|
Post by jkr on Feb 18, 2016 22:14:39 GMT -5
But LeBrun leaves too much out. He doesn't talk about the secrecy around the Price injury. And as CH says, not a word about the coaching.
|
|
|
Post by blny on Feb 18, 2016 22:22:37 GMT -5
But LeBrun leaves too much out. He doesn't talk about the secrecy around the Price injury. And as CH says, not a word about the coaching. It's as if the talking heads don't want to ruffle feathers for fear that they lose a coveted source or connection to a team. They all spit out the same jargon more often than not. There's no opinion. No editorial. That's left to Dave Hodge I guess, and I don't have a problem with that. Dave's never been one to mince words. I just think there should be more. If we can sit here and objectively, with passion, weed out a myriad of reasons why something Therrien has done, or didn't do, is off the wall surely they can too. They simply turn a blind eye to it. Point fingers. Ask the hard questions. It's what they're supposed to do, as journalists.
|
|
|
Post by blny on Feb 18, 2016 22:25:05 GMT -5
If you believe Lebrun and Dreger, that teams are showing interest in Eller and Emelin get it done. Emelin's ntc is an issue, but bigger names have waived their clause to facilitate a trade. Hardball time. If he won't waive, ltir him with a phony injury for a year.
|
|
|
Post by seventeen on Feb 18, 2016 22:28:05 GMT -5
Pierre LeBrun ESPN Odd that he omits the coaching issue. Turning the page on this season is something I believe Habs general manager Marc Bergevin did long before most other people. It's why for a while now, I think, his focus has been on a long-term approach to fix what ails his team.
If there's any silver lining to having the world's best goalie out for most of the season, it's this: Bergevin has looked under the hood and had a chance to observe the rest of his team for what it really is to some degree. Or at least see how much Carey Price covered up en route to winning the Hart Trophy as league MVP last season.
So the focus ahead of the Feb. 29 trade deadline for the Habs is selling off some rental players. The heavier lifting, the potential for real hockey trades, will likely wait until the offseason, when most real hockey trades have happened in the NHL for the past half-decade. Think of the deals involving Tyler Seguin, Doug Hamilton, Milan Lucic, Jason Spezza, etc. Those were all June trades. It's the way the cap system has altered the way you build or fix your team. Summer is easier than February, for the most part.
That doesn't mean there can't be a big deal in the next 11 days. I think Montreal would listen to many ideas. But, from talking to people around the league, the Habs' main focus is mostly to get whatever they can for pending unrestricted free agents Dale Weise, Tom Gilbert and Tomas Fleischmann (for example).
Center Paul Byron, who has generated interest from other teams, is also a pending UFA, but the Habs would seem to rather keep him and re-sign him at some point. He has been a positive in a tough season after being picked up on waivers from Calgary on Oct. 6.
Sources suggest a few teams have shown interest in defenseman Alexei Emelin, who has two more years on his contract at a $4.1 million cap hit. But unless the Russian's camp approaches Habs management and asks for a move, I can't see how he goes anywhere.
Other players may also move, depending on the offers; the Habs can't afford to not listen these days.
In the meantime, it's not the worst thing in the world for the Habs to make the most of the offseason, pick an impact player in the June draft and turn the page.
Bergevin is a patient, calculated dude. This season has been trying, but other teams around the league seem to think the Habs GM is calm within this crazy storm in his passionate market. I kind of like this rational approach to things ... a good opinion ... Cheers. As long as Bergevin is being patient and calculating, which is yet to be proven. The key is still Therrien's removal. I think there's a real risk of turning off fans if he remains.
|
|
|
Post by CentreHice on Feb 18, 2016 23:09:52 GMT -5
This clip is of Bergevin's comments after we were eliminated by Tampa Bay is such a fizzling manner. Apparently, at that time, there were calls for Therrien's dismissal....and Bergevin went effusively to his defence. Something like he did this past January with the "end of the year" endorsement. The "good human being", "excellent coach", and "foxhole" comments. Makes me wonder if they really are a package deal. Therrien here to stay
Deficiencies in possession, a punch-less offence, and a sterile power play didn’t rule the evaluation on coach Michel Therrien.
