Faceoffs and pp - again

[Mike]

This is a recurring problem and one they better fix. On that note, is it
time to finally admit Galchenyuk would make a great winger? I think so.

[Gerry]

On Wednesday, March 22, 2017 at 10:55:02 AM UTC-4, Mike wrote:
> This is a recurring problem and one they better fix. On that note, is it
> time to finally admit Galchenyuk would make a great winger? I think so.

It is getting close, at least. Although personally, I would give one more sustained go with the top line. At least 40 games, uninterrupted, no remorse, no regrets after that.

Anyway, for those thinking that this somehow vindicates prior foxhole handling of Galchenyuk... it most certainly does not. The whole point of past criticisms was that Galchenyuk needed to be TRIED there, and not have obviously inferior options like Desharnais constantly interfering with that. Even now, they may have no better options. And I'm not convinced the trial has been sufficiently sustained.

I think there are posts here where, even during the worst of it, years ago, I made it clear that I didn't know if Galchenyuk should ultimately land at center or wing. I just think they owed it to themselves to try it, and sooner rather than later, given their lack of options and his qualifications/candidacy. If a point arrives where it seems that a sufficient trial has happened, and/or alternative options arise, great. The team obviously has a huge need for a scoring winger too, so it's not remotely a disaster.

All that said, what I would really hate to see happen is that they decide based on this season - which has still been a somewhat sporadic center trial overall, incl. the injury - that they should trade Galchenyuk in something like that package for Duchene to get that "proven center". Duchene has a ridiculously good FO% this year, and has been generally good in the past too. So yeah, he's a "proven center" as a faceoff guy. He's also a team-worst -33 on his team and with much better icetime has not produced any better offense than Galchenyuk. Duchene will also be a UFA after just 2 more seasons.

Basically, I hope they don't get too carried away with devaluing Galchenyuk based on this whole Quest For A Number One Center thing. There are other factors that shouldn't be overlooked.

l8r,
Gerry

[Mike]

He's on wing at practice - Shaw at centre Lehkonen on the other wing.
Not sue about that configuration. Maybe they should try Desharnais at
centre and ..... oh, wait.

[Chuck]

On Wednesday, March 22, 2017 at 10:55:02 AM UTC-4, Mike wrote:

> This is a recurring problem and one they better fix. On that note, is it
> time to finally admit Galchenyuk would make a great winger? I think so.

Give him a big winger who can win puck battles in the corner, and the problem will go away. Get away from MT's one line fits every situation system and commit to having 2 versions of the top two lines.

[Nyssa]

Agreed.

The face-off % can be improved through intensive practice
and tutoring. Put that on the to-do list going forward.

Yes, face-off wins are important, especially in close games
and on the pp. But if that were the only component to being
a number one then go re-sign Manny Malholtra. Problem solved.

There's more to being a Number #1 center than face-off wins.
My pet has most of those other things and face-offs can be
learned/improved on. The rest will come with experience
and having stable wingers so the chemistry can develop.
Without the constant threat of being reassigned to wing or
the mixmaster system of coaching to eat into the confidence
level.

Nyssa, who has to stick up for her pet for the good of the
team going forward

[Gerry]

So end of the day, Galchenyuk has 40 pts in 52 games, with 16:13mins/g (2nd to Pleks among centers) and 2:27mins/g PP time.

You'd have to break this down into time on wing vs. center, and time on the top line vs. mixmaster lines to get a better picture.

But to me, this is getting _pretty close_ to a fair trial. I didn't watch a lot of the first half, so I don't really know or have a *real* opinion. But for the sake of argument and being an obnoxious windbag in general, my impression is that Galchenyuk has basically had a "half trial" this year. 40 pts in 52 games is 63 in a full season, and he's already got a 30-goal season under his belt.

I think the kid is a slam dunk for 30g/60pts in general. In the modern NHL, that's good production.

What I would like to see is, barring other offensive center options suddenly emerging and clearly displacing him (e.g. Shipachyov, who the heck else could?), give him the summer to work on his faceoffs, give him 40 games on the #1 line, give him ~18mins per game as the #1 center. Don't change it if he has a bad game, don't change it if he has a bad month, don't change it if his faceoff % is putridly near 40%.

If it still isn't clear that he can be a #1 center after that, fine, case closed. I could see it happening. I could also see if you gave him that little boost in icetime, security, confidence, linemates, summer faceoff work, he scores 75 pts, manages a not-putrid 48% on faceoffs, and earns the right to be #1 center full-time. It could go either way.

