|
Post by jkr on Mar 11, 2015 15:51:07 GMT -5
So , its quite obvious now that inserting more mobile defensemen, and inserting more grinders does not open up room and create more offense ... We always hav needed, and continue to need, a top 6 player which allows the team to get the mutts off the top lines ... Weisse on the top line going into the playoffs? Are you kidding me? The thing that was grating on my nerves at the trade deadline, and still is to a little degree, is that the last two times we were a first place team, management did very little offensively at the deadline and we bowed out pretty quickly in the playoffs. The times where we were struggling offensively to make the playoffs, we add Kovalev and Vanek, and the team does a little damage. But the general consensus on this board has always been when we were flirting with 7th and 8th place was "Why do anything if we arent going to win the Cup", so when we are a first place team and we don't bolster the offense we say "he tried", "no one was available" , "can't mortgage the future" , "a more mobile defense = more offense" .... I dunno ... IMO, the time to go for it in today's NHL, an NHL with very short window's of opportunity, is when you are a top team, like the Habs. I really get the feeling we will be eliminated in the first round ... we have a recent history of fizzling quickly when we do rather well in the regular season. If the obvious names are unavailable sometime you have to take on a chance and buy low. Look at the Kings last year. When I heard about their deal for Gaborik I just shrugged because he was struggling in CBJ. The Kings got him for Frattin, a 2nd & a 3rd accoring to www.hockeydb.com. The guy came alive in the playoffs with 14 goals. If it didn't work out the cost wasn't prohibitive. Can't think of names right now but maybe this should have been the strategy.
|
|
|
Post by seventeen on Mar 11, 2015 16:19:17 GMT -5
If the obvious names are unavailable sometime you have to take on a chance and buy low. Look at the Kings last year. When I heard about their deal for Gaborik I just shrugged because he was struggling in CBJ. The Kings got him for Frattin, a 2nd & a 3rd accoring to www.hockeydb.com. The guy came alive in the playoffs with 14 goals. If it didn't work out the cost wasn't prohibitive. Can't think of names right now but maybe this should have been the strategy. If you'd asked me last year at the trade deadline if I liked the Vanek deal better than the Gaborik deal, I'd have said Vanek. Both relatively cheap, but I thought Vanek was more durable. Gaborik has been worth every penny and more, though. Without his goals, the Kings don't win the Cup. And he's carried that on this year. If he gets hurt before the playoffs, though, it wouldn't surprise me. I don't think there were any such players available this year or Berg would have been on them big time.
|
|
|
Post by HFTO on Mar 11, 2015 17:16:57 GMT -5
I'm a frustrated like the rest if you yet still torn given despite how close the east is......I'm still not convinced this was the year to give the farm or a portion of the farm away because lack of depth overall.
Carey Price is NOT going anywhere for the next decade no need panic.
This team should not be as pathetic on the PP or on offence ....yes we have way too many grinders but the way the in game strategy feels like they play not to lose rather than to win. NO doubt they need more size down the middle but this team dumps and chases a lot and lose so many battles way too often....there has to be a better game plan based on this personnel over all and especially on the PP.
With the best goalie you always have more than a fighters chance but missing this years window is not a death sentence.This organizations depth is on D and the 3rd and 4th lines.Until #27 matures and they add C strength and maybe another scoring threat this team this team won't be the elite of the elite but are at least in the mix.
HFTO
|
|
|
Post by seventeen on Mar 11, 2015 17:50:31 GMT -5
Yup. You have my vote HFTO. Good summation.
|
|
|
Post by BadCompany on Mar 11, 2015 20:20:17 GMT -5
If the obvious names are unavailable sometime you have to take on a chance and buy low. Look at the Kings last year. When I heard about their deal for Gaborik I just shrugged because he was struggling in CBJ. The Kings got him for Frattin, a 2nd & a 3rd accoring to www.hockeydb.com. The guy came alive in the playoffs with 14 goals. If it didn't work out the cost wasn't prohibitive. Can't think of names right now but maybe this should have been the strategy. If you'd asked me last year at the trade deadline if I liked the Vanek deal better than the Gaborik deal, I'd have said Vanek. Both relatively cheap, but I thought Vanek was more durable. Gaborik has been worth every penny and more, though. Without his goals, the Kings don't win the Cup. And he's carried that on this year. If he gets hurt before the playoffs, though, it wouldn't surprise me. I don't think there were any such players available this year or Berg would have been on them big time. I agree that Gaborik was worth every penny last year in the playoffs, but he's currently on pace for 48 points and is signed for 6 more years. Granted, that's fine if that's the price for the Cup, but like you said what happens if you get Vanek instead of Gaborik? For grins and giggles I picked a not-so-random selection of players coming out of the lockout and through the magic of technology I'm going to conceal (temporarily) their identities. Ages and stats are from the lockout year. All are "big" name players, a couple have won Cups. Player A: 30 years old, 47 games, 12 goals, 15 assists, 27 points. Player B: 32 years old, 39 games, 10 goals, 22 assists, 32 points. Player C: 32 years old, 46 games, 11 goals, 23 assists, 34 points. Player D: 29 years old, 44 games, 13 goals, 31 assists, 44 points. Which one do you sign? All got big contracts, all were stars. They are: Player A: Marian Gaborik Player B: Vincent Lecavalier Player C: Brad Richards Player D: Alexander Semin Sometimes it works, but usually it doesn't. As we learned with Gomez, and to a lesser extent Vanek. If it does work, you look like a genius. If it doesn't, you've really set back your franchise.
|
|
|
Post by seventeen on Mar 11, 2015 21:53:47 GMT -5
And I thought Gaborik was a UFA, but was obviously wrong. Six more years! That's going to hamstring LA at some point, though as you point out, if we don't win a Cup in the next 6 years, who's further ahead?
