Is It Time to Split Up Johnny & Mony?

[DeluxeMoustache]

Originally Posted by getoverit

Tkatchuk needs to go back with Backlund

Put Dube up with G&M

Or Mangiapane.

Depends what you think complements them, but a slow guy who plays a heavy game and has zero hands doesn’t seem to be it.

I think you may benefit from adding speed, skill and hockey IQ, not to mention a bit of a spark

[Classic_Sniper]

I’ve been on the move Gaudreau from Monahan bandwagon since 2019. After their poor finish to the 2019 season and their spectacularly bad showing in the playoffs, these 2 needed to be split up. This duo just simply doesn’t work when games aren’t run & gun. I was actually hoping for a Monahan trade in that offseason while his value was at its highest, but then I heard Treliving’s interview where he said something along the lines of “these guys just need more help” and my hopes were dashed. In hindsight, that might have been the smartest move because Monahan’s point totals since 18-19 are:

101 games
29 goals
39 assists
68 points
-21

....yuck

[tvp2003]

Originally Posted by Major Major

Gaudreau - Lindholm - Dube
Tkachuk - Backlund - Mangiapane
Lucic - Ryan - Phillips
Bennett - Monahan - Leivo

I don’t know if Sutter is looking to shake up the lines but I could get behind this.

Would prefer to swap Monahan and Ryan though — I think this gets you the best out of Monahan because Lucic is a good passer and can do the work along the boards. Bennett and Leivo do neither particularly well.

[Mathgod]

Originally Posted by Major Major

Gaudreau - Lindholm - Dube
Tkachuk - Backlund - Mangiapane
Lucic - Ryan - Phillips
Bennett - Monahan - Leivo

________

[calgarygeologist]

It was mentioned that Sutter doesn't like to bench players but it is probably time to start some rolling benching sessions for under performers like Johnny, Monahan, Tkachuk, etc. Maybe it will change something and maybe it won't.

[scotty2hotty]

Originally Posted by calgarygeologist

It was mentioned that Sutter doesn't like to bench players but it is probably time to start some rolling benching sessions for under performers like Johnny, Monahan, Tkachuk, etc. Maybe it will change something and maybe it won't.

I know that Sutter doesn’t like to bench players mid-game, preferring to get them back on the ice ASAP to work through any gaffes. But does he have a history of not sitting slumping players completely?

I genuinely don’t know.

[Joborule]

Originally Posted by Major Major

Gaudreau - Lindholm - Dube
Tkachuk - Backlund - Mangiapane
Lucic - Ryan - Phillips
Bennett - Monahan - Leivo

This just highlights how terrible the forward group is even more if this what it comes to.

[Macho0978]

I’d like to see

Gaudreau lindholm Tkachuk
Bennett monahan dube
Lucic backlund mangiapane
Leivo ryan Ritchie

Gaudreau gets his top end line. He goes on a tear then maybe we keep him. If not the excuse that monahan is holding him back is no longer valid

Monahan gets 2 lessor line mates. If he doesn’t respond maybe he was just getting carried by Johnny and it’s time to move on

So many said it was the coach and we got sutter and it wasn’t the coach. I’d like to test both guys that seem to be on the hot seat

[Manhattanboy]

Maybe they should trade girlfriends for a while and see if that helps.

[Mathgod]

Originally Posted by btimbit

Johnny you move asap, not out of frustration or anything against Johnny, but simply from a contract and business perspective

I'm not in the trade Johnny camp. I'm not convinced that you'd get a good return for him. Maybe see if you could sign him to something like a 6m/year for 3 years extension.

[DeluxeMoustache]

Originally Posted by calgarygeologist

It was mentioned that Sutter doesn't like to bench players but it is probably time to start some rolling benching sessions for under performers like Johnny, Monahan, Tkachuk, etc. Maybe it will change something and maybe it won't.

Like how Dube coughed up the puck and ended up with, what, 5 or 6 minutes of ice time?

