HFBoards

HFBoards (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/index.php)
-   Montreal Canadiens (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/forumdisplay.php?f=16)
-   -   Now this is an interesting spreadsheet (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/showthread.php?t=1133405)

Emanresu Wen 03-12-2012 07:56 PM

Now this is an interesting spreadsheet
 
http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-0VC4Vacv9P...+%28Feb%29.JPG
http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-0VC4Vacv9P...+%28Feb%29.JPG

24stanleycups* 03-12-2012 08:02 PM

whats CHIP stand for?

LyricalLyricist 03-12-2012 08:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 24stanleycups (Post 45961621)
whats CHIP stand for?

cap hit injured players?

WhiskeySeven 03-12-2012 08:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LyricalLyricist (Post 45961679)
cap hit injured players?

Yup.

No surprise, we lost Gionta and Markov for tons of games. Messes everything up.

x-bob 03-12-2012 08:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by WhiskeySeven (Post 45961953)
Yup.

No surprise, we lost Gionta and Markov for tons of games. Messes everything up.

How does that mess everything up? Our top goal scorer from last year as well as our best defencemen lost a ton of games. It's exactly the point of those stats. If Gomez would of been out for most of the season than you would of had a point since he does not merit much of his cap hit but it's not the case here. (Or maybe I'm misunderstanding what you mean by it messes everything up)

WhiskeySeven 03-12-2012 09:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by x-bob (Post 45962227)
How does that mess everything up? Our top goal scorer from last year as well as our best defencemen lost a ton of games. It's exactly the point of those stats. If Gomez would of been out for most of the season than you would of had a point since he does not merit much of his cap hit but it's not the case here. (Or maybe I'm misunderstanding what you mean by it messes everything up)

I meant it messes up the season... which I think you realized by the end of your post :laugh:

AcadiaAxeMan 03-12-2012 09:56 PM

Nice to throw out accounting spreadsheets - nice to have a guide to explain what it means - I ain't no Shakespeare - yet I don't ride the short bus!! Throw us a bone Yoda!

Got it - WTF is AMIP??

The Gal Pals 03-12-2012 10:09 PM

I don't see what the spreadsheet proves. Sure we have the most money on injury reserve but Pittsburgh is doing just fine with all their injuries including the best player in the NHL. And St. Louis is outstanding as well. To me all this spreadsheet proves is that despite all the injuries, we've had terrible coaching that weren't able to adapt and compose with injuries. This applies to both JM and Cunney.

Watsatheo 03-12-2012 10:09 PM

Gomez inflates it a bit.

sharks9 03-12-2012 10:09 PM

Huge reason why we've been so bad this year. If we're healthier than we can definitely challenge for a playoff spot.

Especially with Grigs in the lineup :handclap:

SouthernHab 03-12-2012 11:59 PM

That would be nice except for Pittsburgh being in the second position.

All this shows is that injuries is an excuse for poor coaching and poor decisions made by a General Manager.

Em Ancien 03-13-2012 12:03 AM

Hey guys, Columbus is only **** because of injuries.

Not. :shakehead

Lafleurs Guy 03-13-2012 12:05 AM

Personally I felt we were better off without Gomez...

Talks to Goalposts 03-13-2012 12:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SouthernHab (Post 45979121)
That would be nice except for Pittsburgh being in the second position.

All this shows is that injuries is an excuse for poor coaching and poor decisions made by a General Manager.

Or that Pittsburgh is a powerhouse that by rights should be running away with the East if they had their star.


Or you could argue that it makes no difference if you replace good players with less good players.

Miller Time 03-13-2012 12:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Talks to Goalposts (Post 45981269)
Or that Pittsburgh is a powerhouse that by rights should be running away with the East if they had their star.

except Pitt is sitting only 4 pts out of 1st in the conference, 6 pts out of 1st overall...

we're sitting 11pts out of a playoff spot.

if they had 10 more pts, they would be "running away with the East", whereas with 10 more points, we're still outside of the playoffs.


if anything, that chart only re-emphasizes what a lot of us have been saying for quite some time. We have a poorly assembled roster, at best contending for a 5-6-7 seed, at worst... well we're seeing the worst (or close to it... imagine if Price had been out for a long stretch :help: )


The combined managing genius of Gainey-Gauthier has led us to this point, how much more evidence do we really need that enough is enough?

Prairie Habs 03-13-2012 12:51 AM

Wow Boston only has 117 games including Savard. They have been insanely healthy this year

Bloumeister 03-13-2012 12:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Prairie Habs (Post 45981727)
Wow Boston only has 117 games including Savard. They have been insanely healthy this year

Yeah, I was seeing the exact same thing...

A crazy stat from this:

Teams like Mtl, Philly and Pitts have approx. 300 man-games lost (give or take a few), and - arguably (*) - their top player (Markov, Pronger, Crosby) has been gone for most of the season.

(all of 70 games for Markov; 55 out of 68 for Pronger; 60 out of 68 for Crosby)

Meanwhile, Boston only has 117 man-games lost, and their "top MIA" is Marc Savard, a guy who might never play again and who's not considered part of the team roster/plans at this point in time.

