Roster/Rumors/Speculation/Trade Talk - 2023-24: Hotel California

[Seph]

10 goals from Martin after his 7 total points of last year would prompt Lou to go for another extension

I'm betting the under!

I am pretty certain he will be under that too. In fact most of the players will likely be under that (hopefully some, like Wahlstrom, will be higher too). I was just saying that needing everyone to score at their career best rates to be competitive as a team that thrives on keeping scores low seems like a pretty large exaggeration is all.

 

[Top Corner]

I mentioned it recently, but I think we'll have plenty of offense for those tight 2-1, 3-2, 4-3 style victories if we get more or less the following realistic totals out of our guys:
60 points - Barzal, Nelson
45-50 points - Lee, Dobson
40 points - Bailey, Beauvillier, Pageau, Palmieri
35 points - Wahlstrom, Pulock, Parise
30 points - Pelech
25 points - Mayfield, Bellows
20 points - Cizikas
15 points - Clutterbuck, Romanov, one of Salo/Aho/Cholowski
5-10 points - Martin, Johnston

Team defense will be the name of the game, and in light of that, stats like these should have the team in a playoff spot and ready to do some damage in the playoffs, especially if the power play is in the top 15 in the league.

I have to believe that if our D can avoid any long absences due to injury , we will be ok.
Still feel that it would be better to have the 6th mobile D with experience and then start slotting in the Salo/Aho/Cholowski's as filler if something does happen

 

[Chapin Landvogt]

10 goals from Martin after his 7 total points of last year would prompt Lou to go for another extension

I'm betting the under!

Not goals, Mike - points.

5-10 points.

 

[Chapin Landvogt]

I am pretty certain he will be under that too.

Not goals, Seph - points.

I wrote 5-10 points.

In fact most of the players will likely be under that (hopefully some, like Wahlstrom, will be higher too). I was just saying that needing everyone to score at their career best rates to be competitive as a team that thrives on keeping scores low seems like a pretty large exaggeration is all.

If this listing I just made isn't what we should realistically expect of our boys in a league where i.e. Robert Thomas, Pavel Buchnevich, and Jordan Kyrou each had over 70 a piece, then we can pack it up now.

BTW, the listing isn't all too different than what the guys already produced this past season. Just tweaked upwards a bit because several of those guys simply have to do better without what essentially were heavy first half slumps.

 

[duster19]

I agree with this. Lou and Barry had a team that was more than the sum of their parts; overachievers. Built to grind you down in a 7 game series, but will get outskated by the Wild on a random night in February.

As @PK Cronin has said, we’re a team built for the playoffs that struggles with the regular season.

The 4th line is the epitome of this. Over a seven game series they just wear teams down. The clutterbuck hit on Carlo against BOS changed that series. But in the season they just can’t play that style for 82 games, nor does it have the same effect with different teams every other game. If they can get in they will be a tough out. You can bet the Pitts and Wash won’t want to play them in the playoffs.

 

[Chapin Landvogt]

I have to believe that if our D can avoid any long absences due to injury , we will be ok.
Still feel that it would be better to have the 6th mobile D with experience and then start slotting in the Salo/Aho/Cholowski's as filler if something does happen

After the lack of moves this summer, it certainly looks like Lou is ready to give those three D and guys like Wahlstrom and Bellows the prime opportunity to fill our needs from within, or he's going to have to be active on the trade market.

 

[seafoam]

This is where I'm currently at...

65-70 points - Barzal, Nelson
50-55 points - Lee
45-50 points - Bailey, Beauvillier, Dobson, Palmieri
40 points - Pageau, Wahlstrom
35 points - Pulock
30 points - Parise
25 points - Bellows, Pelech
20 points - Aho/CholoCop/Salo, Mayfield, Romanov
15 points - Cizikas, Clutterbuck
5-10 points - Martin, Johnston

 

[The Real JT]

Not goals, Mike - points.

5-10 points.

So you’re saying 1 PPG if most of this board has their way?

 

[Mike C]

I am pretty certain he will be under that too. In fact most of the players will likely be under that (hopefully some, like Wahlstrom, will be higher too). I was just saying that needing everyone to score at their career best rates to be competitive as a team that thrives on keeping scores low seems like a pretty large exaggeration is all.