I mean maybe Sutter didn’t like it, but he did it

[dino7c]

Originally Posted by Mathgod

I'm not in the trade Johnny camp. I'm not convinced that you'd get a good return for him. Maybe see if you could sign him to something like a 6m/year for 3 years extension.

Why on earth would he sign that deal?

[Mathgod]

Originally Posted by dino7c

Why on earth would he sign that deal?

His production has been trending downward for a while now.

6m/year might not get him signed, but how much more will he really command if his production doesn't pick up?

[united]

Just before this season started, Jack Han offered some analysis to Kent Wilson on the Gaudreau-Monahan decline, assuming Lindholm would be on their right-hand side. For those unfamiliar, Han formerly held the following titles during a multi-year stint with the Maple Leafs:

- Marlies assistant coach (with then-head coach Sheldon Keefe)
- Maple Leafs scout
- Maple Leafs Hockey Operations Assistant
- Maple Leafs Player Development Analyst

https://bigbodypresence.substack.com...k-up-13-and-23

• IMO Monahan is not really a center. If you watch him play in DZ, you'll see him doing a lot of standing around instead of being a step ahead of the play, pressuring the next puck carrier as the puck gets there, and making stops.
  
• Instead, he's typically standing in a spot, ostensibly playing defense but not really doing anything to help his team get the puck back. This for me explains why his shot impacts have been consistently not great for his entire career: he doesn't really pressure the puck and force the other team to turn it over so that CGY can get on offense.
  
• In terms of how he interacts with 13, a lot of breakout plays that they run as a line involve 13 circling back & building speed, and 23/28 pushing out of the zone to create space for 13
  
• Unlike most top-line Cs, Monahan neither likes nor is very good at carrying the puck from DZ through the NZ. Lindholm (28) is not a guy to take charge in transition either. So when CGY has the puck, 13 is really the guy who's doing that. Even though he's the only one of the three who's never played C in the NHL.
  
• 13 is certainly very small by human standards, but he's also not particularly fast in a straight line. His entire game is about CHANGE of speed and direction to manipulate coverage, rather than purely burning through coverage, so he can't run the same plays too often as a "running back" of sorts. Otherwise, he gets stuffed in the NZ. And the fact that 28 and especially 23 are not really great partners for him in transition puts a lot of stress on 13.
  
• To get into the OZ consistently 13 needs to be a dual-threat, first as a carrier but second as a passer. for him to be a credible passing threat he needs his RD to go.
  
• Right now (13) is exposed because he’s all alone. Calgary needs another center or a winger who can play with him in transition. For Gaudreau, the ideal scenario is for Monahan (or another C) and the other F to push up, and for a righty like Hamilton to catch up to him underneath/wide and get a puck with speed. (Han uses Dougie Hamilton as an example of a mobile RS D in the analysis as Gaudreau-Hamilton was a good connection is successful seasons)

Summary: the line as constructed only has one pass and carry threat through the neutral zone. Without a better center, another transitional winger, or an RH defender activation in transition, Gaudreau can be queued on and defended a lot easier.

I enjoyed the read though some will see the author and immediately dismiss it. For anyone else, the entire article is well worth a look but also note this is from December not today.

Obviously I don't give a #### about deferral to authority but I know there are a small number of posters who ridicule anyone who doesn't immediately do so. So, here we are. Han's analysis closely aligns with my own and that of others whom I respect: Gaudreau's shortcomings (turnovers and extreme contact avoidance) stand out to the casual puck-focused fan, while Monahan's shortcomings (complete indifference to defensive effort, poor in transition) are not as easily noticed as they are usually off-puck occurrences. In the end, both players are flawed however Gaudreau gets significantly more criticism from the casual fan because he has the puck far more often.

What is the harm in splitting them up at this point? Or at least trying 23 on wing. There is nothing to lose now, and in fact keeping them together deprives management of potentially useful information to use in future decision making.

[DeluxeMoustache]

^ that’s a good post. It’s a Kent Wilson piece including those quotes from Jack Han but with more analyses as well. It is a good piece and pretty interesting

Well done, Kent Wilson

[Classic_Sniper]

Originally Posted by united

Just before this season started, Jack Han offered some analysis to Kent Wilson on the Gaudreau-Monahan decline, assuming Lindholm would be on their right-hand side. For those unfamiliar, Han formerly held the following titles during a multi-year stint with the Maple Leafs:

- Marlies assistant coach (with then-head coach Sheldon Keefe)
- Maple Leafs scout
- Maple Leafs Hockey Operations Assistant
- Maple Leafs Player Development Analyst



I enjoyed the read though some will see the author and immediately dismiss it. For anyone else, the entire article is well worth a look but also note this is from December not today.

Obviously I don't give a #### about deferral to authority but I know there are a small number of posters who ridicule anyone who doesn't immediately do so. So, here we are. Han's analysis closely aligns with my own and that of others whom I respect: Gaudreau's shortcomings (turnovers and extreme contact avoidance) stand out to the casual puck-focused fan, while Monahan's shortcomings (complete indifference to defensive effort, poor in transition) are not as easily noticed as they are usually off-puck occurrences. In the end, both players are flawed however Gaudreau gets significantly more criticism from the casual fan because he has the puck far more often.

What is the harm in splitting them up at this point? Or at least trying 23 on wing. There is nothing to lose now, and in fact keeping them together deprives management of potentially useful information to use in future decision making.

Jack Han is a ####ing genius. Everything he wrote is what I've been seeing in the Monahan-Gaudreau partnership ever since their inception (14-15). Their partnership is too one-sided and Gaudreau ends up having to do too much of the heavy lifting and is then ultimately blamed for the lack of success/execution (turnovers).

Defenses all hone in on him because they know our the game plan. If Monahan was better at holding on to pucks and breaking out of the dzone himself and through the neutral zone, the opposition would have to respect that option more and the dynamics of their breakouts would change drastically.

Alas, what we've been actually getting over the last couple years and every playoff series are F2 and F3 dropping back, tight gaps, Dmen stepping up on him, which has resulted in constant turnovers.

[tvp2003]

Great analysis. It confirms that Johnny and Mony didn’t just forget how to play hockey. It’s that the playbook is out on them and everyone knows it (especially the other teams in the division). Pressure 13 because 23 won’t be doing anything dangerous off the rush. From there, you can keep them to the perimeter and create the inevitable turnover because nobody is winning any board battles on that line. It’s also why giving them a bunch of o-zone starts is useless.

[Joborule]

That post really highlights why Monahan is just a stat darling, and why many don't believe he's actually a 1st line centre. He's a beneficiary of being along Johnny, and doesn't generate on his own.

[Willi Plett]

Originally Posted by united

Just before this season started, Jack Han offered some analysis to Kent Wilson on the Gaudreau-Monahan decline, assuming Lindholm woularticle is well worth a look but also note this is from December not today.
occurrences. In the end, both players are flawed however Gaudreau gets significantly more criticism from the casual fan because he has the puck far more often.

What is the harm in splitting them up at this point? Or at least trying 23 on wing. There is nothing to lose now, and in fact keeping them together deprives management of potentially useful information to use in future decision making.

Wow, hadn’t read that article before. Great article and nails what my eye test has been seeing. I’ve been of the opinion that 13 & 23 don’t work well together anymore. It also really makes a case for trading Monahan and finding a better center for JG.

[Monahammer]

Originally Posted by Joborule

That post really highlights why Monahan is just a stat darling, and why many don't believe he's actually a 1st line centre. He's a beneficiary of being along Johnny, and doesn't generate on his own.

That's not really what the article says if you read it, more that Johnny-Monahan need more support from a strong transition RW or RD. It does suggest that Monahan would be better used on the wing.