didn't. They got absolutely shelled at 5 on 5, and somehow managed to post a lower xGF/60 than a pairing made up of Xhekaj and Savard.

We made the playoffs because of two players named Lane and Nick playing out of their minds for 26 games down the stretch.

 

[Sorinth]

And that would be fine to say they were valuable in a shut down role if they actually shut them down, but they didn't. They got absolutely shelled at 5 on 5, and somehow managed to post a lower xGF/60 than a pairing made up of Xhekaj and Savard.

We made the playoffs because of two players named Lane and Nick playing out of their minds for 26 games down the stretch.

But that "shelling" you claim is a direct result of being used in such defensive roles. Whoever you put in that role will get "shelled", that's the nature of going up against truly elite players they will generate a lot of offensive chances and nobody can actually prevent that over the long term. For example defending against McDavid and keeping him to a single point is a success, because his normal is actually much higher then that.

 

[koivalev]

But that "shelling" you claim is a direct result of being used in such defensive roles. Whoever you put in that role will get "shelled", that's the nature of going up against truly elite players they will generate a lot of offensive chances and nobody can actually prevent that over the long term. For example defending against McDavid and keeping him to a single point is a success, because his normal is actually much higher then that.

But that's not really a success. Even if you play 20 minutes, all against McDavid at even strength, he averages 1.15 EVP/60, or 0.3833 points over 20 minutes.

A 40% xGF% is getting shelled at 5 on 5, regardless of deployment.

 

[Redux91]

But that "shelling" you claim is a direct result of being used in such defensive roles. Whoever you put in that role will get "shelled",

Not necessarily
An actual defensive D would do a lot better there than an offensive D

We needed Matheson for the PP, he has since been replaced with a much better option

Now we're using him to be stay at home D defensive D and surprise surprise, he's not cut out for it
And now needs a raise??
HA

They will do what needs to be done
I just can't make any sense at all from people who think we need to keep him around for some reason, none

 

[Mrb1p]

But that "shelling" you claim is a direct result of being used in such defensive roles. Whoever you put in that role will get "shelled", that's the nature of going up against truly elite players they will generate a lot of offensive chances and nobody can actually prevent that over the long term. For example defending against McDavid and keeping him to a single point is a success, because his normal is actually much higher then that.

No, its a direct result of being bad. Again, look at the graph I posted last page, Guhle is getting the same deployment, yet he doesn't get f***ing shelled crazy style.

 

[Sorinth]

Not necessarily
An actual defensive D would do a lot better there than an offensive D

We needed Matheson for the PP, he has since been replaced with a much better option

Now we're using him to be stay at home D defensive D and surprise surprise, he's not cut out for it
And now needs a raise??
HA

They will do what needs to be done
I just can't make any sense at all from people who think we need to keep him around for some reason, none

There's no doubt a number of D who would do better, but your average top-4 defensive D is unlikely to have done a better job.

Don't be surprised if in late summer they feel "what needs to be done" is re-sign him. And I would guess the reason why you can't make sense of it is that you are focused on the highlight reel play vs the brain farts and come to the conclusion the bad outweighs the good. But doing so you miss all the non-highlight reel defensive plays that he's doing that do more then make up for the brain farts.

 

[Sorinth]

No, its a direct result of being bad. Again, look at the graph I posted last page, Guhle is getting the same deployment, yet he doesn't get f***ing shelled crazy style.

In the period being discussed Guhle wasn't getting the same deployment, Guhle was in fact in a very sheltered deployment. If looking at the whole season where yes the deployment is very similar we see that the end result in xGF% is also pretty much identical between the two at 45.62% vs 45.68%.

 

[Miller Time]

Not necessarily
An actual defensive D would do a lot better there than an offensive D

We needed Matheson for the PP, he has since been replaced with a much better option

Now we're using him to be stay at home D defensive D and surprise surprise, he's not cut out for it
And now needs a raise??
HA

They will do what needs to be done
I just can't make any sense at all from people who think we need to keep him around for some reason, none

umm... last season Matheson was the 2nd most used player in the entire NHL at SH... on the 7th ranked PK in the league.

