|
Post by CentreHice on May 15, 2015 10:47:32 GMT -5
Thanks for that breakdown, BC.
It's just that MB commented that there are/were NONE available. He meant none that would've worked for him.
Going forward….Eric Staal is likely too expensive, and has been around forever….and Joe Thornton really is too old.
|
|
|
Post by franko on May 15, 2015 10:52:16 GMT -5
re: the presser.
MB was all politics all the time. even I coulda told you what he was going to say.
we'll work on our coaching . . . we'll work on our play . . . things aren't perfect but we're working on it . . . we have a plan . . .
what, he's going to say "I'm looking to move Galchy to centre and dump one of DD/Eller/Pleks at the first opportunity"? that's the anti-Polluck there.
he's played his cards close to the vest so far and will continue to do so.
but that PP had better come out firing from the beginning of the season and we'd better get a few more goals or there'll be a lot more disgruntled hab fans by November (when MT gets fired).
|
|
|
Post by Boston_Habs on May 15, 2015 11:02:52 GMT -5
How well does Tyler Seguin play "down low"?
Look, if Berg doesn't believe Galchenyuk can thrive at centre then I'm OK with that. If his upside is more like Alexei Kovalev, then I'm good with that too! We know AK27 is one of Galchy's favorite players.
But the value of playing Galchenyuk at centre was also a function of maximizing our strength down the middle, and hopefully rendering expendable a guy like DD or even Plekanec.
We need more scoring. How Berg attacks the problem, who plays where. who stays, who goes is up to him.
Encouraged that signing Petry is a priority. Last year they didn't even try to keep Vanek so Berg clearly sees the value in keeping him.
|
|
|
Post by Willie Dog on May 15, 2015 11:53:38 GMT -5
Wow! Sounds like they don't see Galchenyuk as a center - at all! Even referencing Sarnia, and how they put him on the wing too. Cue the hysteria. Get ready for more DD and Pleks….which means I won't be watching. Me too CH... tired of this BS.
|
|
|
Post by CentreHice on May 15, 2015 12:40:32 GMT -5
I don't want to create a new thread, so I'll continue the Galchenyuk discussion here….
Starting around 5:45 of this 2012 Draft Day video:
DUTHIE: Everyone's talked about your need for a big centre. Is this the guy you can build around?
BERGEVIN: Definitely! That's the guy we're focussing from Day 1 since I took over, and we were glad that he was there at 3.
DUTHIE: So what is it about him that separated him from the rest of the field, in your eyes?
BERGEVIN: I mean, he's a big centre, and they don't come by (very often)…and then when you do, you either draft them…..you can't really trade for one because, for one, they're not available….so….down the middle for me, has to be a strength…and he fits the bill!
======================================================
Let's stop all this nonsense about how he wasn't drafted to be our long-awaited stud #1 centre.
Either our scouting was WAY off….or we don't have proper player development in place. Galchenyuk certainly doesn't have a #1 centre who can mentor him in Montreal…..so the onus falls on the GM, player development and the coaching staff to get the job done…..somehow!
Or are there veterans and/or favourites impeding such development?
Can anyone name another centre drafted in the Top 3 who OOOPS just happened to feel more comfortable on the wing?
|
|
|
Post by blny on May 15, 2015 13:13:37 GMT -5
Count me in the pool of people disappointed that Berg would say anything to make people think there's a long term notion to keep him on the wing. Simply put, Alex sees the ice better from the middle. He makes better plays there, is more dangerous there, and needs to be there. Stop pussyfooting around it, and put him there ... for the year. Only then can you even remotely say whether or not you think he has a future there.