Therrien is the first to remind everyone the results yield to the process, and it’s indisputable the process that achieved 50 wins this season was largely the product of Carey Price’s Hart and Vezina-worthy performance.
It’s ironic that Therrien’s results (not just this year’s) appeared to be Bergevin’s singular focus as he poured cold water all over the possibility of firing his coach and attempting to replace him with the consensus best-in-the-business Mike Babcock.
“In three years, we’ve played 29 playoff games,” started Bergevin in French. “That’s second best in the league. We’ve had 16 playoff wins and played five rounds in the last two years, good for third place behind Chicago and New York (Rangers). So Michel Therrien has done excellent work and it is disappointing—just the idea that Michel Therrien isn’t an established coach, a winner, a quality teacher—it doesn’t anger me, it disappoints me.”Bergevin Defends Therrien
|
|
|
Post by folatre on Feb 18, 2016 23:46:16 GMT -5
A not insignificant list of individuals owe portion of their contracts (duration and richness) signed since 2013 to Carey Price.
|
|
|
Post by seventeen on Feb 19, 2016 0:12:42 GMT -5
With Bergevin and Therrien heading that list. And they had nothing to do with getting him.
|
|
|
Post by PTH on Feb 19, 2016 0:35:31 GMT -5
I still can't fathom why the MT-hatred is so strong that essentially, whatever he does is wrong, and if someone writes anything not critical of him, they're missing a key piece. Whether you like him or not, everything isn't about MT.
|
|
|
Post by CentreHice on Feb 19, 2016 0:36:39 GMT -5
With Bergevin and Therrien heading that list. And they had nothing to do with getting him. Bergevin pried Waite away from Chicago. Best coaching move he made. Keep Waite....move on....
|
|
|
Post by seventeen on Feb 19, 2016 1:00:17 GMT -5
I still can't fathom why the MT-hatred is so strong that essentially, whatever he does is wrong, and if someone writes anything not critical of him, they're missing a key piece. Whether you like him or not, everything isn't about MT. No it's not, but he bears a preponderance of the responsibility for where we are. While Bergevin has done his part by spending too much on players who don't make an impact (DD, Emelin, Pleks, Markov in the later years, and Eller), the inability of the players to a) get our of their own end with control, b) play with any kind of defensive discipline in their own end and c) develop any kind of dangerous power play, are directly related to coaching. Those are the core issues to me. If Therrien had done a good job in those areas, we'd be in a playoff spot right now. Yes, the goaltending is crappy and yes we couldn't score in a house of ill-repute, but we'd keep the goals against down to a manageable level without counting on Priceless Carey. Then, when you garnish these failings with all the strange line-up decisions, the lack of meritocracy, the very unusual handling of some players (and I'm not thinking of Tinordi here, because he may have helped make his own bed) but others. Barberio has been really good IMO. He controls play well and while he makes more than his share of glaring errors, he also drives offensive plays and clears his zone extremely well. Yet he gets benched in favour of guys with worse performances. What does one think when the coach says he understands he has to manage Markov's minutes because the man doesn't have the legs he once did, yet does nothing to manage his minutes? These aren't acts of god, they're not injuries or things out of his control. He makes choices that aren't in the best interest of the team, at least the way many of us see it. It's hard to respect a man like that. He should be thankful he has a guy like PK playing on the back end. PK shut down Ovechkin, he helped shut down Stamkos. He goes up against the best players on other teams, controls them most of the time and when he has an unfortunate turnover, Therrien highlights it. When Markov gave up that horrendous pass in OT earlier this year, that directly led to a goal, Therrien supported him, which is what he should do. He should have supported PK as well, and when he doesn't, one can't help but wonder why and what kind of judgment system he's using. I've seen people like that in positions of leadership. It never ends well and this one won't either. His own life must be a hell hole right now. I sure wouldn't want to be the target of the criticism he's receiving, but I can't feel sorry for him because they are self inflicted wounds. If he'd made good choices, played the right guys the right time and we were just out of a playoff spot, he wouldn't be getting anywhere near this flak. We'd be saying how good a job he's doing holding the team in there without Price. But the team isn't playing well and is not exhibiting any of the characteristics you like to see in a cohesive, battling group of players. The leadership at the top isn't there. And we all find it very frustrating. PS. I know what you mean about unwarranted complaints. The fact DD took three consecutive defensive zone face-offs was an example. Therrien had no control over that at all because of the icing calls, but there were still lots of guys complaining about it, with no basis in fact.