|
|
|
Post by jerry_dog on Mar 12, 2015 0:25:58 GMT -5
while I get that we need some more scoring ... how about something positive from the game? We held the highest scoring team in the league to 1 overtime goal!!! That's a good thing. now; figure out how to score (lots of input in this thread) ... and then we are truly on to something.
|
|
|
Post by habsorbed on Mar 12, 2015 0:53:01 GMT -5
while I get that we need some more scoring ... how about something positive from the game? We held the highest scoring team in the league to 1 overtime goal!!! That's a good thing. now; figure out how to score (lots of input in this thread) ... and then we are truly on to something. There's the problem JD. "We" did not hold the Bolts to one goal. Carey did, single-handedly. The fixes to our goal scoring are not novel. At this point, now that we are beyond the trade deadline, we are stuck with the personel we have. Mix the lines up - every coach would do that. Above all, fix the PP. If our PP was even average we'd be in good shape offensively. Despite being pathetic all season, we have not seen any changes. Every coach would try something different. But not our MT. That round peg is going in that square hole, or not. We have 5 very good offensive dmen, a great sniper, a great crease mucker, and two playmaking centres; and yet a pathetic PP.
|
|
|
Post by BadCompany on Mar 12, 2015 8:11:23 GMT -5
Third Line: Michael Bournival - David Desharnais - Christian Thomas line 3 There's nothing statistically to back this line up, they have essentially never played together. What I'm doing to build this line is working logically, with the same reasoning as I used to build the other lines. It's a small line, one that would need offensive sheltering, but you can do that with the improved top-six. All three of these players can produce offense, even if Thomas hasn't hit his offensive stride in the NHL yet. Bournival and Thomas are both voracious forecheckers whose speed disrupts teams, while Desharnais is the puck carrier on this line, who has the freedom to create away from teams' best checkers. Thomas has a hell of a shot, and with Bournival as the mucker on the line, and Desharnais setting him up, I really like the chances of this line being successful. He lost me with this. Bournival, Desharnais and Thomas would get owned by just about any line in the league, I think. It's not fast enough to overcome it's size limitations and while I like Bournival I don't think any line that relies on him being the mucker will survive. It would be the return of the Smurf Line, only without the talent. Where is he getting the idea that all three players can produce offense? Desharnais sure, but Bournival and Thomas? Bournival has 10 career NHL goals, Thomas 1. Neither player has ever broken the 20 goal mark in the AHL either. I think it would be extremely difficult for this line to ever retrieve the puck, let alone actually do something with it. God forbid they get caught in their own zone with a team cycling on them. Above all, fix the PP. If our PP was even average we'd be in good shape offensively. Despite being pathetic all season, we have not seen any changes. Every coach would try something different. But not our MT. That round peg is going in that square hole, or not. We have 5 very good offensive dmen, a great sniper, a great crease mucker, and two playmaking centres; and yet a pathetic PP. I think this will determine how far we go in the playoffs. Consider that we are a first place team with no power-play. Just like the LA Kings last year (who were not a first place team). The Kings power-play last year finished the regular season at 15.1% and then jumped to 23.5% in the playoffs, almost an extra goal a game for them. Ours is currently at 16.3%. If we get a similar jump, with Price in nets, we could go a long way. Now of course that's a big if. But I'm hopeful. Heck, maybe Therrien is a genius and is keeping his new power-play scheme hidden because the team is still winning and he doesn't want anybody to be able to scout it before the playoffs. Wouldn't that be something? First playoff game, first power-play, and five forwards jump over the boards or something? (yeah, I went there - what are you gonna do about it??)
|
|
|
Post by Gogie on Mar 12, 2015 9:07:22 GMT -5
I'm going to throw some glass half full stuff into this discussion. The Habs just got back from a West Coast swing where they played 4 games against the big, bruising western behemoths. They get home and are thrown into a game with the fast skating, high scoring Bolts. I'm going to posit that they didn't change their focus for the TB game and paid the price. Had they had a proper practice and focused on the type of game they needed to play maybe they would have fared better. This is on the coaching staff, of course. Come playoffs there will be much more time devoted to developing proper game plans according to who your opponent is (we hope) with much better results.
|
|
|
Post by franko on Mar 12, 2015 9:40:41 GMT -5
(yeah, I went there - what are you gonna do about it??) this . . .the other . . . Too many doubts, Too much fear . . . Learn to abandon:
|
|
|
Post by Skilly on Mar 12, 2015 9:42:21 GMT -5
Interesting factoid
Michel Therrien has not won a playoff round in back to back seasons in his coaching career
|
|
|
Post by franko on Mar 12, 2015 9:45:31 GMT -5
This is on the coaching staff, of course. that's Conor McKenna's view as well. he gives a failing grade to every Habs coach except Stéphane Waite. the PP and the icings especially rankle him. join the club, Conor . . . join the club. oh, and the lack of breakout/way we get hemmed in our zone. and . . .
|
|
|
Post by Willie Dog on Mar 12, 2015 12:14:18 GMT -5
I'm going to throw some glass half full stuff into this discussion. The Habs just got back from a West Coast swing where they played 4 games against the big, bruising western behemoths. They get home and are thrown into a game with the fast skating, high scoring Bolts. I'm going to posit that they didn't change their focus for the TB game and paid the price. Had they had a proper practice and focused on the type of game they needed to play maybe they would have fared better. This is on the coaching staff, of course. Come playoffs there will be much more time devoted to developing proper game plans according to who your opponent is (we hope) with much better results. I'm pretty sure the team had the day off Wednesday so should we expect the same result tonight against Ottawa. I personally expect Ottawa to beat us handily... oh joy oh bliss.
|
|