|
|
|
Post by Skilly on May 15, 2015 13:20:54 GMT -5
And who might that somebody else be: Jodoin sitting up in the rafters…..or that great PP tactician, J.J. Daigneault? That is our current coaching staff which, apparently, won't be changed. RE: the Galchenyuk centre question. MB left the door open a crack….that's all. It was 95% that Galchy will be a winger. Which means he agrees with Therrien's assessment. The problem with that? Galchenyuk's centres going forward will be DD or Pleks. Perhaps Eller. Good luck…. ============= As far as no big, strong, skilled centres being available. Um….Seguin….Spezza….Dallas got both of them. Was the cost too high….or was Bergevin asleep….OR did he not want to take the chance on making Ottawa and/or Boston better? Spezza had 66 points the year he was traded, and last year had 62 playing on one of the highest scoring teams in the league. For comparison's sake, Plekanec had 60 points last year. Spezza also has a $7.5 million cap hit. Is he still a true, "Big #1 Center?" Not with those numbers, and not with that cap hit. Seguin spent most of the year playing wing. In fact, left-winger Jamie Benn took more faceoffs than Seguin did. It is also highly unlikely that either Ottawa or Boston would have traded either player to Montreal. Dallas also missed the playoffs with those two "#1 Centers" and was eliminated in the first round the year before last. The argument was there were none available. Well there were. CH is just throwing out examples, not wish lists. It happens all the time on here. Someone mentions a player that was available, and someone tears that player down. People assume that stats from one team are comparable to how he would play on another. Its just not true. So Spezza never brought the Stars into the playoffs, the Stars never had Carey Price or PK Subban either. Its why I try to refrain from mentioning names. It's Bergevin's job to find those players ... he filled the easy roles, now get us the one piece everyone sees as a need. Thats what good GMs do. I don't necessarily think we need a top notch center, just a guy who can finish. If Galchenyuk gets moved to center, the missing piece could be a winger. Players that were available: Evander Kane, Jason Spezza, Matt Moulson, Jaromir Jagr, Joe Thornton, Ryan O'Reilly, Chris Stewart, to name a few ... every one of those players has scored 28 or more goals in one year. Stewart is the one that hasn't done it in a long time. But there were 25 goal scorers out there. What gets me, is that the rebuttal is always, those players wouldn't do that here, or they dont fit. We were NEVER looking for the next guy to carry the team, of course that guy is probably not out there. But a complimentary piece? We have our leaders, we need secondary scoring. If it came down to a Spezza-type at $7.5 million a season for 4 years (31 years old), and Petry at 6 million a season. I'd make room for the Spezza-type. Our window is closing. The cap is not going to allow us to hold on to the guys we have and add that piece down the road ... if we ever are going to make a run for it, I think our time is now. I just dont think our GM is willing to part with his versions of Alex Chiasson, Alex Guptill and Nicholas Paul and second-round picks
|
|
|
Post by Skilly on May 15, 2015 13:24:24 GMT -5
Did Galchenyuk look comfortable at wing in the playoffs? Of all our players, he looked the LEAST comfortable
|
|
|
Post by blny on May 15, 2015 13:29:02 GMT -5
If Price, Pacioretty, and Subban are the core, the window isn't closing. It's as open as it's ever going to be though; now and for the next 3 years or so. Once the first of them cracks 30, you're on the backside of their prime.
|
|
|
Post by CentreHice on May 15, 2015 13:39:56 GMT -5
Did Galchenyuk look comfortable at wing in the playoffs? Of all our players, he looked the LEAST comfortable Exactly. The only knock I heard from Bergevin re: Galchenyuk as a centre, is that he needs work down low, helping the D in our end. So…develop, teach, instruct that!!! Give him time to make mistakes…and learn from them. Others certainly get that chance…. 14 games in which we went 10-3-1 hardly seems like a well-read trial period. Unless he was on the ice for several GA, and we won in spite of his 9 or so points in that time. Good thing he's only 21.
|
|
|
Post by BadCompany on May 15, 2015 14:39:48 GMT -5
The argument was there were none available. Well there were. CH is just throwing out examples, not wish lists. It happens all the time on here. Someone mentions a player that was available, and someone tears that player down. People assume that stats from one team are comparable to how he would play on another. Its just not true. So Spezza never brought the Stars into the playoffs, the Stars never had Carey Price or PK Subban either. Its why I try to refrain from mentioning names. It's Bergevin's job to find those players ... he filled the easy roles, now get us the one piece everyone sees as a need. Thats what good GMs do. The problem is that when you list players as examples of what was available, then by implication you are saying we should have gotten those players. But there was obviously a reason why Bergevin DIDN'T get them, and based on their subsequent performances it seems clear to me that he was right in a lot of those cases. Of course it's his job to find those players that can make a difference, but if they aren't there, they just aren't there. Jason Spezza, to continue with that example, had virtually the same point-per-game average that Scott Gomez had the year we traded for him, and the same cap hit. Moulson, Stewart, Kane... I mean, I can pick apart those players too, not because I'm a Bergevin apologist, but because I'm trying to see why he didn't want those guys. And a rather cursory glance at their numbers provides some pretty good reasons. Look at Moulson's numbers away from Tavares, for example, or Stewart's numbers the last four seasons. If you make moves based on "name" and "past performance" and not on recent scouting... well, you end up looking like the Philadelphia Flyers or the New York Rangers of old. I don't think Bergevin isn't trying. Heck, P.A. Parenteau averaged nearly a point-per-game (0.90) two years before Bergevin acquired him, at the age of 29. That could have been a brilliant move. It didn't work out, but he did try. He made the move to get Vanek, and that didn't work out either. So he made the move to get Petry, which has looked good, but only time will tell how that will work out. He gambled that Smith-Pelly would have a bigger playoff impact than Sekac, because Smith-Pelly in the past put up the numbers. That didn't really work out well either, though time is still to tell on that one too. It's just not that easy. When you look at the players that HAVE been moved, most of them just don't perform to the level that was expected of them. They're moved for a reason, after all. EDIT: Vanek, Parenteau, Briere, Sekac, even Smith-Pelly... these are all players Bergevin brought in because he thought they would be good supporting offensive players, if not legitimate top 6, impact players. If not in the regular season, then in the playoffs. None of them were brought in to be defensive specialists. So I disagree with this notion that he hasn't been trying to get offensive players to add to the core.