|
|
|
Post by franko on Feb 19, 2016 7:15:43 GMT -5
I still can't fathom why the MT-hatred is so strong that essentially, whatever he does is wrong, and if someone writes anything not critical of him, they're missing a key piece. Whether you like him or not, everything isn't about MT. You're right, it isn't . . . but enough is. it's MB's job to provide the proper tools for the job (that's a separate matter); it's MT's job to utilize the tools properly. I don't think he has been -- that's my complaint. at times he has suggested that he hasn't used the tools properly (Markov) but hasn't changed the use. others (OK, we're on the sidelines, and what do we know about specialized tools?) see him using tools improperly (Galchy) or without effect or too often (DD) and have pointed this out but he keeps right on using them the way he's going to, regardless. and other tools doesn't use and loses (Tinner) or abuses and puts away too soon (PK). poor analogy -- we're tools for believing the hype at the beginning of the season.
|
|
|
Post by Willie Dog on Feb 19, 2016 7:48:04 GMT -5
I still can't fathom why the MT-hatred is so strong that essentially, whatever he does is wrong, and if someone writes anything not critical of him, they're missing a key piece. Whether you like him or not, everything isn't about MT. No it's not, but he bears a preponderance of the responsibility for where we are. While Bergevin has done his part by spending too much on players who don't make an impact (DD, Emelin, Pleks, Markov in the later years, and Eller), the inability of the players to a) get our of their own end with control, b) play with any kind of defensive discipline in their own end and c) develop any kind of dangerous power play, are directly related to coaching. Those are the core issues to me. If Therrien had done a good job in those areas, we'd be in a playoff spot right now. Yes, the goaltending is crappy and yes we couldn't score in a house of ill-repute, but we'd keep the goals against down to a manageable level without counting on Priceless Carey. Then, when you garnish these failings with all the strange line-up decisions, the lack of meritocracy, the very unusual handling of some players (and I'm not thinking of Tinordi here, because he may have helped make his own bed) but others. Barberio has been really good IMO. He controls play well and while he makes more than his share of glaring errors, he also drives offensive plays and clears his zone extremely well. Yet he gets benched in favour of guys with worse performances. What does one think when the coach says he understands he has to manage Markov's minutes because the man doesn't have the legs he once did, yet does nothing to manage his minutes? These aren't acts of god, they're not injuries or things out of his control. He makes choices that aren't in the best interest of the team, at least the way many of us see it. It's hard to respect a man like that. He should be thankful he has a guy like PK playing on the back end. PK shut down Ovechkin, he helped shut down Stamkos. He goes up against the best players on other teams, controls them most of the time and when he has an unfortunate turnover, Therrien highlights it. When Markov gave up that horrendous pass in OT earlier this year, that directly led to a goal, Therrien supported him, which is what he should do. He should have supported PK as well, and when he doesn't, one can't help but wonder why and what kind of judgment system he's using. I've seen people like that in positions of leadership. It never ends well and this one won't either. His own life must be a hell hole right now. I sure wouldn't want to be the target of the criticism he's receiving, but I can't feel sorry for him because they are self inflicted wounds. If he'd made good choices, played the right guys the right time and we were just out of a playoff spot, he wouldn't be getting anywhere near this flak. We'd be saying how good a job he's doing holding the team in there without Price. But the team isn't playing well and is not exhibiting any of the characteristics you like to see in a cohesive, battling group of players. The leadership at the top isn't there. And we all find it very frustrating. PS. I know what you mean about unwarranted complaints. The fact DD took three consecutive defensive zone face-offs was an example. Therrien had no control over that at all because of the icing calls, but there were still lots of guys complaining about it, with no basis in fact. The hatred for MT is affecting others as well. I was listening to TSN690 and Mitch Melnyk said MTs daughter was in the building for a charity thing and he felt sorry for her because of what she was having to endure. I assume some yahoos are giving her a hard time because of her dad. I feel bad for the kid. This is the market in Montreal and it's why a lot of players and coaches do not want to come here. We need players like PK, who are confident and thick skinned and can put up with it. If PK can tolerate all of the things MT has done to him, Olympics, benching, berating on 24CH, blaming PK for a mistake 200ft from his own net, then PK can handle anything and I for one am thrilled that he is wearing the CH.
