The state of the Habs Rebuild - The Next step

[Garbageyuk]

Are you referring to St Louis, which did not in fact have two 70 point centremen?

O’Reilly had 77 points and Schenn had 54

Perhaps the golden knights, who had no 70 point players

St. Louis had O’Reilly, who had the same production as current Suzuki, but also won the Selke that year. That’s better than Suzuki. When Suzuki wins the Selke while maintaining his current level of production, we can have a discussion.

Vegas had Eichel, who probably everyone on this site except the most biased Habs fans would agree is better than Suzuki. He missed time that year due to injury, but was healthy for the playoffs where he put up 26 points in 22 games. He was better on a per game basis in both the regular season and playoffs than anything Suzuki has ever done.

Also, both teams had an elite D in the league (Pietrangelo), so they didn’t need a 70+ point 2C.

Wanna try again?

 

[admiralcadillac]

St. Louis had O’Reilly, who had the same production as Suzuki, but also won the Selke that year. That’s better than Suzuki. When Suzuki wins the Selke while maintaining his current level of production, we can have a discussion.

Vegas had Eichel, who probably everyone on this site except the most biased Habs fans would agree is better than Suzuki. He missed time that year due to injury, but was healthy for the playoffs where he put up 26 points in 20 games. He was better on a per game basis in both the regular season and playoffs than anything Suzuki has ever done.

Also, both teams had an elite D in the league (Pietrangelo), so they didn’t need a 70+ point 2C.

Wanna try again?

No I think your post did a very good job of explaining your bias to everyone here

 

[Garbageyuk]

No I think your post did a very good job of explaining your bias to everyone here

What bias? Explain.

 

[Sorinth]

Suzuki proved in our SCF run that he can go out against the oppositions best players and come out on top, so yes he's good enough to be the #1 C of a cup winning team. But like every player they can't do it when they are on an island, and Suzuki was on an island offensively during that run. And frankly putting up 77 points during the regular season with a non-functional PP and no other line that opposing teams have to worry about also shows he's got the juice to be that #1 guy.

So like every player he's going to need support. Right now the supporting cast are all question marks, so the state of the rebuild is figuring out the answers to those questions. Can Caufield be that 40+ goal guy he has shown he could be, what's Slaf's ceiling, can Dach stay healthy and be the player we've seen glimpses of over a full season, can Hutson's transition game make up for his lack of size such that he's a good 5 on 5 player, what's Guhle and Reinbacher's actual ceiling, etc...

We won't get answers for everyone by the end of this year, but just getting better projections will go a long way towards understanding the next steps for the rebuild actually are. In the end building a cup winner is about having your strengths make up for the weaknesses because yes every modern cup winner has holes in their lineup.

 

[Rapala]

The Laine situation scares me a bit.
I could see him rehabbing for a couple of months or so and then realizing it's not right.
He may still be facing surgery no matter what even if he does come back.
What happens if this starts eating into next season.
The idea was always going to be to get a look at what we look like with players actually in their proper chairs.
It will be a shame if we never get to see that this year.

It could be paranoia though I'm still waiting for Pricer to recover.

 

[LaP]

Suzuki proved in our SCF run that he can go out against the oppositions best players and come out on top, so yes he's good enough to be the #1 C of a cup winning team. But like every player they can't do it when they are on an island, and Suzuki was on an island offensively during that run. And frankly putting up 77 points during the regular season with a non-functional PP and no other line that opposing teams have to worry about also shows he's got the juice to be that #1 guy.

So like every player he's going to need support. Right now the supporting cast are all question marks, so the state of the rebuild is figuring out the answers to those questions. Can Caufield be that 40+ goal guy he has shown he could be, what's Slaf's ceiling, can Dach stay healthy and be the player we've seen glimpses of over a full season, can Hutson's transition game make up for his lack of size such that he's a good 5 on 5 player, what's Guhle and Reinbacher's actual ceiling, etc...

