The biggest myth in the NHL today?

Well, it's that time of year again - the time for my yearly post about my beloved Habs.

So what has riled me up enough to compel me to write another long-winded post? Well, for some reason I've been in a hyperactive state since yesterday, and this morning I woke up at 4 AM today ready to solve all the world's problems. Where do I start? Meh...let's forget about the world and talk hockey. There are a few irritants (ill-advised signings by the GM, player mismanagement by the coach, unaddressed size concerns ahead of the playoffs), but generally speaking, the team is looking promising this year and they're currently playing some very good hockey.

PK Subban is having another fine season. He should be a lock to make Team Canada, and is making a strong case with his play to warrant a prominent role on the team's first pairing. However, not everyone in the Canadian media is convinced. Some people even suggest he should be left off the team, which seems like lunacy to me. Normally, I wouldn't care what some people suggest. The problem is that there is a lot of noise that some pretty important hockey people feel that way. Is it just noise? Maybe. I hope so. 

Alas, I'm not so sure. In fact, well-respected NHL insiders like TSN's Bob McKenzie have often suggested that the Team Canada brass sees PK as a bubble player, possibly a player on the outside looking in. Apparently, PK is not reliable. Apparently, PK is a talented offensive d-man, and could help the PP, sure, but he has too many defensive shortcomings for Team Canada. Apparently, PK is too much of a risky player. Too many turnovers. Too many spin-o-ramas. An uncontrollable entity. Impossible to harness for a coach in such a short tournament. Impossible for partnering d-men to adapt to in a short tournament. Too volatile. A risky asset. If he were was a stock on the TSX, his beta would 3.5, which is much too high for Team Canada's conservative fund managers.

The problem is that these arguments are all predicated upon quite possibly the biggest myth in the NHL today. The myth that PK Subban is not a good defensive d-man in this league.

I propose we take a trip down memory lane. 

Let me start with this statement:

PK Subban was a much better defensive d-man than an offensive one when he came into the league. 

Under Jacques Martin, PK was our most reliable defensive d-man. Jacques Martin understood that and gave him monster minutes. PK played on the PK. PK played nearly 30 minutes for many games under Jacques Martin. In fact, when he first came into the league and was thrust into the limelight after his amazing rookie season in the AHL to play in the 2009-2010 playoffs, PK was the guy that Martin used to neutralize the two best players in the game: Crosby and Ovechkin.

I will repeat: as a rookie with 2 NHL regular season games under his belt, Jacques Martin decided to use PK Subban to neutralize the game's two best players in the NHL playoffs. 

Since day one, he has been beyond elite at neutralizing the game's best players when he has been given the assignment to do so.

In his first two full-time NHL seasons under Jacques Martin, he confirmed that was already among the league's best defensive d-men, and was utilized as such. He was always elite without the puck. The way he covers the opposition, the way he always leverages his thick frame to position his body between the puck carrier and the net, the way he threatens oncoming forwards due to his hitting ability and physical presence to keep them honest, the way he recovers the puck down low and separates the opposition from puck & net were always elite. His main weakness was his decision-making with the puck in the defensive end. Holding on to the puck too long. Making the risky pass. Poor decision-making at times, coupled with some issues with game management (knowing when is the opportune time to take risks). Sure, PK makes errors. He makes fewer errors today, but he still makes mistakes occasionally. But hey - every d-man makes errors. Key in on the guys with the best defensive reputations. Watch them closely. They all make errors at times. No d-man is perfect. 

It is his offensive game that was deficient (related to his only defensive weakness). You could tell he had the tools: amazing skater, booming shot, creativity. The main problem was his poor decision-making. He would often make the wrong play: shoot instead of pass, pass instead of shoot. He would often try to pulverize the puck and miss the net, instead of holding back, harnessing his power, taking some off it, and hitting the net. 

That being said, PK is a very, very, VERY smart kid. You could see him improve from day to day. He is a student of the game. He puts in tons of video time. I was amazed at his progression. Slowly but surely, he was improving his offensive game by leaps and bounds. He was hitting the net. He was more confident rushing the puck up the ice at the right time. He was making great passes. He was becoming the complete package. 

This rapid ascension attributable more to his intelligence than his natural abilities (we have seen too many players with all the tools fail because they didn't have a toolbox) culminated with his Norris-winning season last year. It is his offensive game that caught up to his defensive game. Total package. Elite. Even his game management is much improved now. He undoubtedly became one of the top 5 overall NHL d-men in the game. In my book, he is the #1 overall d-man in the game. There are a few who might be slightly better defensively, a few who might be slightly better offensively, but none who offer a better overall package. None. 

The numbers prove it. There are many hockey stat geeks who have proven that PK is the most dominant d-man in the league. This excellent article by Andrew Berkshire (http://www.habseyesontheprize.com/2014-sochi-olympics/2013/12/3/5172530/how-does-p-k-subban-compare-to-other-team-canada-defense-hopefuls) is just one example of the numbers showing how PK compares to the other Team Canada hopefuls. And there are many other stats that show that PK is better defensively than every other Team Canada hopeful.

