Value of: Mike Matheson

LemonSauceD

HFBoards Sponsor
Sponsor
Jul 31, 2015
8,018
13,708
Vancouver
This guy has very minimal value @ 4.87 and the extra year, imo.

This is someone you wanna hide against top players and high leverage Dzone situations.

I am very skeptical that he is viewed as an impactful Top4 dman who would push other players down in the lineup by any other NHL teams. I think teams would view him as a depth addition playing down in the lineup.
Matheson has averaged 24-25 minutes a season since he became a Hab.

He’s also been one of the most efficient point producers on the backend. Obviously he gets favourable o zone starts.

He’s similar to Dougie Hamilton for instance. If you pair him with a solid defensive player and reduce his ice time to about 18-20 minutes, he should be a serviceable top 4 dman on any team. I think the criticism he’s getting is a bit harsh.
 

Playmaker09

Registered User
Sep 11, 2008
3,530
1,823
This guy has very minimal value @ 4.87 and the extra year, imo.

This is someone you wanna hide against top players and high leverage Dzone situations.

I am very skeptical that he is viewed as an impactful Top4 dman who would push other players down in the lineup by any other NHL teams. I think teams would view him as a depth addition playing down in the lineup.
You say that yet teams have given up large returns for Shattenkirk, Yandle, Barrie, Kaberle, Goligoski. Klingberg was offered a massive contract by Dallas etc.

There always seems to be a buyer for a 20+min a night D who can run a PP, no matter the flaws.
 
  • Like
Reactions: zeeto

StreetHawk

Registered User
Sep 30, 2017
29,039
11,241
If the Habs do move Matheson and Savard (due to be a UFA), they need to be prepared and committed to spend possibly both cash on a contract and assets to get a couple of quality veteran Dman. Their D really needs help.
 

Filthy Dangles

Registered User*
Sponsor
Oct 23, 2014
29,809
42,184
Matheson has averaged 24-25 minutes a season since he became a Hab.

He’s also been one of the most efficient point producers on the backend. Obviously he gets favourable o zone starts.

I’d take him over Dougie Hamilton for instance. If you pair him with a solid defensive player and reduce his ice time to about 18-20 minutes, he should be a serviceable top 4 dman on any team. I think the criticism he’s getting is a bit harsh.

So he'd need a good partner, reduction in minutes, and then should be merely serviceable? That does not sound very valuable. Esp. factoring in the contract.

You say that yet teams have given up large returns for Shattenkirk, Yandle, Barrie, Kaberle, Goligoski. Klingberg was offered a massive contract by Dallas etc.

There always seems to be a buyer for a 20+min a night D who can run a PP, no matter the flaws.

Matheson isn't even that good of a PP guy. He's decent, he's only PP1 because he's on MTL. He would not be that on other teams.

Depth defenseman rather than bonafide top4dman/PPQB is how good teams would see him.
 

Habs Halifax

Loyal Habs Fan
Jul 11, 2016
70,798
27,851
East Coast
So he'd need a good partner, reduction in minutes, and then should be merely serviceable? That does not sound very valuable. Esp. factoring in the contract.



Matheson isn't even that good of a PP guy. He's decent, he's only PP1 because he's on MTL. He would not be that on other teams.

Depth defenseman rather than bonafide top4dman/PPQB is how good teams would see him.

Truth is usually in the middle and I feel it applies to this narrative with Matheson. You might be right that Habs are putting too much value with Matheson but then you may also be wrong by lowering it down too much. That sort of thingy. He's not just a depth D man. Sorry, that is just not accurate. He's a good #3 or 4 guy but belongs in the mix with guys who know how to play D. Your guy Rielly is kind of the same. Not really that great in his own end but holds his own... ideally, you want him paired up with a mobile physical stud so he can focus on offense a bit more. Does that mean Rielly sucks or is overrated? NO

Matheson's value would not be less than what the Leafs got in return for Sandin. ;)
 

ElPrimeTime

Registered User
Dec 23, 2014
988
918
Edmonton, AB
You say that yet teams have given up large returns for Shattenkirk, Yandle, Barrie, Kaberle, Goligoski. Klingberg was offered a massive contract by Dallas etc.

There always seems to be a buyer for a 20+min a night D who can run a PP, no matter the flaws.

I don't think it's accurate to compare when those players were traded vs, the Matheson situation right now. Outside of Kaberle, all the players you mentioned were between 26-28 years old and none of those trades happened in the last 5 years. There weren't as many d-man who could put up 60 points back then (Shattenkirk was 4th out of d-men the year he was traded with 56 points in 80 games).

Klingberg's "big contract" with the Stars was signed in 2015. He got two more contracts in 2022 and 2023 and is now out of the league at age 32.

In 2023, Klingberg and Gostisbehere (probably similar comparables) did not have outstanding returns and they were pending UFAs. Klingberg (age 30) returned Andrej Sustr, Nikita Nesterenko and a 2025 4th round pick and Ghost (29) returned a 3rd.

Now if he were a stupid slow, physical, bruising defensive d-man, then he'd probably get a first because teams get stupid for those at the deadline.
 