|
|
|
Post by CentreHice on May 15, 2015 15:02:08 GMT -5
Okay…so let's move forward. It's clear that we have enough support players….we abound in Bottom 6. Problem is, some of them are played and PAID as Top 6. I'm talking in terms of true Cup contention without relying on otherworldly goaltending. We need a #1 centre and a #1 right winger…i.e. to play with Max. Maybe Galchy can be that #1 winger at the very least…except that he's a left shot. Someone mentioned him turning into a Kovalev-type….I presume that means without the caprice.
|
|
|
Post by Disp on May 15, 2015 15:57:13 GMT -5
Did Galchenyuk look comfortable at wing in the playoffs? Of all our players, he looked the LEAST comfortable Exactly. The only knock I heard from Bergevin re: Galchenyuk as a centre, is that he needs work down low, helping the D in our end. So…develop, teach, instruct that!!! Give him time to make mistakes…and learn from them. Others certainly get that chance…. 14 games in which we went 10-3-1 hardly seems like a well-read trial period. Unless he was on the ice for several GA, and we won in spite of his 9 or so points in that time. Good thing he's only 21. Chucky isn't ready, at the moment anyways, and he doesn't want to. Which despite how some like to spin it, is the truth. Everyone would lose their patience fairly quickly if a playoff spot started slipping away cause MT just stuck him there. Not just fans either. He'd lose the room, it would be a mess. Hell, it could wreck the guy. He needs to get stronger. If he can't get stronger, he has to get a heck of a lot smarter. I've been saying it for awhile now, and MB said it today. If he gets his Saperlipopette together and it all comes together in the fall, I'm sure the "I told you so's" will come raining down. It won't be true, but whatever.
|
|
|
Post by Boston_Habs on May 15, 2015 16:06:16 GMT -5
Bergevin has boxed himself in. He knows he can't keep talking about being a team "in transition" as next season will be his 4th year on the job with a core of players in their prime. Plus it's hard to talk like that when you've won the division 2 of the past 3 years.
He also knows that there's probably only one way to go next season if he doesn't fix the scoring, and that's DOWN. Barring an offensive upgrade, we are an average season from Carey Price away from scraping into the playoffs. Remember the Bruins missed the playoffs this year with 96 points.
He also knows he has whiffed twice on trying to bring in offense with marginal players. Briere didn't work and neither did Parenteau (who has done nothing away from John Tavares). I hope he doesn't make the same mistake again this year. I'd rather him save a roster spot for Charlie Hudon than get some overpaid, past his prime marginal UFA.
I believe Berg probably feels like many of us. That he's gotten about as much out of this group as he is going to get, and he sure went out of his way to downplay the expectations for Galchenyuk next year. Personally I don't care where he plays as long as he produces.
BC is correct that it's not for lack of trying, but I do think it's time for a bolder, even riskier approach. Sign Petry by all means (although that is a long way from a done deal), but unless we can find 25-30 goals internally I think the patient approach is a very risky career move for Marc Bergevin. If we backslide next season, lose in the 1st round, or even miss the playoffs... nobody in that press room or Geoff Molson will want to hear that "it's a tough league" and "I tried to get the #1 centre but I couldn't" or "we're still in transition".
It's a tough job Berg, but you signed up for it. Expectations are very high now whether you think they should be or not.
|
|
|
Post by Lord Bebop on May 15, 2015 16:27:23 GMT -5
Never heard the press conference myself but thx for the breakdown
I think we need to take everything Bergeron says with a grain of salt...he's needs to get Chucky under contract before anointing him center #1. I expect desharnais and pleks back next season but I'm expecting next season Chucky will take one of the top 2 center positions by christmas( guessing).