Someone posted awhile back that most of the breaks will have to go our way and most will have to perform at the top end of their ceiling. I'm dubious but hopeful of playoff contention

Once we're in. It's a "new season" to be cliche

 

[leeroggy]

How is that a "Canadian Thing" ? They have their opinions and us Isles fans have our even from Canada and I'm pretty sure Dallas and Florida and maybe even Arizona have their opinions so
I don't think it's a "Canadian Thing"

It's a JOKE, proving I was RIGHT

 

[Seph]

Not goals, Seph - points.

I wrote 5-10 points.



If this listing I just made isn't what we should realistically expect of our boys in a league where i.e. Robert Thomas, Pavel Buchnevich, and Jordan Kyrou each had over 70 a piece, then we can pack it up now.

BTW, the listing isn't all too different than what the guys already produced this past season. Just tweaked upwards a bit because several of those guys simply have to do better without what essentially were heavy first half slumps.

Oh haha, I was referring to my own post where I was listing what the goals for players would look like if each performed at their career best rates, which was highly unrealistic. Your post with the point projections I'd say was very reasonable in terms of expectations.

 

[Seph]

Someone posted awhile back that most of the breaks will have to go our way and most will have to perform at the top end of their ceiling. I'm dubious but hopeful of playoff contention

Once we're in. It's a "new season" to be cliche

I think it will have more to do with how well we prevent goals against, honestly. For as bad as everyone views our offense last season, we actually scored goals at a slightly higher rate than any of the other 3 seasons under Trotz, but we allowed notably more so the results were much worse. I'm hoping for a modest increase in goals for and a return to form defensively for this upcoming season, which should be enough for a wildcard spot. But we will see how things go under Lambert.

 

[leeroggy]

The Lightning made it back to the finals and were one of the most complete teams in the playoffs, so I'd say yes. They crushed that Florida team that relied on offense only and once they settled in they dismantled the Rags too. The Blues did fairly well too, until they lost their goalie. There was just such an abundance of mediocre to be goaltending in the playoffs I think that was the anomaly, Tampa Bay, Rags, Dallas, and maybe St. Louis were the only teams with good goaltending.

Or the much better offenses made goalies look bad

Clearly this last playoff was more offense minded and that can’t be argued

 

[YearlyLottery]

Or the much better offenses made goalies look bad

Clearly this last playoff was more offense minded and that can’t be argued

I think it is fair to talk about the difference between offensive minded and offensive focused. While Tampa and Colorado are offensive minded they play defense absolutely amazing. Teams like Toronto, Florida, NYR were offensive focused and when push came to shove they could not get the job done.

 

[PK Cronin]

Or the much better offenses made goalies look bad

Clearly this last playoff was more offense minded and that can’t be argued

I don't think the Rags offense was much better than any of the teams they faced, they just faced shit goalies.

Was Florida's offense not good? They didn't do anything to Tampa Bay.

Who were these great goalies and defenses that got lit up?

 

[leeroggy]

Why is it played great versus lit up? A jump in the average combined goals scored of say .75, is a large shift historically.

I don't think the Rags offense was much better than any of the teams they faced, they just faced shit goalies.

Was Florida's offense not good? They didn't do anything to Tampa Bay.

Who were these great goalies and defenses that got lit up?

 

[PK Cronin]

Why is it played great versus lit up? A jump in the average combined goals scored of say .75, is a large shift historically.

I don't understand your question. I'm not disputing the large jump in goals, I'm offering my opinion as to why it happened.

I'm of the opinion that most of the teams in the playoffs were not as good on the back end as playoff teams in most other years. I think that's a byproduct of teams emphasizing offense during the regular season, where it can be effective. Come playoff time the better defensive teams fared much better than the run and gun counterparts as I mentioned.

Let's go through the teams:

Washington isn't known as a good defensive team and had such bad goaltending they got rid of both this off-season. They were beat by a deeper offensive team in Florida.

Florida wasn't known for their defense or goaltending, Bobrovsky had a better year but certainly isn't viewed as being good/great. This team was known for outscoring their mistakes. They were able to do that in round 1 and were dispatched in 4 games by a defensively sound Tampa Bay team.