We won't get answers for everyone by the end of this year, but just getting better projections will go a long way towards understanding the next steps for the rebuild actually are. In the end building a cup winner is about having your strengths make up for the weaknesses because yes every modern cup winner has holes in their lineup.

That got to be the most down to earth post i've seen in a while. The season has not started yet so you're still supposed to post pre-season hot takes.

To counter that post and retore balance in the force i'll say all our kids are bust the pre-season proved it and we'll be the new Sabres for the nest 15 years. Rainbusted, Flopkovski and Demibust man we can't draft properly.

 

[LaP]

St. Louis had O’Reilly, who had the same production as current Suzuki, but also won the Selke that year. That’s better than Suzuki. When Suzuki wins the Selke while maintaining his current level of production, we can have a discussion.

Vegas had Eichel, who probably everyone on this site except the most biased Habs fans would agree is better than Suzuki. He missed time that year due to injury, but was healthy for the playoffs where he put up 26 points in 22 games. He was better on a per game basis in both the regular season and playoffs than anything Suzuki has ever done.

Also, both teams had an elite D in the league (Pietrangelo), so they didn’t need a 70+ point 2C.

Wanna try again?

O'Reilly was also 27 years old. When ROR was the same age as Suzuki his best season was 64 points and his best selke ranking was 6th. Suzuki best season his 77 points and his best selke ranking is 13th. I don't expect Suzuki to get much better offensively but he could improve his defensive. I'd say the prime defensively comes later than offensively it's more toward the end of the 20ies around 27-28. Suzuki is close to be a finished product but at the same time he doesn't have to improve a lot to be an effective 1st line center. Just improving his defense a bit would be enough. At his age such small improvement is not unheard of at all.

 

[the valiant effort]

**** ROR

 

[Grate n Colorful Oz]

O'Reilly was also 27 years old. When ROR was the same age as Suzuki his best season was 64 points and his best selke ranking was 6th. Suzuki best season his 77 points and his best selke ranking is 13th. I don't expect Suzuki to get much better offensively but he could improve his defensive. I'd say the prime defensively comes later than offensively it's more toward the end of the 20ies around 27-28. Suzuki is close to be a finished product but at the same time he doesn't have to improve a lot to be an effective 1st line center. Just improving his defense a bit would be enough. At his age such small improvement is not unheard of at all.

League scoring has went up since then. It's pretty even when adjusted.

 

[Garbageyuk]

O'Reilly was also 27 years old. When ROR was the same age as Suzuki his best season was 64 points and his best selke ranking was 6th. Suzuki best season his 77 points and his best selke ranking is 13th. I don't expect Suzuki to get much better offensively but he could improve his defensive. I'd say the prime defensively comes later than offensively it's more toward the end of the 20ies around 27-28. Suzuki is close to be a finished product but at the same time he doesn't have to improve a lot to be an effective 1st line center. Just improving his defense a bit would be enough. At his age such small improvement is not unheard of at all.

Yes, as I’ve said several times now. He is going to have to improve significantly if he’s going to be the top C when we are contending (if we do). That means either Selke level defense (top 5 or better) with his current offense, or improving his offense to probably the 90-100 point range. As he is currently, he’s not good enough. Not sure what people’s issue with that is statement is. It’s true.

 

[LaP]

League scoring has went up since then. It's pretty even when adjusted.

Yeah but the assertion was that ROR was a btter player. 27 years old ROR was but 24 years old not really (i know Suzuki is 25 years old but he has not played his 25 years old season yet so the data we have is from his 24 yerars old season). I could see Suzuki becoming as good as 27 years old ROR in the next 3 seasons easily.

Beside Garbageyuk seems to be working with the assumption that the rebuild is over and none of our kids will overacrhive. That's a weird take at best. Many people have argued since the beginning that the rebuild would take 5 years minimum. It has only been 3 drafts so far ... it's not over yet.

We will definitely draft top 10 again in 2025. While we might not draft top 10 in 2026 i don't think we'll be outside the top 15. With all the accumulated picks we can try to move up in those drafts too. We'll add other kids in the upcoming two years. I don't think any knowledgeable fans think the rebuild is over atm.