Savard was #2 on our team... Carrier at #3 played almost 200min fewer than Matheson.

Pretty strong indication that we "needed" Matheson for the PK more than anything last season, no?


i don't really get this notion that "we need to keep him around". But it's pretty odd that you don't understand the reason's why our organization very much would "want" to keep him around.

take 2 min, look up how much he actually played for the team this year, relative both to the other players on our roster, and relative to other Dmen league wide... ask yourself if you like seeing our roster able to perform at a level required to make the playoffs, and then it should make perfect sense to you.

If Matheson is moved, we'll need to replace his impact just to maintain the performance level we saw from this roster a year ago. We are already losing Savard (who despite the flack, also did contribute a much needed impact) and while I'm on the bullish side of what Strubble/Xhekaj/Reinbacher could do for us next season, relying on 21-22-23 year old dmen with limited experience to step in and replace 25min/night of quality top 4 performance is a risky bet, not even considering injury depth.

and it goes without saying that there is no realistic path forward to replace or upgrade on Matheson at his cap hit. Any dmen signed as UFAs this summer that can play 25min/night are going to cost at least 50% more, if not double his 4.875 cap charge.

Need Matheson? nah... Need to externally replace or upgrade on him if we don't want to take a step back, absolutely.

 

[Mrb1p]

In the period being discussed Guhle wasn't getting the same deployment, Guhle was in fact in a very sheltered deployment. If looking at the whole season where yes the deployment is very similar we see that the end result in xGF% is also pretty much identical between the two at 45.62% vs 45.68%.

Guhle was injured in that time frame

 

[Sorinth]

Guhle was injured in that time frame

Not all of it

 

[Mrb1p]

Not all of it

He got injured before the 4-nations and came back to play the last 11 games. You believe he was 100% ?

 

[Sorinth]

He got injured before the 4-nations and came back to play the last 11 games. You believe he was 100% ?

Nobody is 100% at the end of a long season, Guhle wasn't rushed back so it's irrelevant.

If xGF% is what we are using to judge Matheson's defensive play, then I'll repeat his numbers are basically identical to Guhle's over the whole season, 45.68% vs 45.68%.

 

[Mrb1p]

Nobody is 100% at the end of a long season, Guhle wasn't rushed back so it's irrelevant.

If xGF% is what we are using to judge Matheson's defensive play, then I'll repeat his numbers are basically identical to Guhle's over the whole season, 45.68% vs 45.68%.

Yes, he was rushed back, lol.

 

[koivalev]

umm... last season Matheson was the 2nd most used player in the entire NHL at SH... on the 7th ranked PK in the league.

Savard was #2 on our team... Carrier at #3 played almost 200min fewer than Matheson.

Pretty strong indication that we "needed" Matheson for the PK more than anything last season, no?


i don't really get this notion that "we need to keep him around". But it's pretty odd that you don't understand the reason's why our organization very much would "want" to keep him around.

take 2 min, look up how much he actually played for the team this year, relative both to the other players on our roster, and relative to other Dmen league wide... ask yourself if you like seeing our roster able to perform at a level required to make the playoffs, and then it should make perfect sense to you.

If Matheson is moved, we'll need to replace his impact just to maintain the performance level we saw from this roster a year ago. We are already losing Savard (who despite the flack, also did contribute a much needed impact) and while I'm on the bullish side of what Strubble/Xhekaj/Reinbacher could do for us next season, relying on 21-22-23 year old dmen with limited experience to step in and replace 25min/night of quality top 4 performance is a risky bet, not even considering injury depth.

and it goes without saying that there is no realistic path forward to replace or upgrade on Matheson at his cap hit. Any dmen signed as UFAs this summer that can play 25min/night are going to cost at least 50% more, if not double his 4.875 cap charge.