I think Bergeron can make cap space by trading emelin. We need to make room for Patern and Tinordi.
I think Parenteau will be shopped but will there be any takers?? Not a lot of quality on the free agent market so maybe someone will take a chance who only has 1 more year on contract. Bergeron has a knack for trading underachieving players.
Can Mccarron be a dark horse for a center ice spot sometime next season. He looked real good last pre season.very interguing prospect imo
I feel really good at the direction are team is going. I know I'm in the minority but I think Therrion is a very good coach. Only if we can fix the power play. I think we would be playing Washington not Tampa if we had even a average power play.
|
|
|
Post by Disgruntled70sHab on May 15, 2015 17:06:30 GMT -5
I didn't hear all of his presser, but from what you guys left on here it sounds as if he's being more of a realist...
Cheers.
|
|
|
Post by blny on May 15, 2015 17:43:44 GMT -5
PAP best season, in terms of ppg was the lock out year. 43 in 48 games. He had the same 18 goals as in the full year with Tavares previously. In both scenarios he was allowed to run and gun with Tavares and I assume Duchene next.
Regarding the center issue, the Rags are showing you can get there without a center. They're getting by with a stingy goalie and a defensive group that is at home shutting down the opposition. Their offense is putrid for the most part, and they've been in so many consecutive one goal differential games it makes ones head spin.
|
|
|
Post by jkr on May 15, 2015 19:01:44 GMT -5
Wow! Sounds like they don't see Galchenyuk as a center - at all! Even referencing Sarnia, and how they put him on the wing too. Cue the hysteria. Get ready for more DD and Pleks….which means I won't be watching. The other thing that concerns me about Plekanec is his age & contract situation. He will be 33 in October with one year left on his deal. What do you do: - play it out & maybe lose him as a UFA - extend him - trade him I wasn't happy with his play in the playoffs so I lean towards moving him but if they don't land a centre maybe he hangs around.
|
|
|
Post by Skilly on May 15, 2015 19:01:53 GMT -5
The argument was there were none available. Well there were. CH is just throwing out examples, not wish lists. It happens all the time on here. Someone mentions a player that was available, and someone tears that player down. People assume that stats from one team are comparable to how he would play on another. Its just not true. So Spezza never brought the Stars into the playoffs, the Stars never had Carey Price or PK Subban either. Its why I try to refrain from mentioning names. It's Bergevin's job to find those players ... he filled the easy roles, now get us the one piece everyone sees as a need. Thats what good GMs do. The problem is that when you list players as examples of what was available, then by implication you are saying we should have gotten those players. But there was obviously a reason why Bergevin DIDN'T get them, and based on their subsequent performances it seems clear to me that he was right in a lot of those cases. Of course it's his job to find those players that can make a difference, but if they aren't there, they just aren't there. Jason Spezza, to continue with that example, had virtually the same point-per-game average that Scott Gomez had the year we traded for him, and the same cap hit. Moulson, Stewart, Kane... I mean, I can pick apart those players too, not because I'm a Bergevin apologist, but because I'm trying to see why he didn't want those guys. And a rather cursory glance at their numbers provides some pretty good reasons. Look at Moulson's numbers away from Tavares, for example, or Stewart's numbers the last four seasons. If you make moves based on "name" and "past performance" and not on recent scouting... well, you end up looking like the Philadelphia Flyers or the New York Rangers of old. I don't think Bergevin isn't trying. Heck, P.A. Parenteau averaged nearly a point-per-game (0.90) two years before Bergevin acquired him, at the age of 29. That could have been a brilliant move. It didn't work out, but he did try. He made the move to get Vanek, and that didn't work out either. So he made the move to get Petry, which has looked good, but only time will tell how that will work out. He gambled that Smith-Pelly would have a bigger playoff impact than Sekac, because Smith-Pelly in the past put up the numbers. That didn't really work out well either, though time is still to tell on that one too. It's just not that easy. When you look at the players that HAVE been moved, most of them just don't perform to the level that was expected of them. They're moved for a reason, after all. EDIT: Vanek, Parenteau, Briere, Sekac, even Smith-Pelly... these are all players Bergevin brought in because he thought they would be good supporting offensive players, if not legitimate top 6, impact players. If not in the regular season, then in the playoffs. None of them were brought in to be defensive specialists. So I disagree with this notion that he hasn't been trying to get offensive players to add to the core. He never really "tried" with Vanek. He saw a cheap, short term solution. Problem was, we needed a long term solution and he isn't illing to pay that price. We all knew VANEK was leaving for Minny. I'll give him credit for addressing a need on the 8th place team we were when we acquired Vanek. We all saw how that one player affected our Offense immensely back then. We went from a weak offense to that 3 goal a game offense we dream of. But he has yet to replace those goals , for two years now. Why? Because he continues to try improving the offense by shopping in the Value Village. You want to improve the offense, get real 2nd liners. He brought all those players you mentioned, and yet last year Prust was a first liner and this year Weise was a first liner.