Toronto also isn't known for their attention to defense. Their goaltending was okay but is a weak spot for the organization. Despite all their offense they couldn't get past Tampa Bay

Carolina is a good defensive team but their goaltending is always suspect. Didn't they also lose one of their goalies during the playoffs? Who did they lose to? A team with a better goalie in Shesterkin.

The Rags aren't good defensively but had the best goalie in the league last season. They also had the fortune of going up against second and third string goalies for two rounds. Who did they lose to? A team with comparable goaltending and a better defense.

Boston lacks defensive depth and their goaltending is okay. Bounced by a better defensive team in the first round.

Pittsburgh choked away their series because they had a third string goalie playing and the Rags had Shesterkin. Neither team was good defensively.

Nashville lost any chance they had when they lost their starting goalie. Outclassed by Colorado, a better team offensively and defensively, just not in net.

Minnesota is a great up and coming team but they were beat by a hot goalie and the good defense from the Blues.

The Blues were playing very well and gave Colorado trouble until Binnington went down. I think they might have won that series had he stayed healthy. A good goalie was key to beating Colorado.

Calgary was good defensively during the regular season but lost a key defender and their goalie wasn't good and everyone knew it. They lost to a high powered offense that has the most talented player in the world on it.

Dallas gave Calgary all they could handle because of their goaltending. Unfortunately they severely lacked in both other areas.

Edmonton was defense optional and played two older goaltenders and an LA team without their best defensemen.

LA played hard but didn't have the defense to stop McDavid. I love Quick but he also isn't his old self anymore and can't steal a series.

I don't know, I'm looking at these teams and it's pretty clear that teams with good goalies and strong defense do pretty well. None of the high powered offenses were able to get get by teams with good defense and a good goalie. Colorado is weird because they don't have great goaltending but are so good everywhere else that it didn't cost them.

 

[SI]

This is where I'm currently at...

65-70 points - Barzal, Nelson
50-55 points - Lee
45-50 points - Bailey, Beauvillier, Dobson, Palmieri
40 points - Pageau, Wahlstrom
35 points - Pulock
30 points - Parise
25 points - Bellows, Pelech
20 points - Aho/CholoCop/Salo, Mayfield, Romanov
15 points - Cizikas, Clutterbuck
5-10 points - Martin, Johnston

I appreciate the point total, but it may be more clear to project goal totals -

30 - Nelson and Lee
20- Palmieri, Barzal, Wahlstrom, Beauvillier
15 - Pageau and Bailey
10- Parise
5 - Cizikas, Clutterbuck, Bellows
2 - Martin and Johnston
5 goals scored by call ups
That is a total of 192 goals from the F group.

10- Dobson
7 - Pulock
5 - Mayfield Romanov and Pelech
3 - Salo
3 - Aho
2 - from call ups
50 goals from the D -

That’s 242 total goals (say 10 goal swing)
IF the GA fall back - to say 200ish that +30-42 goal diff. Will mean this team is 100+ team and in the playoffs

 

[Chapin Landvogt]

So you’re saying 1 PPG if most of this board has their way?

More like .85 PPG...

Give the guys credit - no need to exaggerate!

 

[NC 1972]

If everyone hit their career bests, we'd score around 305 goals, which last year wouldve been tied for 5th in the league.

Breakdown would look like this:
~35 goals from Lee, Nelson and Parise
~30 goals from Palmieiri
~25 goals from Pageau
~20 goals from Barzal, Beauvillier, Cizikas and Clutterbuck
~15 goals from Bailey
~10 goals from Martin, Wahlstrom, Dobson and Pulock
~5 goals from Pelech and Mayfield

I'll take the under on this.

 

[Chapin Landvogt]

Someone posted awhile back that most of the breaks will have to go our way and most will have to perform at the top end of their ceiling. I'm dubious but hopeful of playoff contention.

The important thing is just to get the playoffs. We have "history" showing that these boys are capable of being a playoff team. Let's not forget that - right or wrong - the playoffs are called differently than the regular season.

Any impression we may have gotten last spring had a whole lot to do with some seriously bad goaltending, which wasn't all that surprising in light of how many teams actually even had a 3rd stringer in net.