Need Matheson? nah... Need to externally replace or upgrade on him if we don't want to take a step back, absolutely.

Montreal's PK this year was pretty much entirely a result of insane goaltending during it. Seriously, look at Monty, Dobeš, and even Primeau's stats shorthanded.

 

[Miller Time]

Montreal's PK this year was pretty much entirely a result of insane goaltending during it. Seriously, look at Monty, Dobeš, and even Primeau's stats shorthanded.

If you take a moment to think about what you wrote, you might realize that the common denominator is not what you think it is...

 

[koivalev]

If you take a moment to think about what you wrote, you might realize that the common denominator is not what you think it is...

The common denominator is Dobeš and Primeau being basically top of the league in high danger unblocked shot save % on the PK lol. Our xGA on the PK was much higher than Vegas for example, but they didn't get the goaltending and had a bottom 7 PK.

 

[Scriptor]

This is a horrible thread with everyone tugging the blanket firmly their way, just trying to be right and not listening to anything that might threaten that.

Some horrible misrepresentation of the situation as well. Disingenuous, as it often is.

 

[Miller Time]

The common denominator is Dobeš and Primeau being basically top of the league in high danger unblocked shot save % on the PK lol. Our xGA on the PK was much higher than Vegas for example, but they didn't get the goaltending and had a bottom 7 PK.

Hidden in plain sight

 

[Miller Time]

This is a horrible thread with everyone tugging the blanket firmly their way, just trying to be right and not listening to anything that might threaten that.

Some horrible misrepresentation of the situation as well. Disingenuous, as it often is.

If you think this thread is bad, you better stay away from the Slaf & DR threads lol

 

[Walksss]

umm... last season Matheson was the 2nd most used player in the entire NHL at SH... on the 7th ranked PK in the league.

Savard was #2 on our team... Carrier at #3 played almost 200min fewer than Matheson.

Pretty strong indication that we "needed" Matheson for the PK more than anything last season, no?


i don't really get this notion that "we need to keep him around". But it's pretty odd that you don't understand the reason's why our organization very much would "want" to keep him around.

take 2 min, look up how much he actually played for the team this year, relative both to the other players on our roster, and relative to other Dmen league wide... ask yourself if you like seeing our roster able to perform at a level required to make the playoffs, and then it should make perfect sense to you.

If Matheson is moved, we'll need to replace his impact just to maintain the performance level we saw from this roster a year ago. We are already losing Savard (who despite the flack, also did contribute a much needed impact) and while I'm on the bullish side of what Strubble/Xhekaj/Reinbacher could do for us next season, relying on 21-22-23 year old dmen with limited experience to step in and replace 25min/night of quality top 4 performance is a risky bet, not even considering injury depth.

and it goes without saying that there is no realistic path forward to replace or upgrade on Matheson at his cap hit. Any dmen signed as UFAs this summer that can play 25min/night are going to cost at least 50% more, if not double his 4.875 cap charge.

Need Matheson? nah... Need to externally replace or upgrade on him if we don't want to take a step back, absolutely.

This is a great post, it's a shame everyone will ignore it because it goes against their entrenched opinions.

The question remains where on earth are you going to replace what Matheson provides for $4.8 mil? Some of the boneheads on this board have tried to sell me that Arber Xhekaj would be a better option than Mike Matheson because that's the high level hockey knowledge we're blessed with on this site.

Totally agree that MM will need to be replaced, it's just not that easy because Xhekaj, Struble or some Hague guy are not the answer. Maybe Adam Engstrom could continue his growth and we get an answer there. Otherwise I don't think our cap structure is gonna allow us to sign a true replacement. Won't stop the usual suspects from crying a river and then floating down it together though.

 

[Mrb1p]

This is a horrible thread with everyone tugging the blanket firmly their way, just trying to be right and not listening to anything that might threaten that.

Some horrible misrepresentation of the situation as well. Disingenuous, as it often is.

We can agree to disagree on the flavour of cakes we like, not on Matheson being horseshit.