Hughes Will Not Be Trading Matheson
April 16, 2024
By Grant McCagg
The grass is always greener on the other side.
Many Habs fans envision a Canadiens blueline in a couple of years without David Savard and Mike Matheson. The thought is that seven youngsters will be on the roster, and veterans be damned.
That makes sense only if fans are willing to wait at least six years to contend for a Stanley Cup. Sure – the Canadiens have a promising group of young defencemen, and the future looks bright for several of them. The issue with always pining for the greener grass, however, is that greenhorns never win the Stanley Cup without veteran help. Ever.
A hot topic in recent days has been whether the Canadiens should deal Matheson over the next year or two. The main issue with that, aside from him being the best blueliner on the team, is that you don’t win Cups without at least one veteran defenceman on the roster. Clubs need that mentorship and experience. It is crucial.
So crucial, in fact…that Cliff Fletcher once gave up a future 70-goal scorer in Brett Hull for veteran defenceman Rob Ramage to get the Flames over the hump. Fletcher said at the time that he knew Hull would turn into a great player but Calgary wasn’t winning a Cup without a veteran who brought leadership and experience to a young defence corps.
Since 1990, every Stanley Cup winner had at least one veteran defenceman on the roster.
All but a handful of the players listed above were 30+, and those who weren’t (Letang, Keith, Foote, Seabrooke) were 28 or 29 when they won their first Cups. All were seasoned veterans at the time.
Interestingly – the only team since 1990 with one veteran defenceman on a Cup winner was Montreal in 1993. Just like with Calgary in 1989 – that veteran was Rob Ramage.
I understand the excitement for the kids on defence. It is a promising bunch. It is also an unproven group, and everything I hear about both Matheson and Savard points to them being excellent leaders.
The Habs brass would like to seriously compete for a Cup within three years – perhaps two. If Matheson and Savard are gone, the elder statesman on the blueline by 2027 would be…25 or 26.
No team has won a Stanley Cup with a defence group all under the age of 27 since the Islanders won their first Cup in 1980, and they had a generational defenceman in Denis Potvin who was 26 going on 32. It was an era where defenceman typically retired or lost NHL roster spots before the age of 33. Players are keeping themselves in much better shape today, and we have seen Cup champions in the past 25 years with five or six defencemen over the age of 30.
The average number of veteran defencemen on Cup winners in the past 33 years is 3.6 – basically; half of the defence corps. Perhaps if some of the young defencemen already had 250-300 NHL games under their belts there would be a remote possibility that Montreal could compete for a Cup with seven defencemen under 27 but that’s not the case. Jordan Harris, David Reinbacher, Kaiden Guhle, Lane Hutson, Logan Mailloux, Adam Engstrom, Jayden Struble, Arber Xhekaj, Justin Barron and William Trudeau combined have played fewer than 500 NHL regular season and playoff games.
Vegas’s defence group last season had 3700 games of regular season experience between them entering the playoffs. The 2002-03 New Jersey Devils had what was considered to be one of the best defence groups in NHL history. The seven defencemen who played for the Devils in that run to the Cup had played more than 6000 NHL regular season games.
Suffice it to say that trading away Mike Matheson in the middle of his prime years would be a poor decision unless the fanbase wants youth more than playoff success for the next six years. Matheson is still improving as a defenceman. Blueliners who skate as well as Matheson are typically quite effective right up until the age of 35 or more. Jay Bouwmeester was a key part of a St. Louis Cup win at the age of 35. Scott Neidermayer won a Cup in Anaheim at 33, and when he retired at 36, he was still one of the best defencemen in the NHL. Chris Chelios was still a terrific defenceman when he won a Cup with Detroit at 46. Ray Bourque at 40 was a key component of a Colorado Avalanche Cup winner. Scott Stevens and Larry Murphy won two more Cups each after the age of 34.
The leadership, experience and mentorship that veteran defenceman can provide a young group is immeasurable. Do you not think that Jacques Laperriere and Serge Savard were positive influences on a young Larry Robinson? Did Robinson, in turn, not mentor Chelios, Petr Svoboda, Craig Ludwig and Eric Desjardins?
Nothing beats the life lessons that someone who has been through them can pass on to the next generation. There is not a day that passes where I wish my father weren’t still around to offer me his advice. It’s no different for young hockey players.
Everyone praises Matheson’s character and leadership; he and Savard want to be in Montreal. As one NHL executive pointed out when I told him I was writing this story: “It’s not easy to find those guys and especially getting them to come to Montreal with the tax situation.”
I can guarantee you that two years from now if Savard and Matheson are no longer with the Canadiens and the club is in playoff contention, Kent Hughes will be on the phone calling NHL teams at the deadline trying to find at least one veteran defenceman and offering promising prospects and/or first-round draft picks. So why would you trade either, especially when they want to be here until they retire?
Do not be surprised if Matheson and Savard are still with the Canadiens three years from now. It would not shock me if Savard signs another contract with the Canadiens, especially if they are in playoff contention next February. Why would the club trade away its only Cup winner if they make the playoffs?
The Canadiens have no shortage of young prospects and future draft picks. Getting a second-round pick for Savard next trade deadline if the club is in contention would be ill-advised. Trading away Matheson if the club is in contention over the next two years would be even dumber. Kent Hughes does not come across as a dummy.
Like what you read? Please consider supporting independent journalism at a minimal monthly cost:
Good article. Well reasoned and backed up with plenty of facts and statistics. Having said that, I’m not sure that without one of matheson or savard it would be 6 yrs until we could win. A lot of other variables could affect outcomes 1. The league is changing and the game is getting younger, faster and more skilled. 2. The salary cap is changing how teams are built all across the league. 3. The future overall team in its entirety, from goaltending on out, looks to be extremely promising.
The young defence either currently on the team or on the way are to say the least, impressive. Not only are their individual skills impressive but the totality of them as a group, growing together and learning together will be special. I’m not sure the habs will have EVER had a group like this. And that’s saying a lot. I’m not saying McCagg’s historical analyses is wrong. What I’m saying is we are entering uncharted waters. I would agree that keeping matheson would be prudent. I don’t think we also need to keep savard to win cups in less than 6 yrs though. The time is coming where we finally have more than enough “chips” in the bank to upgrade key areas and have the cap space to do it. With internal growth and competition, along with a ton of elc’s and the resulting bank of freed up cash, going and getting 1 or 2 major UFA’s when it makes sense could completely change our timeline. Just imagine drafting lidstrom or iginla and THEN going and signing Crosby AND Connor. With what Montreal is building, the days of major UFA’s not wanting to come here may be about to change. Hold on to your hats folks. It’s about to get real interesting.