But our Isles are getting to the playoffs via goaltending and their defensive group. Team defense will be key and naturally, we don't have the fastest forwards around. Those who can move it aren't necessarily the strongest defensive forwards we've got. All in all though, we should be one of the best in the Eastern Conference when it comes to winning the tight games.

 

[Chapin Landvogt]

The Blues were playing very well and gave Colorado trouble until Binnington went down. I think they might have won that series had he stayed healthy. A good goalie was key to beating Colorado.

Am glad someone else mentioned this. It's exactly how I felt. Colorado was having fits with Binnington. No telling what would have happened there had he not gotten injured.

Of course, that Kadri was in the middle of that injury and Binnington got all psycho was a soap opera in and of itself, an chain of events that DEFINITELY changed that series.

 

[mm11]

Am glad someone else mentioned this. It's exactly how I felt. Colorado was having fits with Binnington. No telling what would have happened there had he not gotten injured.

Of course, that Kadri was in the middle of that injury and Binnington got all psycho was a soap opera in and of itself, an chain of events that DEFINITELY changed that series.

I agree I think the blues would have given the avs all they could of handled and then some.

 

[JPIsles18]

To me a retool on the fly is anything that has you in the discussion as a contender year for year while constantly avoiding having to go through a full-out rebuild.

It can be achieved through pure lateral moves and signings, or through constantly replacing players from within through strong drafting (usually in later rounds if you're always in the Cup discussion) without skipping a beat in being highly competitive in a contending manner. It can be a combination of the two.

For most teams, it has to be the latter.

A rebuild is tearing it down, living with several years of bottom five finishes, and making use of high draft picks and draft positions to (re)build from the bottom up.

I don't see us heading in that direction whatsoever. Nor is it necessary.

We've already got the pillars (i.e. Sorokin, Dobson, Barzal) to constantly rotate around them on the fly and be a contender all the while.

I just don't know if we have front office to let guys fade out while bringing in the few kids we've got to replace them adequately? I also am not certain our scouting staff has the acumen to keep bringing in pieces with few darts and while drafting primarily in later rounds?

But the possibility to contend regularly is there without having to rebuild.

You're absolutely correct IMO. The one ingredient is also picking the right "young guys" and "veterans." In a cap world, spending assets and then the cap space for a guy like Pageau for instance hurts. Same with Palmieri. Not only do you take away a lottery card (1st round pick), but you're also giving up 10 million dollars in opportunity cost to bring in a younger difference maker. Even though I'm not sold on Romanov, those are the moves that you give high value draft picks for: a potential top 4 dman making 2.5 mil a year. But Lou hasn't done that until this season. That's the right idea, perhaps on the wrong player (hoping I'm wrong).

Furthermore, the Isles scouts seem to have strong biases towards players that can play in bottom 6 roles at the bottom of the draft. Instead of taking swings on high risk/high reward players, they take overagers like Coskey, Bibeau, etc. Minor gripe, but still my issue is with the thought process. Of course there is always a Dufour sprinkled n there. But not enough of them.

 

[The Real JT]

You're absolutely correct IMO. The one ingredient is also picking the right "young guys" and "veterans." In a cap world, spending assets and then the cap space for a guy like Pageau for instance hurts. Same with Palmieri. Not only do you take away a lottery card (1st round pick), but you're also giving up 10 million dollars in opportunity cost to bring in a younger difference maker. Even though I'm not sold on Romanov, those are the moves that you give high value draft picks for: a potential top 4 dman making 2.5 mil a year. But Lou hasn't done that until this season. That's the right idea, perhaps on the wrong player (hoping I'm wrong).

Furthermore, the Isles scouts seem to have strong biases towards players that can play in bottom 6 roles at the bottom of the draft. Instead of taking swings on high risk/high reward players, they take overagers like Coskey, Bibeau, etc. Minor gripe, but still my issue is with the thought process. Of course there is always a Dufour sprinkled n there. But not enough of them.

Definitely agree regarding the first round picks. The Romanov pick was well worth it it IMO since it was for a position of need, the player still has potential and is cost controlled and the draft pick was set in stone and not particularly high.

The Palmieri and JGP picks were potentially going to be more valuable since the Isles draft position was not yet finalized. Those players also already carried a bigger cap hit and had no future potential over what they already brought to the table.