|
Post by Habsolution on Jan 19, 2003 3:21:05 GMT -5
What's funny with MT constent line juggling was that he never came up with the right ones. He never understood Perreault lacks speed and isn't a guy who works a lot. So he put him with 2 slow guys: gilmour and Mckay. Even though they did well together I've always thought this line was too slow. Then he never understood Hainsey is way better than Traverse and that he actually has potential. Something Traverse is lacking. He never understood Hainsey is an offensive dman, who has to pinch sometimes and play the PP to become effective. He never understood chow's lack of defensive awareness could be corrected by putting him with two defensively responsible players. Since Hossa has been on the first line I've always been feeling good about putting our best line against other teams top lines. Some of you might disagree on this one though. But I always hated to think we had not a good enough first line to compete with others and had to put a defensive third line against them. It just looks as if we bow down and agree we're not a talented team. That's lacking pride IMO. Offense is the best defense. He never understood Traverse wasn't a #2. He is not a #2 on any team in the league. Some people say Rick Green is responsible for pairing and playing the D. How come then that this changed tonight with CJ behind the bench. That means MT was the problem IMO. I don't care if we lose like this till the end of the year. They played an exciting game... sure they were giving it all to impress the new coach but still it was MT's to say the right things to make them play 60 minutes. But he had lost their respect and couldn't say or do anything that could turn it around anymore. Plus CJ will know how to use our upcoming players. He knows Hossa, Hainsey, Plekanec, Balej, etc. He'll use them properly when they get up and make them improve their game. Great decision by AS. Could have happened earlier though ...
|
|
|
Post by habwest on Jan 19, 2003 9:52:55 GMT -5
Let me play Devil's Advocate (hey I wanna have some fun before the football games): - doesn't matter if Perreault, Gilmour and McKay were all slow. Perreault was scoring a lot, Gilmour was starting to and McKay had more ice time so we had a big winger out there. - it wasn't a matter of not understanding that Hainsey had more talent than Traverse, it was bringing Hainsey along carefully so as not to put him in over his head. Worked with Markov with fine results. Why not with Hainsey? - he put Hossa on with Koivu's line - let's see how well Koivu holds up playing against the big centers in the East. Will he be a foot shorter and injured by the end of the season? - didn't Czerk play with Juneau at some point? - Green's influence- see above on Hainsey.
|
|
|
Post by MPLABBE on Jan 19, 2003 10:48:25 GMT -5
- it wasn't a matter of not understanding that Hainsey had more talent than Traverse, it was bringing Hainsey along carefully so as not to put him in over his head. Worked with Markov with fine results. Why not with Hainsey? It also took Markov TWO full years to develop into a good NHL d-man thanks to Therrien's scratchings, benchings and lack of ice time on the PP. The Markov we are seeing this year...we could have seen him sometime last year. If CJ keeps giving Hainsey ice time...he will likely become as good as Markov is now while taking less time to develop...because Hainsey is bigger, faster and is much better defensively than Markov was at that stage of his career. Hainsey may not become another Leetch(in other words a tremendous offensive d-man) like HA says...but he can certainly become one of the best 2 way d-men in hockey.
|
|
|
Post by Habsolution on Jan 19, 2003 13:06:36 GMT -5
Let me play Devil's Advocate (hey I wanna have some fun before the football games): - doesn't matter if Perreault, Gilmour and McKay were all slow. Perreault was scoring a lot, Gilmour was starting to and McKay had more ice time so we had a big winger out there. I reckowned it worked ... but still Perreault scored yesterday and things can only get better it was CJ's first time as coach. Anyway McKay is not a 2nd liner. He was taking space away from guys like Petrov and Bulis who had no place in the line up before. It's not cuz 2 guys on a line are producing it's a good thing to have a Gilmour-YP-RM line. The truth is CJ has better line combinations at his first game. Sure the energy boost might be misleading but watch out ... - it wasn't a matter of not understanding that Hainsey had more talent than Traverse, it was bringing Hainsey along carefully so as not to put him in over his head. Worked with Markov with fine results. Why not with Hainsey? You can't possibly argue with the fact Hainsey is better used and has way more chances to mature and learn if you play him than if scratch him a game out of two and play him 5 minutes a game when you don't scratch him. Considering the fact it was really hurting his development IMO and that it was tiring the other dman to run only 5 guys. You can see MT was the only reason why we lost that game aganst the NYI. He stopped playing Hainsey in the third and all the D's were tired and were nervous because MT was playing his "experienced" dman too much as if it was a 7th playoffs game. - he put Hossa on with Koivu's line A monkey would have thought about it. - let's see how well Koivu holds up playing against the big centers in the East. Will he be a foot shorter and injured by the end of the season? That's why he decided to play Perreault's line against Sundin at some point in the game. Not every teams has big first line centers. - didn't Czerk play with Juneau at some point? Pre-season .. mm wasn't he the leading scorer ? Why did he stop doing that huh I wonder. - Green's influence- see above on Hainsey. I don't see ... Hainsey has way more chance to develop playing like an offensive dman than playing as if the next error he'll do will be his last one.
|
|
|
Post by MPLABBE on Jan 19, 2003 13:14:20 GMT -5
You can see MT was the only reason why we lost that game aganst the NYI. He stopped playing Hainsey in the third and all the D's were tired and were nervous because MT was playing his "experienced" dman too much as if it was a 7th playoffs game. and the Atlanta game...he went with 5 D from the mid way point..
|
|
|
Post by Habsolution on Jan 19, 2003 13:23:08 GMT -5
What's good is on top of having more chances to succeed that way they satisfy the angry mob who ask for more Hainsey and who ask them to play the youth more. Thumbs up to CJ for doing that.
|
|
|
Post by Viper on Jan 19, 2003 13:54:16 GMT -5
Regarding the changes i noticed last night from MT to CJ.
The 4th line got used an awful lot last night particularly right after the leafs got their second goal. I was in dibelief at first and actually kind of perturbed thinking why this line now when we need to have a big shift or this could get ugly. They were hemmed in their own zone for a while and finally after they cleared the zone i remember Kidd making a quick outlet pass to center as the beleagured 4th line rushed to get off the ice. I was sweating a little to say the least and had i not been at a friends house many more things would have been sworn at the TV.
I was reading in another thread this morning about how CJ likes to go with 3 offensive and a grinding line. I have serious doubts the existing lineup can complete this task unless some adjustments are made. It will be interesting to see what transpires from now until the deadline as far as player movement is concerned. I'd really like to see at least one of the triple threat wingers(triple threat being against us in AUdette Cerk and Petrov) moved along with Hackett. anyhow it seems a step in the right direction at least.
AS is off the slagging list for now but the continued reliance on this difficult roster will throw him back on it that's for sure.
|
|