Arguing we're not there yet is kind of pointless as very few fans think we really are. Most people around here put the team bottom 10 for this season. Even the media paid by the TV deal with the NHL say we'll be bottom 10 and they usually sell our team high since they are beasically getting paid by the CH to do their job.

 

[LaP]

Yes, as I’ve said several times now. He is going to have to improve significantly if he’s going to be the top C when we are contending (if we do). That means either Selke level defense (top 5 or better) with his current offense, or improving his offense to probably the 90-100 point range. As he is currently, he’s not good enough. Not sure what people’s issue with that is statement is. It’s true.

You should just disregard anyone saying otherwise. I've not followed the whole conversation cause the breadcrumb was over 10 posts long but in those few posts i've check you come across as someone pretending he can't make the improvement. Maybe i misjudge you?

While i'm not pretending he'll make the improvement i think it's far form being impossible. He needs to improve his defensive game and his faceoffs but he made lot of progress in the last 2 years in those aspects of the game and while he's at the age most players don't improve offensively he is young enough to improve defensively and at the faceoffs dot while retaining his offense.

 

[Garbageyuk]

you come across as someone pretending he can't make the improvement.

Not at all. In fact, I said he’s going to have to if he’s going to be the 1C when we’re contending (if we do). Whether he actually does is anyone’s guess, and I didn’t say what will happen one way or the other.

This whole thing started because the one poster insinuated that the team could contend for Cups without both an elite 1C and a top D. I was just pointing out how that’s never happened, and in all likelihood, never will.

 

[Sorinth]

Yes, as I’ve said several times now. He is going to have to improve significantly if he’s going to be the top C when we are contending (if we do). That means either Selke level defense (top 5 or better) with his current offense, or improving his offense to probably the 90-100 point range. As he is currently, he’s not good enough. Not sure what people’s issue with that is statement is. It’s true.

Selke is very much a reputational award and honestly has little bearing on who is actually better defensively. Suzuki already has a good enough defensive game that he could be winning Selke's, Caufield scoring 5 on 5 and Montembeault handling the #1 job well probably does more for Suzuki's Selke votes then anything.

And even offensively, an improved PP and playing with Slaf all season probably nets Suzuki another 10-15 points without him actually being better offensively.

But at the end of the day it's all about supporting cast, with a good supporting cast I do believe Suzuki can be the #1 center on a cup winning team. That said the supporting cast of forwards are probably going to have to be somewhat close to his level. If there's a significant dropoff from Suzuki to the next 3ish forwards then no he's unlikely to take the team on his back offensively and provide enough scoring to win the cup. But even McDavid can't win without the right supporting cast and he even has Draisaitl to help and it's not enough. So really the whole this guy isn't good enough in his role to win the cup is nonsense, Chicago won the cup with freaking Handzus as the 2nd line center.

 

[Garbageyuk]

Selke is very much a reputational award and honestly has little bearing on who is actually better defensively.

You could maybe use this argument if you’re talking about the top 3-5 guys, but it doesn’t work for a guy whose best finish in voting is 13th. If he gets into that tier, then you could start taking like this.

Suzuki already has a good enough defensive game that he could be winning Selke's, Caufield scoring 5 on 5 and Montembeault handling the #1 job well probably does more for Suzuki's Selke votes then anything.

Nope. His faceoff%, tk/gv differential, and possession metrics are simply not that of a top defensive forward, Montembeault and Caufield aren’t going to change that, especially the first two things.

And even offensively, an improved PP and playing with Slaf all season probably nets Suzuki another 10-15 points without him actually being better offensively.

If and/or when that happens, we can give him credit. For now, it’s just hoping.

I do believe Suzuki can be the #1 center on a cup winning team.

Not currently; he’d have to improve significantly, like I’ve said repeatedly. There isn’t a single recent Cup winner that didn’t have a 1C better than Suzuki.

