RW Matvei Michkov (2023, 7th, PHI) Part 6

[BillDineen]

Turnovers are fine. They are mistakes and part of learning. This wasn't a turnover. This was a lazy flyby.

I feel there is a drastic difference between the two.

It wasn't at all. Michkov thought Couturier would get the puck and send him on a breakaway ... for his team with no goals in two games, generating offense. Perfectly reasonable

 

[Just Linda]

Question: do you think Jack Hughes would be the player that he is today if NJ had benched him for every turnover in his rookie year?

No. Neither one got benched for every turnover.

Do I think Hughes would've developed without the level of accountability the the USDP instilled in him and then the work done by his NHL coaches to turn him into a great player? No, I don't. Especially since so much of his play is built on disrupting transitions.

It wasn't at all. Michkov thought Couturier would get the puck and send him on a breakaway ... for his team with no goals in two games, generating offense. Perfectly reasonable

You still gotta support the breakout.

Michkov cheats. That's not news to anyone, it's not a rare thing for a teenage with his skill to do. He cheats quite a bit, it's a common criticism of his game.

It's not concerning since he's still so young and will develop into a better player still but let's not try to downplay a flaw in his game (especially since noone seems to be catastrophizing it either)

 

[Kshahdoo]

There’s a middle ground between what Michkov was doing and playing defense. Michkov literally skated away from the play and bailed on his team before they had any chance of gaining control of the puck. Michkov wasn’t making an offensive-minded play, there. He was making a stupid play.

I’m not a Torterella fan, but if you’re going to say Michkov hockey is smarter than the NHL coach who’s been in the league for two decades and won. . . I don’t know that the discussion is worth having.

If Richard went to Holmstrom and Seeler to Cizikas, then Holmstrom would have had just two options: to try to stickhandle around Richard with a chance to lose the puck and get 2 vs 1 breakaway or to pass to the defenseman. And the latter wasn't even in the zone so passing to him would have been equal to killing the attack. That's what high IQ plays mean. Alas, other Flyers aren't that smart...

 

[PenguinSuitedUp]

If Richard went to Holmstrom and Seeler to Cizikas, then Holmstrom would have had just two options: to try to stickhandle around Richard with a chance to lose the puck and get 2 vs 1 breakaway or to pass to the defenseman. And the latter wasn't even in the zone so passing to him would have been equal to killing the attack. That's what high IQ plays mean. Alas, other Flyers aren't that smart...

So now you’re asking the Flyers to play defense as a 4 v 5 so that Michkov can do whatever he wants, ie play irresponsibly. Teams play systems, and every player needs to buy in, otherwise the goal that happened because of Michkov will reoccur over and over again.

 

[Kshahdoo]

So now you’re asking the Flyers to play defense as a 4 v 5 so that Michkov can do whatever he wants, ie play irresponsibly. Teams play systems, and every player needs to buy in, otherwise the goal that happened because of Michkov will reoccur over and over again.

It was 4 vs 4 because one defenseman was in the neutral zone to cover Michkov...

 

[BillDineen]

No. Neither one got benched for every turnover.

Do I think Hughes would've developed without the level of accountability the the USDP instilled in him and then the work done by his NHL coaches to turn him into a great player? No, I don't. Especially since so much of his play is built on disrupting transitions.


You still gotta support the breakout.

Michkov cheats. That's not news to anyone, it's not a rare thing for a teenage with his skill to do. He cheats quite a bit, it's a common criticism of his game.

It's not concerning since he's still so young and will develop into a better player still but let's not try to downplay a flaw in his game (especially since noone seems to be catastrophizing it either)

He does cheat too much, but this was the right time. TK would have done the exact same thing. It was the right choice with the team not scoring.

 

[Artaud]

He does cheat too much, but this was the right time. TK would have done the exact same thing. It was the right choice with the team not scoring.

Even if it was the right choice (very debatable) it cost them a goal. At some point results overcome process.

This is all beyond the point. The point is that Michkov is stubborn and refuses to buy into the team concepts. Putting the team above the individual is not a Tortorella thing either, it's the foundation of a winning culture.

There was always echoes of Michkov being a shitty teammate. Him stepping on other players bags, lack of defensive commitment, stuff like that, often brushed aside as a product of his competitive spirit. Halfway through his first season, his selfish attitude has already caused problems. I think being a competitor is about doing anything to win and this play is the opposite of that.

 

[Kshahdoo]

Even if it was the right choice (very debatable) it cost them a goal. At some point results overcome process.

This is all beyond the point. The point is that Michkov is stubborn and refuses to buy into the team concepts. Putting the team above the individual is not a Tortorella thing either, it's the foundation of a winning culture.

There was always echoes of Michkov being a shitty teammate. Him stepping on other players bags, lack of defensive commitment, stuff like that, often brushed aside as a product of his competitive spirit. Halfway through his first season, his selfish attitude has already caused problems. I think being a competitor is about doing anything to win and this play is the opposite of that.