|
|
|
Post by blny on Feb 19, 2016 8:13:37 GMT -5
- Any coach who hires a minor league goon to be his power play coach, and said coach inevitably flops, should come under significant scrutiny.
- Any coach who looks at the likes of Gionta and Desharnais and tells them 'you're grinders!' should have his head examined. I get that somewhere in his mind he thinks it's motivational. It's delusional.
- Any coach who demonstrates that he hasn't really learned anything since his first tenure, other than to not make throat slashing, should be removed.
- Any coach who clearly plays favorites with the wrong people (Desharnais, Bouillon), and ignores lines that are/were working to promote said player into a role they shouldn't be in, should be removed.
- Any coach who continually shows he's a poor strategist and can't adjust in-game should be fired.
- Any coach who is at the helm of a period where record is as bad as it has been since the end of November gets fired.
... I'm running out of fingers ...
|
|
|
Post by PTH on Feb 19, 2016 8:26:19 GMT -5
I still can't fathom why the MT-hatred is so strong that essentially, whatever he does is wrong, and if someone writes anything not critical of him, they're missing a key piece. Whether you like him or not, everything isn't about MT. ... PS. I know what you mean about unwarranted complaints. The fact DD took three consecutive defensive zone face-offs was an example. Therrien had no control over that at all because of the icing calls, but there were still lots of guys complaining about it, with no basis in fact. Thanks for acknowledging that it happens, that particular example rankled me since it showed people complaining without having actually seen the game and being unable to judge with all the facts. I'm not particularly fond of MT and I won't mind when he gets fired, but he's far from the only culprit this season, and I wouldn't have him at the top of the list either. And somehow, I get a completely different feel for the guy based on his post-game press scrums than most people on here get.
|
|
|
Post by franko on Feb 19, 2016 8:30:09 GMT -5
... I'm running out of fingers ... be careful which one you use in MT's direction; this is a family-oriented site.
|
|
|
Post by PTH on Feb 19, 2016 8:34:06 GMT -5
I still can't fathom why the MT-hatred is so strong that essentially, whatever he does is wrong, and if someone writes anything not critical of him, they're missing a key piece. Whether you like him or not, everything isn't about MT. ..... the lack of meritocracy,....(PK) He goes up against the best players on other teams, controls them most of the time and when he has an unfortunate turnover, Therrien highlights it. When Markov gave up that horrendous pass in OT earlier this year, that directly led to a goal, Therrien supported him, which is what he should do. He should have supported PK as well, and when he doesn't, one can't help but wonder why and what kind of judgment system he's using.... Well, to me it seems like people complain about a lack of meritocracy when a guy they like gets benched (Subban) after making a major mistake of a kind he's been repeatedly talked to about not making anymore (or at least, trying a find a way to limit these mistakes) - in short, people want meritocracy, but not when it impacts their favorite player, or a guy they think should be given more of a chance for some reason, etc. I think MT largely incorporates meritocracy, but what counts as merit in his book might not be as obvious to us. We watch hockey games (some miss quite a few), he lives and breathes with this team, so I have to think his judgment isn't bad, it's based on all kinds of non-obvious elements. It's not as if we'd traded away players who suddenly did much better after getting out of MT's shadow.