So really the whole this guy isn't good enough in his role to win the cup is nonsense

Again, he isn’t currently. See above.

Chicago won the cup with freaking Handzus as the 2nd line center.

Is Suzuki going to be the 2C when we are ready to contend? If so, then I agree he’s already good enough.

 

[Sorinth]

Not currently; he’d have to improve significantly, like I’ve said repeatedly. There isn’t a single recent Cup winner that didn’t have a 1C better than Suzuki.

He was already 3 wins away from winning the cup as the teams #1 C. All it would've taken was a 2nd line center who could manage more then 4 points in 22 playoff games or for a guy like Tatar to not become a no-show with 1 point in 5 games.

He doesn't have to improve significantly, especially when he can arguably meet your metrics simply by having a better team around him and without actually improving.

 

[Garbageyuk]

He was already 3 wins away from winning the cup as the teams #1 C.

Danault was the team’s 1C in the playoffs that year, not Suzuki. Also, 3 wins away is 3 wins away, i.e., it didn’t happen.

He doesn't have to improve significantly, especially when he can arguably meet your metrics simply by having a better team around him and without actually improving.

He absolutely does if we’re going to contend with him as the 1C. Having a better team around him isn’t going to improve his faceoff% or his tk/gv differential, among other things. He’s not even as good defensively as the aforementioned Danault, who has/had Selke voting finishes of 7, 6, 6, 8 consecutively. If his production goes up when the team is better, then sure, but it remains to be seen whether that will happen or not.

 

[Sorinth]

Danault was the team’s 1C in the playoffs that year, not Suzuki. Also, 3 wins away is 3 wins away, i.e., it didn’t happen.

Danault was not the #1 C he was the #2 center.

He absolutely does if we’re going to contend with him as the 1C. Having a better team around him isn’t going to improve his faceoff% or his tk/gv differential, among other things. He’s not even as good defensively as the aforementioned Danault, who has/had Selke voting finishes of 7, 6, 6, 8 consecutively. If his production goes up when the team is better, then sure, but it remains to be seen whether that will happen or not.

Barkov's tk/gv differential was +1.26 per 60 minutes, Mike Hoffman's was +1.27, Connor Garland was +2.11. It's not proof of anything.

 

[Garbageyuk]

Danault was not the #1 C he was the #2 center.

You’re incorrect. And again, it’s moot either way because they didn’t win.

Barkov's tk/gv differential was +1.26 per 60 minutes, Mike Hoffman's was +1.27, Connor Garland was +2.11. It's not proof of anything.

Not in and of itself, which is why I didn’t mention it by itself. But generally, Selke level forwards are among the best in the league in this metric along with faceoff%, and you have to at least be on the plus side of it to be considered. Suzuki is not and never has been. In fact, he isn’t among the best in any defensive statistical category or metric.

 

[Sorinth]

You’re incorrect. And again, it’s moot either way because they didn’t win.

Not in and of itself, which is why I didn’t mention it by itself. But generally, Selke level forwards are among the best in the league in this metric along with faceoff%, and you have to at least be on the plus side of it to be considered. Suzuki is not and never has been. In fact, he isn’t among the best in any defensive statistical category or metric.

If a defensive stat has Hoffman and Barkov at the same level then it's massively flawed as a stat that doesn't report what you think it is.

 

[Grate n Colorful Oz]

He was already 3 wins away from winning the cup as the teams #1 C. All it would've taken was a 2nd line center who could manage more then 4 points in 22 playoff games or for a guy like Tatar to not become a no-show with 1 point in 5 games.

He doesn't have to improve significantly, especially when he can arguably meet your metrics simply by having a better team around him and without actually improving.

As much as I like Suzuki, that is a complete spin. Danault centered the main shutdown line, which is why he had so few points, while Suzuki was more often used to exploit a weaker pairing.

This is just like the people thinking Draisaitl was better than McDavid in so and so series, or Malkin versus Crosby. Both Drai and Malkin were used as exploits in those moments, while McDavid or Crosby faced the toughest opposition.