|
|
|
Post by Skilly on May 15, 2015 19:07:12 GMT -5
If Price, Pacioretty, and Subban are the core, the window isn't closing. It's as open as it's ever going to be though; now and for the next 3 years or so. Once the first of them cracks 30, you're on the backside of their prime. Three years is a closing window, .., in three years Price will be due a raise, Galchenyuk's bridge deal will be up, Pacioretty will be looking for the money he lost last time ...
|
|
|
Post by blny on May 15, 2015 20:09:30 GMT -5
If Price, Pacioretty, and Subban are the core, the window isn't closing. It's as open as it's ever going to be though; now and for the next 3 years or so. Once the first of them cracks 30, you're on the backside of their prime. Three years is a closing window, .., in three years Price will be due a raise, Galchenyuk's bridge deal will be up, Pacioretty will be looking for the money he lost last time ... You're entitled to your opinion, but if a player enters his prime around 25-27 his prime isn't over in 3 years. To imply the window is closing is to say that the core is going to get worse starting now. They've passed the plateau period all together and have started to decline. Can't disagree more.
|
|
|
Post by Disgruntled70sHab on May 15, 2015 22:31:01 GMT -5
Did Galchenyuk look comfortable at wing in the playoffs? Of all our players, he looked the LEAST comfortable He wasn't much of a factor ... Galchenyuk had plenty of opportunities but no finish ... it was odd ... it was like he was aiming for Bishop's logo, sometimes ... can't say for sure, but I think he'd have done the same thing if he were a centre ... that doesn't mean he shouldn't move back to centre ... the club really doesn't have anything to lose at this point ... edit: I'm expecting a better season from him next year ... Cheers.
|
|
|
Post by Skilly on May 16, 2015 7:26:39 GMT -5
Three years is a closing window, .., in three years Price will be due a raise, Galchenyuk's bridge deal will be up, Pacioretty will be looking for the money he lost last time ... You're entitled to your opinion, but if a player enters his prime around 25-27 his prime isn't over in 3 years. To imply the window is closing is to say that the core is going to get worse starting now. They've passed the plateau period all together and have started to decline. Can't disagree more. I didn't imply they were getting worse, or plateaued ....I stated straight out that we won't be able to afford all the 7-8 million dollar players in 3-4 years. (Price, Pacioretty, Galchenyuk, Subban ...heck some even want Petry signed for 6-7 million).
|
|
|
Post by Disgruntled70sHab on May 16, 2015 7:44:16 GMT -5
You're entitled to your opinion, but if a player enters his prime around 25-27 his prime isn't over in 3 years. To imply the window is closing is to say that the core is going to get worse starting now. They've passed the plateau period all together and have started to decline. Can't disagree more. I didn't imply they were getting worse, or plateaued ....I stated straight out that we won't be able to afford all the 7-8 million dollar players in 3-4 years. (Price, Pacioretty, Galchenyuk, Subban ...heck some even want Petry signed for 6-7 million). I'd be surprised if Bergevin overpaid for Petry ... I like his comments, though ... if he can get a taker for Emelin, that would be a start to freeing up cap space ... also liked the endorsement he gave Tinordi ... an important thing to remember about Galchenyuk; he made a lot of his own chances ... he's good with the puck and good at getting himself open ... Cheers.