Nobody else on the roster has that potential, nobody in the farm system or pipeline seems to. I feel like they haven't quite done their due diligence on this option yet. You don't get a #3 overall pick in the NHL very often, not if you're the Montreal Canadiens. It still feels to me like they're kicking themselves in the groin failing to really make the kind of commitment this calibre of pick and player warrants. They're still treating him like he's a generic pick past the 2nd round who has flashed some things but still has to prove himself. That's a mentality that to me doesn't fit the circumstances.

Galchenyuk has been awful on faceoffs this year, undeniably, and I'd go a little further than that and say that he hasn't impressed me with his backcheck or defensive work as a center in general either. He lacks attention to detail on things that drive NHL coaches nuts. He says he doesn't even care if he's wing or center, and that might actually be true. But dangnabbit(sp?) to me the Habs really ought to try harder to make this work, because you can easily look at the roster and pipeline and see that this is actually their best hope. Like, their only hope.

l8r,
Gerry

[Marty]

On Wed, 22 Mar 2017 11:55:02 -0300, Mike wrote:

> This is a recurring problem and one they better fix. On that note, is it
> time to finally admit Galchenyuk would make a great winger? I think so.

Alternative theory. A major one.

Galchenyuk will require some patience to return to centre. He has lost out
on 3-4 years of experience. His face-offs skills suck because,
"surprise!", he wasn't taking them. This is the downside of Therrien's
"slow" approach. He did mask some of Galchenyuk's fault's as a centre
while young, but now that he is older he has the exact same faults because
he did not work though them. He learned to be a winger, not a centre. So,
do we simply accept he is now a winger?

Actually, he would probably be decent winger, I admit. Hell, he might turn
into a Radulov clone, minus to puck-doggedness but plus a more effective
shot.

However, I think you still try and work through his issues. Be patient.
Radulov himself seems more like a centre, stuck on the wing. He has such
playmaking skills, and could strip opposing centres of the puck so well.
But a long time ago someone probably took the easy way with him. Now we
are looking at Galchenyuk the same way. I say work harder with him. Get a
guy to work with him on face-offs, constantly. See if you can make him
invest in being a centre. Making him a winger is a failure option. He will
be good there, but not his best. It means setting some of his talent
aside. Don't tell me a fast reflex guy can't be taught face-offs. It is
whether you invest in teaching him, and motivating him.

Marty

[Nyssa]

AbsoLUTly! Everything you wrote!

It's not like the Habs have a box full of other potential
star centers in the closet waiting for their chance. And
as you say, my pet was #3 pick because of his skills and
potential for NHL success.

One of the things that's been driving me around the twist
the past couple of weeks is some talking heads saying that
Chucky isn't working on his faceoffs, like he doesn't care
or want to improve. One idiot states this as "fact" and
then a bunch more of these other idiots take up the refrain
too. I heard it again yesterday from a Sirius host who
cannot know this first hand, so must have heard it from
one of those self-appointed experts that Habs-land has a
surplus of.

So how come he spent time during the bye week working with
some faceoff guy down in Florida? How come he spent time
after practice asking one of the other guys for tips and
help with faceoffs? And showed some small improvement in
the next game after getting said help/tips?

How about the COACHES helping out with some of the rough
edges? That's what their job is and what they're paid
handsomely to do. It's for doggone sure that MT didn't
do much to help any of the younger players. Oh yeah,
except to "make a better person of him" type crap.

Now that CJ is in charge, you'd think *he'd* step in to
ensure that players with problems with their game, be
it faceoffs or defensive coverage, get the extra help
and instruction they need. Right now, I can see where
he'd still be learning about each player and concentrating
on the real problem of the pp and getting playoff-ready
though, so I'll give him a pass for now.

Come off-season, he'd better have some plans for the
players' summer to smooth out the rough edges and
improve specific areas be it skating, strength, or
faceoffs.

Whatever they do now, we're running out of experimental
time, so they'd better make it fast and sure before the
playoffs start.

Nyssa, who doesn't check the standings until the last two
weeks of the regular season, but it sounds like the Rags
in the first round

[Nyssa]

Applause!!

Yes, that's exactly the problem. MT's non-coaching hid
the faults instead of addressing them when he was a rookie
and in his sophomore year. Now we're hearing complaints
about a problem that could have been cured by now instead
of covered up by the jerking around by MT.

We need a #1 center. We've got an excellent candidate.
Instead of wringing hands and whining about how he isn't
perfect, work on those imperfections and allow him to
reach his full potential, both for himself and for the
team going forward into the next decade.