 

[Garbageyuk]

If a defensive stat has Hoffman and Barkov at the same level then it's massively flawed as a stat that doesn't report what you think it is.

31 and 12 is the same thing as 61 and 31? News to me. Hoffman played less games and had the puck less, and played against worse competition. Barkov is among the best doing the complete opposite.

And again, I didn’t claim that tk/gv on its own is proof of anything (you know this because I’ve said it repeatedly), it’s just one of many stats and metrics we use to help us evaluate defensive prowess. Suzuki isn’t among the best in any of them.

 

[Miller Time]

He was already 3 wins away from winning the cup as the teams #1 C. All it would've taken was a 2nd line center who could manage more then 4 points in 22 playoff games or for a guy like Tatar to not become a no-show with 1 point in 5 games.
He doesn't have to improve significantly, especially when he can arguably meet your metrics simply by having a better team around him and without actually improving.

not too mention that Suzuki today is a much more established and proven performer than he was at the time of leading the team in scoring on the way to the cup finals.

He has improved considerably since then, and there's really zero reason to doubt that he is more than adequate as the "#1C" on a cup contending roster. That he isn't a McDavid or Crosby is irrelevant. Obviously if you're #1C is a HOF lock and all-time great, you don't need as much support, but there are several recent winners/finalists of which Suzuki's performance impact would be on par with the #1C that they had (blues, knights, capitals, stars, sharks etc.).

If Dach takes the step forward in his game that seems quite likely, top 6C is going to be the least important area of concern as far as icing a contender in the next 3-5 years... especially if Hage develops well.

same with top 6 scoring wingers... I'm confident enough in Slaf, CC, Demidov, Newhook (plus Laine?) providing us with enough there as well.

top pairing d, goaltending, scoring depth... these are the areas with real ? that need to be answered over the next 2 years or so...

Will 1-2 of Guhle/Hutson/RB/Mailloux (or outliers like Xhekaj/Engstrom/ Konyuskov/Barron/Strubble) establish themselves as legit top pairing minute-eating dmen?

Will Monty (or Dobes? or Volkhin or Fowler) be able to get to a consistent top tier 1A netminding presence?

Will enough of our prospect forwards be able to transition into solid middle 6 contributors? (Hage, Mesar, Kapanen, Beck, Roy, Rohrer, Heineman, Farrell, Xhekaj...)


and for any position where the hope for internal development falls short, the growing cap room and depth of picks/prospects gives KH the ammunition to go out and target a specific external addition.

Future is Bright

 

[Sorinth]

As much as I like Suzuki, that is a complete spin. Danault centered the main shutdown line, which is why he had so few points, while Suzuki was more often used to exploit a weaker pairing.

This is just like the people thinking Draisaitl was better than McDavid in so and so series, or Malkin versus Crosby. Both Drai and Malkin were used as exploits in those moments, while McDavid or Crosby faced the toughest opposition.

Yes Danault was the main shutdown line, but not only is that not the definition of a teams #1 line, there's no exclusivity in terms of matchups and opposing teams the top lines will end up playing against all the lines. You can tilt it somewhat but having Danault doesn't mean Suzuki didn't also face the other teams best players or was in an exploitation role.

For example, in the finals at 5 on 5 Kucherov played against Suzuki for 27:31, against Danault for 22:49, and against neither 17:24.

 

[Sorinth]

31 and 12 is the same thing as 61 and 31? News to me. Hoffman played less games and had the puck less, and played against worse competition. Barkov is among the best doing the complete opposite.

And again, I didn’t claim that tk/gv on its own is proof of anything (you know this because I’ve said it repeatedly), it’s just one of many stats and metrics we use to help us evaluate defensive prowess. Suzuki isn’t among the best in any of them.

I never said you used it exclusively, but using a broken metric doesn't actually provide any insight. Even if you filter out all the non-sensical results like Hoffman you can't be sure that it's going to provide good results or not because you know it does provide non-sense and there's no way of knowing whether you are getting non-sense with any player or not.