It's exactly how they destroy prospects' development. "He must play system. He must do it right. He must follow rules". And then boom, you get another average NHLer instead of potential superstar. Average at best. Michkov should play Michkov's hockey not that Torts' shit. It's how he's become Michkov after all.

 

[Artaud]

It's exactly how they destroy prospects' development. "He must play system. He must do it right. He must follow rules". And then boom, you get another average NHLer instead of potential superstar. Average at best. Michkov should play Michkov's hockey not that Torts' shit. It's how he's become Michkov after all.

So Michkov became Michkov by cheating on his defensive assignments. He did not pull off some creative out-of-the-box strategy that only his superior hockey mind could think of. Fat dudes in my beer league do this all the time because they just want an easy breakaway.

Stop putting him on a pedestal. You don't win in the NHL by putting individual players above the team concept, especially not rookies. Michkov has won nothing and proven very little in the show. He's not Ovechkin and learning/accepting to play within an NHL structure is something he will have to do eventually if he wants to win.

Though I agree Torts is a certified hard-ass and surely not the guy to tame a hotheaded young gun like Michkov.

 

[Zine]

So Michkov became Michkov by cheating on his defensive assignments. He did not pull off some creative out-of-the-box strategy that only his superior hockey mind could think of. Fat dudes in my beer league do this all the time because they just want an easy breakaway.

Stop putting him on a pedestal. You don't win in the NHL by putting individual players above the team concept, especially not rookies. Michkov has won nothing and proven very little in the show. He's not Ovechkin and learning/accepting to play within an NHL structure is something he will have to do eventually if he wants to win.

Though I agree Torts is a certified hard-ass and surely not the guy to tame a hotheaded young gun like Michkov.

Using this reasoning, Bedard is a selfish bad teammate and will never be a winner either.

 

[yianik]

So Michkov became Michkov by cheating on his defensive assignments. He did not pull off some creative out-of-the-box strategy that only his superior hockey mind could think of. Fat dudes in my beer league do this all the time because they just want an easy breakaway.

Stop putting him on a pedestal. You don't win in the NHL by putting individual players above the team concept, especially not rookies. Michkov has won nothing and proven very little in the show. He's not Ovechkin and learning/accepting to play within an NHL structure is something he will have to do eventually if he wants to win.

Though I agree Torts is a certified hard-ass and surely not the guy to tame a hotheaded young gun like Michkov.

If Michkov is a hothead then Torts is exactly who you need. Otherwise you have a players coach and Michkov will just do whatever he wants.

He's a terrific talent playing his 1st year in the NHL. No need to panic.

 

[sbhnur]

I see a great line coming with mm and Kuzmenko averaging 8 minutes per night!

Topic related: the style torts plays doesnt help skilled players, it's a system for low skilled and grinders. It creates zero offense and offensive zone time. It will make us a contender in about 55 years.
MM suffers especially bc he is an offensive minded players with great instinct. It's not what torts likes. He likes doing guys doing whatever he says, minimizing all risks a hockey game can evolve.

 

[Zine]

If Michkov is a hothead then Torts is exactly who you need. Otherwise you have a players coach and Michkov will just do whatever he wants.

He's a terrific talent playing his 1st year in the NHL. No need to panic.

Just like Chicago/Bedard, the Flyers have the luxury of developing Michkov slowly. They should be fostering his innate talent, while shoring up his deficiencies step by step.
The Flyers will probably scew up Michkov’s development.

Tortorella is a horrible coach for a young rebuilding team, let alone any team with significant offensive talent.

 

[majormajor]

I see a great line coming with mm and Kuzmenko averaging 8 minutes per night!

Topic related: the style torts plays doesnt help skilled players, it's a system for low skilled and grinders. It creates zero offense and offensive zone time. It will make us a contender in about 55 years.
MM suffers especially bc he is an offensive minded players with great instinct. It's not what torts likes. He likes doing guys doing whatever he says, minimizing all risks a hockey game can evolve.

Let's be real, how much offense does Michkov blowing the zone create? He gets caught from behind on many of his breakaways anyways. His quality shines in creating offense in the attacking zone, until they get set up in the offensive zone he might as well just follow the team structure.

 

[majormajor]

Tortorella is a horrible coach for a young rebuilding team, let alone any team with significant offensive talent.

People say shit like this reflexively without knowing a thing about it.

Werenski began as a rookie under Torts when he was a bit younger than Michkov is. You know what Torts had him do? He told him to "play rover". Very unorthodox. Now years later Werenski is playing that same rover style and has broken out as a borderline Hart candidate. Torts played him big minutes right from the start. Same thing with 19 year old PLD.