It seems to be an obvious choice, but for those who
want instant gratifications and fixes, not so much.

I say, Patience, Grasshopper. The problems can be
fixed and will be worth the wait.

We've just seen lot of time wasted where it could already
have been done by now if the shortcomings had been
addressed from the beginning instead of covered up.

Nyssa, who doesn't like cover-ups or ignoring a problem

[Jim Bauch]

Yeah, one of my bigger concerns about Bergevin is that I have a suspicion that his mindset is a little like an NFL coach: that management decides what the team will look like, and then gets rid of players who don't fit in favor of those who do.

A modest dose of that is fine, and even smart. It's good for management to have a vision of what style you want to play, and to try to adopt a coherent philosophy. And although I might grumble here about specific instances, it's really not that big a deal if management has a "pet" who they really want as a 4th line forward or bottom pairing defensemen.

But the NHL isn't like the NFL. Smart NHL GMs recognize that truly talented young players are a valuable commodity, and try to work with the pieces they've got and build around them. Alex Galchenyuk is a rarer commodity than Marc Bergevin. It should be Bergevin's job to figure out how to get the most out of Galchenyuk.

Perhaps I'm being paranoid. It's hard to tell, because the Habs' young stars who MB inherited are:
(1) Subban, who is obviously Exhibit A for MB's stubbornness. But even Subban fans like me will admit that he's an atypical personality, so it could just be a one-off;
(2) Price, who is kind of a non-factor in this. He's an easy guy for a GM to like -- one of, if not the, best in the world at his position, currently on a discounted cap hit, and by all accounts a fairly drama-free personality. Plus, goaltenders don't really have to fit as closely into a GM's preferred system as skaters;
(3) Pacioretty, who is a point in favor of MB's ability to work with what he has. MB obviously liked him enough to make him captain, and has generally defended him through some team- and personal slumps; and
(4) Galchenyuk, who I think most of us agree has been mishandled, but it remains to be seen how much of that was MB and how much was his departed foxhole buddy.

Jim

[Mike]

I will agree that Galchenyuk was mishandled by Therrien 2.0 but would a
winger getting say 40 goals a year be such a bad thing? Maybe Danault is
a better centreman.

[Chuck]

The problem is they got rid of one of their best puck handlers on the points. Players who can protect the line, and pass the puck to players who are in position to do something with it. Puck control by their dmen in the offensive zone is haphazard. Where it is easier to just fire the puck in the corners then risk a turnover, if they need to reposition themselves to find an open forward. I think all of Montreal's offense problems start and end with a defence which displays little confidence when controlling the puck. Markov still shows flashes of his past skills. Weber has a great shot, but doesn't get set up to use it often enough. Petty and Emelin handle the puck as if it was a grenade. Beaulieu had any confidence in his offensive skills beaten out of him. The rest are just head knockers, who clear rebounds.

[Marty]

It's funny. I am just reading this now, and I had not read Gerry's post
first, but we both said almost the same thing from different perspectives,
and Nyssa cheered us both b/c she sees the same thing, so I think we are
on the right track.

I do get him being moved to wing for this season. He was lost the last few
weeks. And Gerry has it right. Start him at centre next season, 40 games+
and live with the mistakes. However, that's what seemed to be happening.
Even if Therrien has messed him up and slowed his development, THAT plan
actually seemed like the plan this season, and it was working OK until the
injury derailed everything. Galchenyuk came back as less than full
effectiveness, and his lack of skills as a centre showed. Still, next
season, give it a shot again. And since Galchenyuk seems a little gun-shy
being designated the #1 centre, work on his confidence, while maybe
minimizing the pressure in public.

Oh, and again, get a face-off guy to work with him. Seriously, find a face-
off dude to practice with him all summer as part of his summer routine.
With the money these guys make, how hard would it to be to hire a former
minor-league face-off specialist who would love to become a Hab's face-off
"consultant"? Pay him 100K the try and help make a potential top flight
centre finally earn his wings.

Marty

[Nyssa]

Which is pretty much what we've been saying and is the
logical thing to do.

I mentioned Manny Malholtra for a reason: he was one of the
top faceoff men the Habs have had recently. What's he doing
these days since retirement? Plus he speaks French. ;) I'm
sure there are others on the Habs that could use a bit of
extra coaching too. If Manny isn't interested, there are
other recent retirees who could probably be lured into a
consultant job. Make it so!