|
|
|
Post by Willie Dog on Feb 19, 2016 8:56:20 GMT -5
..... the lack of meritocracy,....(PK) He goes up against the best players on other teams, controls them most of the time and when he has an unfortunate turnover, Therrien highlights it. When Markov gave up that horrendous pass in OT earlier this year, that directly led to a goal, Therrien supported him, which is what he should do. He should have supported PK as well, and when he doesn't, one can't help but wonder why and what kind of judgment system he's using.... Well, to me it seems like people complain about a lack of meritocracy when a guy they like gets benched (Subban) after making a major mistake of a kind he's been repeatedly talked to about not making anymore (or at least, trying a find a way to limit these mistakes) - in short, people want meritocracy, but not when it impacts their favorite player, or a guy they think should be given more of a chance for some reason, etc. I think MT largely incorporates meritocracy, but what counts as merit in his book might not be as obvious to us. We watch hockey games (some miss quite a few), he lives and breathes with this team, so I have to think his judgment isn't bad, it's based on all kinds of non-obvious elements. It's not as if we'd traded away players who suddenly did much better after getting out of MT's shadow. The issue as I see it is MB said (paraphrasing here), in the interview where he took the blame and said it was on him, was he said the players cannot play not to lose, they have to play to win. He also said the players cannot worry about making a mistake, if they make a mistake it's OK. But then MT comes out and basically blames PK for the loss whereas a month earlier he was sticking up for markov when we lost against the Leafs... why the double standard?
|
|
|
Post by Gogie on Feb 19, 2016 9:02:36 GMT -5
..... the lack of meritocracy,....(PK) He goes up against the best players on other teams, controls them most of the time and when he has an unfortunate turnover, Therrien highlights it. When Markov gave up that horrendous pass in OT earlier this year, that directly led to a goal, Therrien supported him, which is what he should do. He should have supported PK as well, and when he doesn't, one can't help but wonder why and what kind of judgment system he's using.... Well, to me it seems like people complain about a lack of meritocracy when a guy they like gets benched (Subban) after making a major mistake of a kind he's been repeatedly talked to about not making anymore (or at least, trying a find a way to limit these mistakes) - in short, people want meritocracy, but not when it impacts their favorite player, or a guy they think should be given more of a chance for some reason, etc. I think MT largely incorporates meritocracy, but what counts as merit in his book might not be as obvious to us. We watch hockey games (some miss quite a few), he lives and breathes with this team, so I have to think his judgment isn't bad, it's based on all kinds of non-obvious elements. It's not as if we'd traded away players who suddenly did much better after getting out of MT's shadow. There are certain hockey players that you have to pretty much leave alone to do their thing if you want to get the most out of them. Nobody told Bobby Orr to stop carrying the puck and pay more attention to his defensive responsibilities (and he made many a defensive gaffe in his day - just look at the 1971 playoffs). Guy Lafleur flourished before Jacques Lemaire decided to try to rein him in. Mario Lemieux and Wayne Gretzky did what they did best and didn't worry about preventing goals. You put guys out with those types of players to look after the defensive side of things and let them fly. PK is one of those types of players. I've only seen him live a few times, but I can tell you that there's a lot of things that he does that you miss on TV. I want to see PK given the green light to do what he does best and let the "grinders" look after the rest of the stuff.