|
|
|
Post by seventeen on May 16, 2015 10:10:41 GMT -5
Exactly. The only knock I heard from Bergevin re: Galchenyuk as a centre, is that he needs work down low, helping the D in our end. So…develop, teach, instruct that!!! Give him time to make mistakes…and learn from them. Others certainly get that chance…. 14 games in which we went 10-3-1 hardly seems like a well-read trial period. Unless he was on the ice for several GA, and we won in spite of his 9 or so points in that time. Good thing he's only 21. Chucky isn't ready, at the moment anyways, and he doesn't want to. Which despite how some like to spin it, is the truth. O Everyone would lose their patience fairly quickly if a playoff spot started slipping away cause MT just stuck him there. Not just fans either. He'd lose the room, it would be a mess. Hell, it could wreck the guy. He needs to get stronger. If he can't get stronger, he has to get a heck of a lot smarter. I've been saying it for awhile now, and MB said it today. If he gets his Saperlipopette together and it all comes together in the fall, I'm sure the "I told you so's" will come raining down. It won't be true, but whatever. "Chucks, isn't ready, doesn't want to be and that's the truth" Do you have a source for that statement or is it an opinion? It appears very definite, like a fact.
|
|
|
Post by Disgruntled70sHab on May 16, 2015 10:30:17 GMT -5
From Mitch Melnick on Twitter ... a zinger ...
Mitch Melnick @hunterzthompson 12m12 minutes ago Down 2-0 w/ 5:00 to play...it's like Plekanec never left Montreal.
... I thought Bergevin did well in endorsing Desharnais and Plekanec in his presser but what else could he say publicly ...
Cheers.
|
|
|
Post by Disp on May 16, 2015 11:27:54 GMT -5
Chucky isn't ready, at the moment anyways, and he doesn't want to. Which despite how some like to spin it, is the truth. O Everyone would lose their patience fairly quickly if a playoff spot started slipping away cause MT just stuck him there. Not just fans either. He'd lose the room, it would be a mess. Hell, it could wreck the guy. He needs to get stronger. If he can't get stronger, he has to get a heck of a lot smarter. I've been saying it for awhile now, and MB said it today. If he gets his Saperlipopette together and it all comes together in the fall, I'm sure the "I told you so's" will come raining down. It won't be true, but whatever. "Chucks, isn't ready, doesn't want to be and that's the truth" Do you have a source for that statement or is it an opinion? It appears very definite, like a fact. It is, watch him play. He's not strong enough. He has trouble with the defensive game on the wing. It's better if he's further from the net when he eff's it up. We've been over the "doesn't want to" bit plenty of times. He'll go where the coach wants him to, but he's more comfortable on the wing. Those are his feelings on it. Spin it however you want, that's the gist of it. Pretty definite and easy to see, I'd say it's a fact. Now if you want to make it out to be something else other than that, make sure you state it as an opinion.
|
|
|
Post by CentreHice on May 16, 2015 12:25:30 GMT -5
According to the draft day video in this thread, and the La Presse article I posted a while back….
FACT: Bergevin and his team scouted and drafted Galchenyuk as their future #1 centre.
FACT: Galchenyuk played 14 games at centre this year. We went 10-3-1.
FACT: Therrien saw some holes in his defensive game, and approached Galchenyuk….asking him if he'd feel more comfortable on the wing.
FACT: Galchenyuk told Therrien that he felt he could help the team more on the wing. But he didn't approach Therrien.
Bergevin and Therrien must be totally devastated, huh?
Their dream of a franchise, stud centre down the tubes because he doesn't feel comfortable there. Bergevin said yesterday that "We all want him to play centre….but….."
Apparently, nobody on our coaching staff can instruct the defensive side of the game. How about Pleks? Maybe he could teach him a thing or two.
Or perhaps Galchy just truly will never get that part of playing centre.
Just our luck….we finally get to draft in the Top 3 for the first time since we selected Doug Wickenheiser in 1980…..and they were both busts as our future #1 centres.
Wow.
|
|
|
Post by Disp on May 16, 2015 12:53:51 GMT -5
I don't think he's busted at all. Is that a fact? I don't think he was ready this year. Seems to be a fact. He himself says he's more comfortable on the wing. Seems to be a fact. Maybe after a summer of lifting, hgh, maturing, he'll be more suited for it. This is, hmmmm, maybe a hopeful opinion? It is my opinion, that if MT and MB feel that he will help us at centre next year, he will play there. It is also my opinion, that if Chucky doesn't do what needs to be done over the summer, or maybe, just doesn't want to play centre, he won't. Seems reasonable to me. It's not some grand conspiracy to keep Chucky from playing centre. He's young, they're being patient. Putting a young guy where he doesn't feel comfortable is sometimes not a good thing I would say. I know we're all impatient, but really, it's not like he's old.
|
|
|
Post by CentreHice on May 16, 2015 13:13:28 GMT -5
Didn't say it was a conspiracy……
But I haven't ruled out inept player development at this point in time.
|
|