I had to chuckle over the weekend when I was listening
to a Pens game and Mike Lange mentioned that Sidney Crosby
has always had poor faceoff stats. Gee, that hasn't kept
him from being a #1 has it?

Nyssa, who thinks that all the time the coaches, GM, and
commentators have spent whining about faceoffs could have
been better spent actually doing something about it, like
finding a *&@#! coach to help fix it

[Gerry]

Malhotra is basically doing that job already for the Vancouver Canucks.

Although I'm not so sure how secure their coaching staff is after this season. Vancouver is doing ok on faceoffs, 10th in the league at 51.1%.

I feel like the main "art of the draw" is pretty bogus... clean wins and losses isn't the thing that matters here. Players and teams are largely distributed between 45% and 55%, which says to me it's largely a coin toss. Plus the stat itself has limitations.

It is more than a decade now since I spent a season charting faceoffs, but what I came away thinking from that exercise was... usually it doesn't matter if you win or lose. It's more down to how the players handle the win or loss that matters. You can lose cleanly, and the puck really goes nowhere important and nothing happens. Or vice versa on a clean win. The really key thing is how the players handle their coverages off the draw. It's when somebody isn't tied up on a loss or a lane opens or a weird/lucky bounce happens that a faceoff loss actually hurts you.

So to me, it's a stat that gets waaaaay too much attention for centers. What matters more to me, and this is still the case for Galchenyuk anyway, is how they handle their coverage and positioning and defensive responsibilities in general. There isn't a good stat for that either. Not something as simple and easy for the pundits to point to as a "win/loss" percentage on faceoffs, anyway. I'd take any productive center at 40% on faceoffs *IF* they were otherwise tying their opponent up and handling the defensive responsibilities of their position in general well. Which Galchenyuk isn't either.

l8r,
Gerry

[Gerry]

Oh yeah, and the other thing that bugged me when I charted faceoffs was... how do they figure a faceoff is always a WIN or LOSS? I started counting WIN/LOSS/TIE pretty early on in my exercise, because a lot times the centers just tied eachother up, and it really wasn't on them what the outcome of the faceoff ended up being.

l8r,
Gerry

[gorgo...@gmail.com]

They do have ties. I don't know how they calculate it but not all faceoffs are awarded as a win or loss. In addition, and I think they record the quality of the win or loss and this is tabulated. Was it a clean win/loss, a scrambled one etc. Last week in one of Montreals losses, can't remember which of the two, there was a stretch when the Habs (Pleacs) lost 3 faceoffs in their end "cleanly" in a row. They were scored on on the 3rd. Whats worse, they lost the next 2 faceoffs in there end cleanly too. One by Danault, can't remember the other. IMO, Pleacs faceoff % stats, which are not great, don't also add that he loses a lot of draws cleanly.

[TheMadApe]

Were you getting paid to do this or was this for your own fun? If for
the fun of it, then you deserve a super-fan award.

Otherwise you must work in the business.

You don't have to answer LOL.

TMA

[Gerry]

Just being a nerdy fan, alas. :)

l8r,
Gerry

[Nyssa]

Good for you!

More important than faceoff wins or losses is what the other
players DO after the faceoff.

It doesn't help the effort if your winger keeps losing the
puck right after the win giving the opposition a scoring
opportunity.

Rather than concentrating everything on whether or not
a specific player has good or bad faceoff stats, how about
they take a closer look at what happens immediately afterward?

If the guys can get the puck back well after a loss or lose
it right after a win, which is better? One gives you possession
while the other might give you a plus in your faceoff stats,
but still isn't good on the play.

Massaging the statistics. It ain't just the governments who
do it. ;)

Nyssa, who wants to know the rest of the story

[Gerry]

Back then, I was just charting win/loss/draw by zone for Habs centers, probably based on some argument on here. :) I could see that you needed to go further to get a better scoop, but I didn't go further. I used to divide a sheet of paper into offensive/defensive/neutral zone and make columns by zone for all the centers, then just tally tick marks during the game. Paying no attention to the opponent either... these days, handedness and "quality of opposition" could factor in. Along with all the elements mentioned about what the rest of the team does on the draw.

Although I can see how a coach could flip it back to the center... just ASSUME everybody else on the team plays the faceoff perfectly and handles all their responsibilities. Then would you rather have the center win or lose the draw? Win of course.

Anyway, no time for stuff like that these days! :)

l8r,
Gerry

[TheMadApe]

Then I vote you the NHLs biggest superfan.

TMA