|
|
|
Post by blny on Feb 19, 2016 9:27:19 GMT -5
... I'm running out of fingers ... be careful which one you use in MT's direction; this is a family-oriented site. #1! lol
|
|
|
Post by Willie Dog on Feb 19, 2016 9:46:01 GMT -5
Well, to me it seems like people complain about a lack of meritocracy when a guy they like gets benched (Subban) after making a major mistake of a kind he's been repeatedly talked to about not making anymore (or at least, trying a find a way to limit these mistakes) - in short, people want meritocracy, but not when it impacts their favorite player, or a guy they think should be given more of a chance for some reason, etc. I think MT largely incorporates meritocracy, but what counts as merit in his book might not be as obvious to us. We watch hockey games (some miss quite a few), he lives and breathes with this team, so I have to think his judgment isn't bad, it's based on all kinds of non-obvious elements. It's not as if we'd traded away players who suddenly did much better after getting out of MT's shadow. There are certain hockey players that you have to pretty much leave alone to do their thing if you want to get the most out of them. Nobody told Bobby Orr to stop carrying the puck and pay more attention to his defensive responsibilities (and he made many a defensive gaffe in his day - just look at the 1971 playoffs). Guy Lafleur flourished before Jacques Lemaire decided to try to rein him in. Mario Lemieux and Wayne Gretzky did what they did best and didn't worry about preventing goals. You put guys out with those types of players to look after the defensive side of things and let them fly. PK is one of those types of players. I've only seen him live a few times, but I can tell you that there's a lot of things that he does that you miss on TV. I want to see PK given the green light to do what he does best and let the "grinders" look after the rest of the stuff. Bobby Orr said the following about Karlsson and it also applies to PK imo.
|
|
|
Post by PTH on Feb 19, 2016 17:54:06 GMT -5
But then MT comes out and basically blames PK for the loss whereas a month earlier he was sticking up for markov when we lost against the Leafs... why the double standard? Because Markov makes occasional mistakes, everyone does. PK takes it to another level, always looking for a big play, carrying the puck to dangerous areas, and overall it's worth the risk, but when you're in a tie game with 2 minutes left against a Western opponent, you don't take those risks, and PK keeps on doing so, and does so on purpose. This time he says he lost an edge, as if such things never happen - they do happen, in every game, and when you're pushing things to the limit, they'll happen even more often. To put it another way, PK could improve his decision-making, but all players do make mistakes - but they can all try to not put themselves in positions where a simple mistake leads to an immediate turnover at the opposing blueline.
|
|
|
Post by Willie Dog on Feb 19, 2016 18:11:30 GMT -5
Because Markov makes occasional mistakes, everyone does. PK takes it to another level, always looking for a big play, carrying the puck to dangerous areas, and overall it's worth the risk, but when you're in a tie game with 2 minutes left against a Western opponent, you don't take those risks, and PK keeps on doing so, and does so on purpose. This time he says he lost an edge, as if such things never happen - they do happen, in every game, and when you're pushing things to the limit, they'll happen even more often. To put it another way, PK could improve his decision-making, but all players do make mistakes - but they can all try to not put themselves in positions where a simple mistake leads to an immediate turnover at the opposing blueline. I agree all players should try to limit their mistakes but PK gets paid 9 million a season and i expect him to be a difference maker.... sometimes difference makers make mistakes... you accept it because they are difference makers.
|
|
|
Post by PTH on Feb 19, 2016 18:30:41 GMT -5
I agree all players should try to limit their mistakes but PK gets paid 9 million a season and i expect him to be a difference maker.... sometimes difference makers make mistakes... you accept it because they are difference makers. I think MT is saying, through his actions more than anything (ie, benching PK for 2 minutes), that PK isn't trying enough to minimize mistakes.
|
|
|
Post by Willie Dog on Feb 19, 2016 18:58:58 GMT -5
MT taught him a lesson that's for sure... he taught everyone on that team a lesson.... that trying to win a game was not as important as teaching your star player a lesson.
Like it or not the habs had a better chance to tie the game up with PK on the ice than on the bench.... simple as that and MT took the best chance to do that away imo.
|
|
|
Post by PTH on Feb 19, 2016 19:22:44 GMT -5
MT taught him a lesson that's for sure... he taught everyone on that team a lesson.... that trying to win a game was not as important as teaching your star player a lesson. Like it or not the habs had a better chance to tie the game up with PK on the ice than on the bench.... simple as that and MT took the best chance to do that away imo. At some point, enough is enough. We're always a better team with Subban on the ice, but at some point, the coach has to get a message across, the message being to avoid silly risks at certain points in the game.
|
|
|
Post by Willie Dog on Feb 19, 2016 19:26:27 GMT -5
You think MT is right and I think he is wrong so I will leave it at that. That mon ami is what makes this board great.