PK Subban is possibly the best d-man in the league at 24 years of age. The Habs are lucky to have him. And I'm ecstatic and thankful to be able to watch him every game - it was such a treat to see him evolve so quickly, and for the first time in many years I'm excited about this team. I think we finally have a guy who can lead our team to winning our first cup since 1993. He is our first unquestionably truly elite player in years. PK is simply one of the best players in the league. Period.

I love the Habs, and I love Canada. But if PK is left off Team Canada, I will cheer against them. To leave arguably the best overall d-man in the league off the team would be criminal, whatever the reason is (stigma about d-men who score lots of points being necessarily weak defensively, dislike for his ''flashy'' style, ill-advised perception about him being risky and a poor game manager, predisposed bias against individuals producing higher melanin which often leads to darker skin pigmentation, etc.).

2013 Habs: Forward position

It only took me six months since my last post to finally get to talking about the Habs forwards on the 2013 team. It bodes very well for the update frequency of this blog moving forward.

Let's take a look at the potential forwards on this year's team:

Centers: Desharnais, Plekanec, Eller, Nokelainen, Galchenyuk
Wingers: Pacioretty, Cole, Bourque, Gionta, Moen, Prust, Armstrong, White, Blunden, Gallagher

At first glance, it's very clear that this year's team has very little offensive flair compared to last season's team, which didn't have all that much flair to begin with. We essentially swapped Gomez, Kostitsyn, Cammalleri with Bourque, Prust and Armstrong. We have less offensive flair, but more grit now. We practically no longer have any puck possession players (Eller and Galchenyuk are the only guys who could play a puck possession game - which will make it difficult for Galchenyuk to truly shine with this year's edition).

Accordingly, I suppose that Michel Therrien's proposed offensive strategy and more direct north-south approach is consistent with the tools at his disposal. There is nothing innovative about Michel Therrien. He is primarily a motivator who will try to get the best out of his troops by preaching hard work. This season's Habs will work hard - of that, I have little doubt. However, I also expect the Habs scoring struggles to continue, and I also expect that the team will play some of the most boring hockey in the NHL. Send the puck deep, crash and bang in the corners, crash the net. It isn't always entertaining, but it can be effective. Unfortunately, a quick comparison with other teams will reflect how little talent we have at the forward position compared to real contenders. As I mentioned in a prior post, our wingers are much older (and less exciting) than the wingers you would find on a contending team. Cole and Gionta are declining assets. Cole will have a hard time to match last year's anomalous production. Gionta should no longer be a top-six player, and would be best served as a 3rd line winger. Bourque is no spring chicken, but he seems more motivated this year, and may still be a useful player if he gets top-six minutes and power play time. Armstrong, Prust, Moen, Blunden, Nokelainen and White are incapable of providing regular offense. Gallagher is redundant on a team with Gionta. Basically, the only potentially dynamic offensive forwards on the team are Desharnais, Plekanec, Pacioretty, Galchenyuk and Eller. It is difficult to roll out 3 offensive lines when you only really have 5 dynamic offensive forwards. Heck, it's difficult to roll out 2 offensive lines. I look at a team like the St-Louis Blues with tremendous envy - they have several good, young dynamic forwards.

Alas, the Habs are organizationally devoid of such depth. One of the few potentially entertaining and promising young players on this year's team is Lars Eller. While it may be premature to jump to conclusions, it would appear as though Michel Therrien is not satisfied with his play, and is considering to bench him for next game. While this would be a very irritating development, it doesn't surprise me, as his style of play doesn't fit with Therrien's direct north-south play. In fact, Therrien has mentioned that he would like to see Eller embrace a more direct style of play, effectively neutering whatever natural flair he has. When will the Habs stop this poisonous policy of trying to mould all players into the same boring style of play as opposed to embracing diversity and nurturing young players' natural flair?

Eller's style of play is perfect for a puck possession player like Galchenyuk, but I doubt Therrien will have the foresight to play them together. Instead, I expect Galchenyuk to struggle to find chemistry with any of the players Therrien will put him with, and I would prefer to see him sent down instead of being forced to play a style of hockey which doesn't naturally suit him. Kostitsyn could have been another good player to play with Galchenyuk, but the Habs believe that players who don't naturally play a direct north-south game must be lazy, or dumb, or both. There is no room on the team for players who aren't like Cole and Gionta. There is no room for players who play a different style. There is no room for diversity. There is no room on the team for any flair.

I hope there is no truth to the rumours about Eller being benched next game. However, if it does prove to be true, things are shaping up for the upcoming season to provide us with some of the most boring hockey in the NHL today. But hey, at least our team will be hard working, right?

If I'm Alex Galchenyuk, I'm hoping to see Barkov or MacKinnon wearing a Habs sweater come draft time.