Torts isn't mindlessly jamming Michkov into a square peg, he's trying to cut out the parts of Michkov's game that don't help Michkov. He's eager to have Michkov play Michkov's style in the attacking zone where it works.

 

[Kshahdoo]

So Michkov became Michkov by cheating on his defensive assignments. He did not pull off some creative out-of-the-box strategy that only his superior hockey mind could think of. Fat dudes in my beer league do this all the time because they just want an easy breakaway.

Stop putting him on a pedestal. You don't win in the NHL by putting individual players above the team concept, especially not rookies. Michkov has won nothing and proven very little in the show. He's not Ovechkin and learning/accepting to play within an NHL structure is something he will have to do eventually if he wants to win.

Though I agree Torts is a certified hard-ass and surely not the guy to tame a hotheaded young gun like Michkov.

It's exactly how Bure played the game. Would you mind to get Pavel Bure for your team? If you would, then there are a lot of those who wouldn't. And I'm pretty sure Torts would hate Bure.

 

[sbhnur]

Let's be real, how much offense does Michkov blowing the zone create? He gets caught from behind on many of his breakaways anyways. His quality shines in creating offense in the attacking zone, until they get set up in the offensive zone he might as well just follow the team structure.

He did this earlier in the season. Hang on to the puck finding open players who joined the rush. By now he mostly just flips the puck into the corner. It's what the coaches ask for.

But you're right, he surely needs power skating camps in the summer to improve his speed. He's too dependent right now.

 

[Frank Drebin]

It's exactly how Bure played the game. Would you mind to get Pavel Bure for your team? If you would, then there are a lot of those who wouldn't. And I'm pretty sure Torts would hate Bure.

Bure was fast

 

[stevo61]

It's exactly how Bure played the game. Would you mind to get Pavel Bure for your team? If you would, then there are a lot of those who wouldn't. And I'm pretty sure Torts would hate Bure.

He loved Panarin

 

[BillDineen]

Math is hard, so I will help the coaches on here. Averages High Danger Shooting % of NHL forwards is roughly 20% while average breakaway is 25%, so even if Michkov thought Couturier only had a 50-50 shot at the puck, it still makes sense to take that chance. Sometimes offense involves calculated risks, especially when your team can't score for the life of them.

Edit: Now, if you are Torts and you want to play for 82 0-0 ties and hope for 50% wins in the shootout, then yes, you would be mad. It just isn't optimal development for a skilled player

 

[Kshahdoo]

Bure was fast

And Michkov is smart.

 

[WhiskeyYerTheDevils]

Math is hard, so I will help the coaches on here. Averages High Danger Shooting % of NHL forwards is roughly 20% while average breakaway is 25%, so even if Michkov thought Couturier only had a 50-50 shot at the puck, it still makes sense to take that chance. Sometimes offense involves calculated risks, especially when your team can't score for the life of them.

Edit: Now, if you are Torts and you want to play for 82 0-0 ties and hope for 50% wins in the shootout, then yes, you would be mad. It just isn't optimal development for a skilled player

Who's to say it's just one high danger chance? Blowing the zone like that completely compromises the team's defensive structure and can lead to sustained zone possession and multiple high danger chances by the other team.

Also, the likelihood of couturier winning the puck and being able to make a play clean up to Michkov is well below 50% in a scenario like that.

It's just not winning hockey, plain and simple. Bedard is guilty of the same terrible habit.

 

[BillDineen]

Who's to say it's just one high danger chance? Blowing the zone like that completely compromises the team's defensive structure and can lead to sustained zone possession and multiple high danger chances by the other team.

Also, the likelihood of couturier winning the puck and being able to make a play clean up to Michkov is well below 50% in a scenario like that.

It's just not winning hockey, plain and simple. Bedard is guilty of the same terrible habit.

It may not have led to a high danger chance at all. Also, MM may think his breakaway chances are higher than league average. It was a calculated decision and completely rational. Now if "winning hockey" is getting 123 pts by finish every game 0-0 and winning half of shootouts, then yes, that is regular season "winning".

Any offensive player should take the chance if there is a positive expectation, even of it means it is risky.

 

[WhiskeyYerTheDevils]

It may not have led to a high danger chance at all. Also, MM may think his breakaway chances are higher than league average. It was a calculated decision and completely rational. Now if "winning hockey" is getting 123 pts by finish every game 0-0 and winning half of shootouts, then yes, that is regular season "winning".

Any offensive player should take the chance if there is a positive expectation, even of it means it is risky.

But there's not a positive expectation in that scenario, as there wasn't enough puck support and it was too deep in the zone. Not only that, his teammates are counting on him to play the system as planned, so when he takes off like that it catches his teammates off guard, leading to even more confusion. In the unlikely scenario they are able to recover the puck, their first instinct is going to be to relieve pressure, not make a headman pass to a cherry picking teammate.

No coach would support the decision he made there.