Subtract the 68 man-games that "belong" to Savard, and Boston actually only lost 49 man-games.

One-sixth of the aforementioned teams.

That is amazingly healthy for a team, especially in a year where players are dropping like flies.




* no argument that Crosby is Pitts's best player; Markov and Pronger are at least still Top 3 for their respective team, and the impact of their absence is major

Talks to Goalposts 03-13-2012 01:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Miller Time (Post 45981639)
except Pitt is sitting only 4 pts out of 1st in the conference, 6 pts out of 1st overall...

we're sitting 11pts out of a playoff spot.

if they had 10 more pts, they would be "running away with the East", whereas with 10 more points, we're still outside of the playoffs.


if anything, that chart only re-emphasizes what a lot of us have been saying for quite some time. We have a poorly assembled roster, at best contending for a 5-6-7 seed, at worst... well we're seeing the worst (or close to it... imagine if Price had been out for a long stretch :help: )


The combined managing genius of Gainey-Gauthier has led us to this point, how much more evidence do we really need that enough is enough?

You can make a pretty strong argument based on goal differential that Montreal, as banged up as they are this season, belong more in the 7-9 range of teams in the east rather than 15th based on talent/ability. A lot of things went wrong to put the Habs were they are right now.

Miller Time 03-13-2012 02:06 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Talks to Goalposts (Post 45982577)
You can make a pretty strong argument based on goal differential that Montreal, as banged up as they are this season, belong more in the 7-9 range of teams in the east rather than 15th based on talent/ability. A lot of things went wrong to put the Habs were they are right now.

indeed, but i think the point is that a lot of things have gone terribly wrong for the pens, yet their fall has been far far less acute, in no small part to a very well constructed roster that benefits from (obviously) elite talent but also features very effective & well priced complimentary players.


In some ways, I think that having Crosby/Malkin/Fleury/Staal as "no-brainer" big contract guys from a very young age, it forced Shero and his team to be very careful and methodical about how they went about spending the rest of their cap space in building around those core pieces.

Perhaps an argument could be made that part of montreal's management troubles in successfully building the roster stems in part b/c without the pressure of working with limited resources to fill several roster spots (caused by having several big ticket players), they became victim of their own flexibility to spend spend spend...

I remember feeling very excited heading into the summer of '09... with 11 UFA's, and obviously no elite talent in place, I thought we were in a perfect position to methodically position ourselves to be able to pounce when the next big-ticket type player became available... that handled properly, we could continue to ice a competitive roster while keeping the necessary space needed to snag a Kovalchuk type if/when he hit the market (trade or UFA).

instead, Gainey (with Gauthier's input, how much who knows?) went for the scatter approach, foolishly thinking that Gomez had enough in the tank to be a key part of a "talent-by-committee" approach that cost as much as other teams top players, but unfortunately never delivered anywhere near that level of play (save for a brief 15 game run by cammy).

SeriousHabs 03-13-2012 07:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SouthernHab (Post 45979121)
That would be nice except for Pittsburgh being in the second position.

All this shows is that injuries is an excuse for poor coaching and poor decisions made by a General Manager.

Pittsburgh only lost plugs like Crosby, Fleury and Letang. Imagine if they had lost White and Gionta!

nilan30 03-13-2012 08:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bloumeister (Post 45981973)
Yeah, I was seeing the exact same thing...

A crazy stat from this:

Teams like Mtl, Philly and Pitts have approx. 300 man-games lost (give or take a few), and - arguably (*) - their top player (Markov, Pronger, Crosby) has been gone for most of the season.

(all of 70 games for Markov; 55 out of 68 for Pronger; 60 out of 68 for Crosby)

Meanwhile, Boston only has 117 man-games lost, and their "top MIA" is Marc Savard, a guy who might never play again and who's not considered part of the team roster/plans at this point in time.

Subtract the 68 man-games that "belong" to Savard, and Boston actually only lost 49 man-games.

One-sixth of the aforementioned teams.

That is amazingly healthy for a team, especially in a year where players are dropping like flies.




* no argument that Crosby is Pitts's best player; Markov and Pronger are at least still Top 3 for their respective team, and the impact of their absence is major

Bruins were extremely healthy for 80% of the year. Not so much anymore.

CGG 03-13-2012 09:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by nilan30 (Post 45987717)
Bruins were extremely healthy for 80% of the year. Not so much anymore.

And now they're fading. 2 points up on Ottawa, which means two points away from falling to 7th place.

Now take Chara out of their lineup for 70 games, and Brad Marchand for 40. Then add another 100 man games lost to various other players and we'll see how well they would have done this year.

Habs 4 Life 03-13-2012 09:25 AM

Blues, Flyers and Penguins have a **** load of depth that's for sure


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:27 PM.

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com, A property of CraveOnline, a division of AtomicOnline LLC ©2009 CraveOnline Media, LLC. All Rights Reserved.