The make-up of a champion

I heard a lot of noise from fellow fans that we should have gone after Jaromir Jagr (contrary to the old Jagr, the new Jagr is now a good veteran leader), and that we should go after Shane Doan. A solid veteran. Good presence in the dressing. Good veterans help you win cups, right?

Before dissecting the Habs current roster in order to assess what changes I'd like to see being made with the team, I figured I should take a quick look at the last 3 Stanley Cup champions: the 2011-2012 Kings, the 2010-2011 Bruins, and the 2009-2010 Blackhawks.

My gut tells me that the winning recipe is: skilled young forwards with size, good veteran D, good goalie. My gut also tells me that you don't win cups by having too many 30+ year old forwards. The infamous summer of 2009 was always ill-advised, because you don't win cups these days with high-priced UFA forward signings. My hypothesis is that the makeup of the Habs is fundamentally flawed, and that there are far too many aging forwards on the team. Comparing the current Habs makeup to the makeup of the 2012 Kings, 2011 Bruins and 2010 Blackhawks may not prove my hypothesis is correct, as it's a rather superficial assessment, but, in the interest of time, I think it's interesting food for thought just the same. It's often said that forwards peak at the ages of 27-28, so I will list players aged 29 and older on each of the aforementioned cup winning rosters when assessing our current roster, since you could say these are declining assets.

The only significant forwards on the 2012 Kings above the age of 28 were Jarret Stoll, age 30 and Justin Williams, age 30 (Simon Gagne, age 32, only played 34 regular season and 4 playoff games). TOTAL: 2 players above the age 28.

The only significant forwards on the 2011 Bruins above the age of 28 were Michael Ryder, age 31, Chris Kelly, age 30, Shawn Thornton, age 32, and of course, Dr. Mark Recchi, age 43. TOTAL: 4 players above the age of 28.

The only significant forwards on the 2010 Hawks above the age of 28 were Marian Hossa, age 31 and John Madden, age 37. TOTAL: 2 players above the age of 28.

As it stands right now, the Habs current roster will the following players above the age of 30 come the 2013 playoffs: Colby Armstrong, age 30, Rene Bourque, age 31, Erik Cole, age 34, Brian Gionta, age 34, Scott Gomez (don't laugh - he's still on the team), age 33, Travis Moen, age 31, Tomas Plekanec, age 30, Brandon Prust, age 29. TOTAL: 8 players above the age of 28.

Eight players above the age of 28. Four more than the 2011 Bruins. Six more than the 2012 Kings and the 2010 Hawks.

Our team needs to get much younger. In today's game, you can be a successful forward at a younger age than in the past. You need veterans to play D, but playing forward is easier and quicker to learn. You don't need eight veteran forwards. You just don't.

Bergevin needs his forwards to get much younger. Younger forwards have the requisite energy to forecheck hard and last a full 82 game season + playoffs. Younger forwards cost less money and eat up less cap space too. Bergevin does not need to sign any more UFA forwards (i.e. he does not need a Shane Doan).

Let me be clear here: I'm not saying you don't need veterans to win. Veterans are absolutely necessary to mobilize a team and keep a team focused on the prize.

Essentially, my claim is that the differential in performance obtained by spending a lot of cap space on several expensive veteran forwards as opposed to relying on younger forwards and using the cap space elsewhere is sub-optimal.

Last year, you saw what happens when you use your cap-friendly roster spots on defencemen. The performance gap between a veteran D-man and a young D-man is typically greater than the performance gap between a veteran forward and a young forward. The past cup winners have shown that a more optimal mix is to try to maximize the number of cap-friendly roster spots given to young talented forwards.

Thus, the return on invested capital (ROIC) when spending cap space on veteran forwards vs. younger forwards appears to be typically lower than the ROIC when spending cap space on veteran d-men vs. younger d-men, so the opportunity cost of foregoing cap spending on veteran forwards is lower than the opportunity cost of foregoing cap spending on veteran D-men.

In my next post, I'll propose some moves in order to revamp the look of our aging forwards.

And that's your Cup of Joe on the Habs for today.

Another Habs blog? Why?

Good question. Well, for starters, I've pretty much lived in Montreal my whole life, and I've always been an avid fan of the Montreal Canadiens. I also happen to enjoy writing. Why not combine the two and write about the Habs? Makes sense, doesn't it? This blog is primarily for my own enjoyment (perhaps also for the enjoyment of 2 or 3 of my friends who are die-hard Hab fans).

What qualifies me to write intelligently (and hopefully entertainingly) about the Habs other than just being a regular fan? Not much, I suppose: I'm currently employed as a management consultant for a big consulting firm and I've never played hockey competitively. However, I am genuinely passionate about the game (much more so than I am passionate about management consulting, truth be told). In my humble opinion, I also happen to understand quite a bit about hockey. Accordingly, if you do happen to occasionally stumble upon this site, I'm fairly confident that it won't be a complete waste of your time.