Filthy Dangles

Registered User*
Sponsor
Oct 23, 2014
29,809
42,184
Truth is usually in the middle and I feel it applies to this narrative with Matheson. You might be right that Habs are putting too much value with Matheson but then you may also be wrong by lowering it down too much. That sort of thingy. He's not just a depth D man. Sorry, that is just not accurate. He's a good #3 or 4 guy but belongs in the mix with guys who know how to play D. Your guy Rielly is kind of the same. Not really that great in his own end but holds his own... ideally, you want him paired up with a mobile physical stud so he can focus on offense a bit more. Does that mean Rielly sucks or is overrated? NO

Matheson's value would not be less than what the Leafs got in return for Sandin. ;)

Not a Leafs fan, i guess everyone assumes so because the avatar lol.

But Sandin was 22 when traded and was not making a lot of money, 1.4M. Caps targeted him for the future and as much for upside.

Matheson is a 30 year old vet. I don't see him getting a 1st round pick but ibve been wrong before.

Let's see what happens i guess....
 

Digitalbooya

By order of the Peaky Blinders
Sponsor
Jul 10, 2010
27,936
7,915
Wisconsin
Feel like Matheson is the exact kind of guy that even amongst NHL GMs and pro scouts there's wildly differing opinions. The big problem for MTL is I just don't see the fit anywhere. What contender 1) needs an offensive 2LD 2) can fit in the contract for a second year in-season and 3) is willing to give up a 1st+?

I feel like MIN is probably the closest to hitting all 3? Cap and futures to play with, competing but also Matheson would be a clear upgrade to their group. FLA maybe if they can accrue enough space at the deadline? Probably the best on-ice fit but would almost certainly prevent them from bringing Ekblad back though.
Minnesota makes sense fit wise, the contract length coincides with Kaprizov's next contract and bridges them into Buium. Also they are the one of the only teams that doesn't have a blue line threat like Matheson on the powerplay. Lastly, with their D depth they should be able to cover most of his defensive woes and give him favorable minutes. I don't see them offering a 1st though unless there is significant retention. The main problem for the Wild is Faber and Middleton's extensions are eating ~10M of the 13M coming off the buyouts next summer and Rossi is going to get a big raise too. Assuming the cap goes up about 5M again that leaves 7M to work with if no cap is going back the other way.
That’s an easy no thanks for Minnesota.

We don’t need LD at all - Brodin-Middleton-Chisholm-Merrill with Buium expected to sign at the end of the NCAA season.

I’d rather have Faber run the PP than trade assets (definitely not a 1st) for Matheson AND have to account for his cap hit next year AND have him block Buium/Chisholm/Hunt.

The easiest no because it doesn’t make sense and he doesn’t fit.
 

Empoleon8771

Registered User
Aug 25, 2015
85,623
86,184
Redmond, WA
You say that yet teams have given up large returns for Shattenkirk, Yandle, Barrie, Kaberle, Goligoski. Klingberg was offered a massive contract by Dallas etc.

There always seems to be a buyer for a 20+min a night D who can run a PP, no matter the flaws.

The problem with Matheson is a very similar problem with Granlund: good teams aren't going to be playing those guys in the roles they succeed in on bad teams. Good teams aren't going to be playing Granlund as a 20 minute a night 1C and good teams won't be playing Matheson as a 22 minute a night top PP defenseman.

If he's being used in that kind of role, it very likely means your team is bad.
 

Playmaker09

Registered User
Sep 11, 2008
3,530
1,823
The problem with Matheson is a very similar problem with Granlund: good teams aren't going to be playing those guys in the roles they succeed in on bad teams. Good teams aren't going to be playing Granlund as a 20 minute a night 1C and good teams won't be playing Matheson as a 22 minute a night top PP defenseman.

If he's being used in that kind of role, it very likely means your team is bad.
I don't disagree with you, at all, but GMs sure seem to no matter how much we continue to complain.

Multiple contenders have bought into the idea of Tyson Barrie as a top D only recently.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Empoleon8771

dgibb10

Registered User
Feb 29, 2024
3,458
2,988
The problem with Matheson is a very similar problem with Granlund: good teams aren't going to be playing those guys in the roles they succeed in on bad teams. Good teams aren't going to be playing Granlund as a 20 minute a night 1C and good teams won't be playing Matheson as a 22 minute a night top PP defenseman.

If he's being used in that kind of role, it very likely means your team is bad.
The Matheson problem is he can do everything at a meh level.

Helpful to a bad team.

But doesn't really move the needle for a good one that much (unless they are truly desperate for a PPQB and can't stomach hiding a ghost type)

Hell of a skater tho
 

ElPrimeTime

Registered User
Dec 23, 2014
988
918
Edmonton, AB
I don't disagree with you, at all, but GMs sure seem to no matter how much we continue to complain.

Multiple contenders have bought into the idea of Tyson Barrie as a top D only recently.

The bolded part is factually incorrect. Oilers traded Barrie to get an upgrade to Ekholm. Nashville couldn't find a trading partner for Barrie last season and he had to settle for a PTO this season.
 

Frank Drebin

Likes are suspended, sorry for inconvenience
Sponsor
Mar 9, 2004
35,571
23,260
Edmonton
Matheson, if traded, will probably return more than hf expects

The acquiring team, assuming matheson is put in a lesser role, will probably be happy with what he brings

Jets were happy with how monahan improved their pp after his acquisition after screaming that they didn’t want him
 

Playmaker09

Registered User
Sep 11, 2008
3,530
1,823
The bolded part is factually incorrect. Oilers traded Barrie to get an upgrade to Ekholm. Nashville couldn't find a trading partner for Barrie last season and he had to settle for a PTO this season.
Edmonton and Toronto both brought him in to be a key piece to their Dcore. What imaginary reality are you trying to construct here?
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad