[PGT] Nucks 5 Flames 2

[Blaster86]

Originally Posted by Flames Draft Watcher

What makes you say that?

Gaudreau when not on his game actually actively hurts the Flames with his turnovers, poor puck decisions, inability to win a puck battle. He's magic in open ice but he rarely gets much open ice these days. If the NHL playoffs had 3 on 3 OT then hell yeah, you'd never get rid of him. But Gaudreau is the type of player who is likely to be less effective in the playoffs as he's the type of player you can shut down fairly easily with physicality, hooking, holding and obstruction. We haven't seen strides in Gaudreau's game this year, in fact he's playing his worst hockey of his career.

Monahan meanwhile has had his offensive numbers suffer due to Gaudreau's poor year but unlike Gaudreau we can see him trying to work on his weaknesses. It seems like he's making strides in his 200 ft game, his face-offs, his physicality.

After last playoffs I wasn't sure which one of Gaudreau/Monahan was a problem but it seemed like one of them might be. After this season so far I'd say I'd rather bet on Monahan long term than Gaudreau.

I've been on "Anti-Monahan" boat for a while and maybe it suffers from only seeing every third or fourth Flames game, but every game I see I have the same thoughts. I do agree that one of Gaudreau or Monahan has to go, but I make the case that Gaudreau will get out of his funk no matter who his line mates are. Monahan needs Gaudreau (or another top line play making talent) to get out of his funk because he won't drive that line himself.



I'm gonna get eviscerated for this comparison (I made it last year after the Neal signing so there is consistency...) but: He reminds me of prime James Neal... but center. That is... not good. He is a "top" line center that cannot play center. If he was a winger, he'd be a great finisher, like Neal in his prime, but he brings nothing else to the table. As a center there are just too many other responsibilities, being a finisher that doesn't back check, doesn't distribute and seems to avoid the "tough areas" you become a boat anchor. you are forcing your team to find a defensively responsible winger who isn't bad offensively as well. There just aren't that many Jere Lehtinens in the world. While you seem to think that Monahan is making strides, I just don't see it (which I admit could be a situation where I just don't watch him enough). Even last night, he always seemed a step behind defensively.



The player that I've always put next to Monahan is Horvat (for obvious reasons. They're in the same division, both the people on this board and myself will see the comparable with a regular frequency). Do you take a 30+ goal scoring center who needs that set up man (traditionally a center's job is distribution) to be successful or do you take the 25+ goal scoring center who will also play against the opposing team's top line and be the driving force on his line, no matter who his wingers are? They're both having down years, so the comparison is still good, it's not like Horvat has been lights out either. I might be biased, and framing it in a fairly unfair way but... Yeah.

There is also the final reason I trade Monahan over Gaudreau: You'll get more. Despite everything that I've just said, NHL GMs are in love with big scoring centers, no matter what else is going on around them. You can easily get a equal winger plus more. Move Lindholm to center, let him be the defensive presence on a forward line with Gaudreau and someone else. If Gaudreau bounces back, the line is no worse off than it was.

Originally Posted by Toonage

All else being equal, you'd keep the centre

Normally, yes. I don't feel this situation is equal though.

[Flames Draft Watcher]

You make a strong case Blaster.

But I do think you underrate the progression in Monahan's defensive, physical and face-off play this season.

I'm not convinced Monahan is worth significantly more than Gaudreau. Different teams will have different needs. Some may value Monahan higher because of their need for a top two line centre, some may value Gaudreau higher because they need that top end skill and feel they have the bigger, stronger, more physical players to surround him with that he needs to excel.

I'm optimistic Monahan will continue to round out his game.
I'm worried that Gaudreau never will.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by Blaster86

I'm gonna get eviscerated for this comparison (I made it last year after the Neal signing so there is consistency...) but: He reminds me of prime James Neal... but center. That is... not good. He is a "top" line center that cannot play center. If he was a winger, he'd be a great finisher, like Neal in his prime, but he brings nothing else to the table. As a center there are just too many other responsibilities, being a finisher that doesn't back check, doesn't distribute and seems to avoid the "tough areas" you become a boat anchor. you are forcing your team to find a defensively responsible winger who isn't bad offensively as well. There just aren't that many Jere Lehtinens in the world. While you seem to think that Monahan is making strides, I just don't see it (which I admit could be a situation where I just don't watch him enough). Even last night, he always seemed a step behind defensively.



The player that I've always put next to Monahan is Horvat (for obvious reasons. They're in the same division, both the people on this board and myself will see the comparable with a regular frequency). Do you take a 30+ goal scoring center who needs that set up man (traditionally a center's job is distribution) to be successful or do you take the 25+ goal scoring center who will also play against the opposing team's top line and be the driving force on his line, no matter who his wingers are? They're both having down years, so the comparison is still good, it's not like Horvat has been lights out either. I might be biased, and framing it in a fairly unfair way but... Yeah.

Yes you will (deservedly), and yes you are.

You're trying to make it sound like Monahan only has a little more production (30+ vs 25+), with less defense. But the fact is that Monahan has scored at 0.4 GPG while Horvat has produced at 0.26 GPG. Not even close to the same thing. And Monahan plays primarily against the other teams' top Cs as well.

You are massively under-rating Monahan. And doing so laughably by bringing up Neal. That is flat out ridiculous.

[bubbsy]

At his peak (which I still don't think Monahan has arrived at just yet btw) Monahan will be a bigger, better scoring, Daymond Langkow.

[Blaster86]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

Yes you will (deservedly), and yes you are.

You're trying to make it sound like Monahan only has a little more production (30+ vs 25+), with less defense. But the fact is that Monahan has scored at 0.4 GPG while Horvat has produced at 0.26 GPG. Not even close to the same thing. And Monahan plays primarily against the other teams' top Cs as well.

You are massively under-rating Monahan. And doing so laughably by bringing up Neal. That is flat out ridiculous.

Monahan started out a much better player than Horvat offensively. Horvat has gotten much better over the years. He has scored more goals each season he has played and over the last three years my comparison between the two is pretty spot on. You're trading between 5-10 goals for a more responsible player who drives his own line.

If he was playing against The Canucks top line last night, I missed it. I thought he went against the Horvat or Beagle lines mostly.

You may not like the Neal comparison, but they were both players who score(d in Neal's case) goals off their fantastic shot playing with solid set-up men. If he goes as Gaudreau goes, I make the case someone else can go just the same, but for cheaper and additional assets.

Originally Posted by bubbsy

At his peak (which I still don't think Monahan has arrived at just yet btw) Monahan will be a bigger, better scoring, Daymond Langkow.

Funnily, Langkow is a guy I look too for Horvat's development as well

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by bubbsy

At his peak (which I still don't think Monahan has arrived at just yet btw) Monahan will be a bigger, better scoring, Daymond Langkow.

They aren't very similar in any way, IMO.

Actually, Langkow might be a good comparison for Horvat though.

[Flames Draft Watcher]

Originally Posted by Blaster86

Monahan started out a much better player than Horvat offensively. Horvat has gotten much better over the years. He has scored more goals each season he has played and over the last three years my comparison between the two is pretty spot on. You're trading between 5-10 goals for a more responsible player who drives his own line.

If he was playing against The Canucks top line last night, I missed it. I thought he went against the Horvat or Beagle lines mostly.

You may not like the Neal comparison, but they were both players who score(d in Neal's case) goals off their fantastic shot playing with solid set-up men. If he goes as Gaudreau goes, I make the case someone else can go just the same, but for cheaper and additional assets.

Funnily, Langkow is a guy I look too for Horvat's development as well

People won't ever agree with the Neal comparison as Neal is arguably one of the worst Flames we've seen in the past 5 years. Slow, bad defensively, bad work ethic, couldn't pass, couldn't shoot. Literally useless on the ice.

Monahan is about 100 times the player Neal is. Monahan is a better playmaker, better passer, better shooter, better defensively, tries harder and arguably a better skater too.

I understood what you're trying to get at but the comparison is a poor one.

Does Monahan need a playmaker to excel? Probably. But Tkachuk is as good of a playmaker as Gaudreau is, perhaps better at this point. So it's not like Monahan would be useless without Gaudreau.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by Blaster86

Monahan started out a much better player than Horvat offensively. Horvat has gotten much better over the years. He has scored more goals each season he has played and over the last three years my comparison between the two is pretty spot on. You're trading between 5-10 goals for a more responsible player who drives his own line.

If he was playing against The Canucks top line last night, I missed it. I thought he went against the Horvat or Beagle lines mostly.

You may not like the Neal comparison, but they were both players who score(d in Neal's case) goals off their fantastic shot playing with solid set-up men. If he goes as Gaudreau goes, I make the case someone else can go just the same, but for cheaper and additional assets.

Funnily, Langkow is a guy I look too for Horvat's development as well

Neal and Monahan are nothing alike, other than they can both score goals. There is a perception with some that Monahan just relies on Gaudreau, but that is just not accurate.

This is a tough league and you don't score 30+ per year, playing as a C with a winger who doesn't provide any support defensively, without carrying some serious weight yourself.

As for Monahan playing against Horvat last night, yeah, one game dictates typical matchups - we'll just ignore his first 511 games.

[Blaster86]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

Neal and Monahan are nothing alike, other than they can both score goals. There is a perception with some that Monahan just relies on Gaudreau, but that is just not accurate.

I don't feel it's inaccurate. I feel a lot of the people on this board agree. When Johnny is off, Monahan doesn't feel like he is contributing to the same level. I think that holds somewhat true, as Monahan is currently producing at the same pace as Horvat without Gaudreau going.

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

This is a tough league and you don't score 30+ per year, playing as a C with a winger who doesn't provide any support defensively, without carrying some serious weight yourself.

Well I think this is my issue with Monahan. I don't feel he provides enough support defensively in a position that is supposed to be at least somewhat defensively capable. That being said, you will never catch me saying that Sean Monahan does not have a world class finishing ability.

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

As for Monahan playing against Horvat last night, yeah, one game dictates typical matchups - we'll just ignore his first 511 games.

I mean, It's more every game I watch he seems to be away from the other team's top line when the Flames have last change.

Originally Posted by Flames Draft Watcher

People won't ever agree with the Neal comparison as Neal is arguably one of the worst Flames we've seen in the past 5 years. Slow, bad defensively, bad work ethic, couldn't pass, couldn't shoot. Literally useless on the ice.

I am aware of that, but I just could not think of any player off the top of my head that has that similar level of finishing ability. Ryan Kesler, maybe.... but that's not going over well either.

Originally Posted by Flames Draft Watcher

Monahan is about 100 times the player Neal is. Monahan is a better playmaker, better passer, better shooter, better defensively, tries harder and arguably a better skater too.

Now? Yes. 100%. 5 years ago? Probably a better skater, but Neal was real good on the right side of the blue line.
I understood what you're trying to get at but the comparison is a poor one.

Originally Posted by Flames Draft Watcher

Does Monahan need a playmaker to excel? Probably. But Tkachuk is as good of a playmaker as Gaudreau is, perhaps better at this point. So it's not like Monahan would be useless without Gaudreau.

While Gaudreau is in this funk? He might be. When Gaudreau is going, he's a magical player to watch. Though it is a question of "Is this a funk or is this who he is?" I suppose. I say it's a bad funk, you say it's just who he is. That will definitely be a deciding factor on this debate.

[Flames Draft Watcher]

Originally Posted by Blaster86

I don't feel it's inaccurate. I feel a lot of the people on this board agree. When Johnny is off, Monahan doesn't feel like he is contributing to the same level. I think that holds somewhat true, as Monahan is currently producing at the same pace as Horvat without Gaudreau going.

But you've got to dig down into the question of why Monahan and Gaudreau's production is so linked.

You are suggesting Monahan cannot create offense without Gaudreau. I don't believe this to be the case.

Instead I think what happened this year is that Gaudreau's puck management has been so poor that he has been dragging down his line most of the year. He gives up the puck far too easily with turnovers. His line cannot cycle very well unless he's with Ryan-Lucic so their possession is terrible.

It's not that Monahan is simply a one-trick finisher who is inept at creating offence otherwise. It's that Gaudreau has actually been that bad 5 on 5 most of the year that his line cannot retain the puck and therefore they struggle to create offence.

[Blaster86]

Originally Posted by Flames Draft Watcher

But you've got to dig down into the question of why Monahan and Gaudreau's production is so linked.

You are suggesting Monahan cannot create offense without Gaudreau. I don't believe this to be the case.

I'm suggesting Monahan produces much better with a set-up man.

Originally Posted by Flames Draft Watcher

Instead I think what happened this year is that Gaudreau's puck management has been so poor that he has been dragging down his line most of the year. He gives up the puck far too easily with turnovers. His line cannot cycle very well unless he's with Ryan-Lucic so their possession is terrible.

I feel like Monahan hasn't been that great at protecting the puck either?

Originally Posted by Flames Draft Watcher

It's not that Monahan is simply a one-trick finisher who is inept at creating offence otherwise. It's that Gaudreau has actually been that bad 5 on 5 most of the year that his line cannot retain the puck and therefore they struggle to create offence.

I think I am being a bit unfair with how I am putting this. I don't think Monahan is solely reliant on a set up man. I am saying he flourishes with one. At his worse he is still a 20 - 25 goal scorer. I think the issue is that he's not good enough defensively to "only be" a 20 - 25 goal scorer. I am also not high on his ability to drive a line and make his line mates better, I do think Gaudreau can do that.

[Flames Draft Watcher]

Originally Posted by Blaster86

I'm suggesting Monahan produces much better with a set-up man.

Agreed.

Originally Posted by Blaster86

I feel like Monahan hasn't been that great at protecting the puck either?

Nope, I wouldn't say puck protection is one of Monahan's strengths.

Originally Posted by Blaster86

I think I am being a bit unfair with how I am putting this. I don't think Monahan is solely reliant on a set up man. I am saying he flourishes with one. At his worse he is still a 20 - 25 goal scorer. I think the issue is that he's not good enough defensively to "only be" a 20 - 25 goal scorer. I am also not high on his ability to drive a line and make his line mates better, I do think Gaudreau can do that.

Well this year's Gaudreau is driving his line off the road and into the ditch. He certainly has not been driving any line he's been on for the majority of this year. So while he has done in the past and many believe he can or will again in the future, this year we've seen very little indication of this.

I understand your perspective. You aren't putting as much weight as I am on this year's (and last playoff's) Gaudreau. You're giving him more of the benefit of the doubt thinking he'll probably rebound and be the same player he's been in the past. I'm skeptical.

It's a big next half a year for Johnny IMO. Let's see if he's capable of elevating his game, especially in the playoffs. If he's not capable then I think he might be best used as a trade chip in the offseason. If he is capable then all questions are answered.

So far this year his play is very worrying.

As for Monahan I'm far less worried about his play long term. He's going to be a useful player. If you want to take advantage of his amazing shot then he probably could use a playmaking winger/centre. I do think he's a bit better playmaker than we've seen because I think he's always deferred to let Johnny handle the puck and make the plays. I remember in his scouting reports they praised his passing and playmaking far more than his shot. We really haven't seen him away from Gaudreau enough of the time to know exactly what he'll look like without him. But he's bigger, stronger, plays the more important position and most importantly IMO is that it appears he wants to become better and he's willing to work on areas of his game in order to do that.