Now on to the flyers... lets see what the boys can do.
|
|
|
Post by Disgruntled70sHab on Feb 19, 2016 19:28:11 GMT -5
But then MT comes out and basically blames PK for the loss whereas a month earlier he was sticking up for markov when we lost against the Leafs... why the double standard? Because Markov makes occasional mistakes, everyone does. PK takes it to another level, always looking for a big play, carrying the puck to dangerous areas, and overall it's worth the risk, but when you're in a tie game with 2 minutes left against a Western opponent, you don't take those risks, and PK keeps on doing so, and does so on purpose. This time he says he lost an edge, as if such things never happen - they do happen, in every game, and when you're pushing things to the limit, they'll happen even more often. To put it another way, PK could improve his decision-making, but all players do make mistakes - but they can all try to not put themselves in positions where a simple mistake leads to an immediate turnover at the opposing blueline. He's our best player, but he'd agree with you in that there's always room for improvement ... Cheers.
|
|
|
Post by seventeen on Feb 19, 2016 19:34:11 GMT -5
MT taught him a lesson that's for sure... he taught everyone on that team a lesson.... that trying to win a game was not as important as teaching your star player a lesson. Like it or not the habs had a better chance to tie the game up with PK on the ice than on the bench.... simple as that and MT took the best chance to do that away imo. At some point, enough is enough. We're always a better team with Subban on the ice, but at some point, the coach has to get a message across, the message being to avoid silly risks at certain points in the game. But when do you decide it's a silly risk? Morgan Reilly stickhandled in front of his net last night, lost the puck and within 2 seconds the Rangers scored the winning goal. It was far more a direct mistake for Reilly than the one attributed to PK. AT least with PK, there was 150 feet between his error and the goal and 3 guys who covered their men (for a while). I didn't hear anything at all out of Toronto about Reilly costing his team the game. That's because Reilly is going to be a great player and part of being great is taking risks. Bobby Orr took risks, all the time. Paul Coffey took risks, Erik Karlsson takes risks. If you take the risk out of the player, you might as well play Pateryn, because that's what you're getting. And really, if Pacioretty just stays with his man, nothing happens. DLR got thrown out of whack because he suddenly had two guys to cover, and Scrivens overplayed the shot. The season is shot. What's the big deal? Which makes one wonder what is going on to bring all this criticism of PK to bear. Better that we expend energy on getting some discipline into our defensive game. That's what cost the 3rd goal last night.
|
|
|
Post by jkr on Feb 19, 2016 19:52:15 GMT -5
I think MT is saying, through his actions more than anything (ie, benching PK for 2 minutes), that PK isn't trying enough to minimize mistakes. I don't find he's fair in his criticism. Subban took the blame for the goal which led to a 3 on 3 rush that was screwed up by Pacioretty etc. Where was the criticism for MP? Benching your leading scorer when you are in desperate need of a goal just seems spiteful - as if the coach is putting his feelings ahead of the needs of the team. He didn't even mention the shortie they gave up in the 2nd. In a one goal game there is more than one turning point but he chose to focus on PK. This team needs a win every game now. Picking up a single point doesn't help much. Subban was taking Bergevin's advice & playing to win. Therrien's public blaming of a single player was uncalled for & unprofessional and something rarely heard from coaches.
|
|
|
Post by folatre on Feb 20, 2016 21:29:16 GMT -5
NHL coach faces heat and criticism when losing at record setting levels.
There are things Therrien and his staff control in world without Price. Defensive zone coverage is one. I see guys freelancing and sleepwalking in the d-zone. Power play is two. Habs power play is 28th since December 1. Reduce exposure to player weaknesses is three. I see Markov playing well over 20 minutes, playing short handed, playing 3 on 3 in overtime; I see Plekanec and Desharnais playing #1 and #2 centre minutes.
When Lundqvist missed 30 games to injury last season, Alain Vigneault would survive if say Rangers went 7-22-1? When Boston played two months without Chara and more than two months without Krecji, a 30 game stretch as abjectly futile as 7-22-1 would have forced Chiarelli to dismiss Claude Julien?
|
|