|
Post by Boston_Habs on Dec 9, 2002 15:53:12 GMT -5
I didn't see the Phoenix game, but I looked at the forward lines and their minutes played and I must say this may be the most balanced lineup I've seen this year. If there aren't going to be any trades or callups, I can live with the following:
1st line: Kilger/Koivu/Zednik..... 17 minutes per game. No, Kilger isn't the long-term answer, but this line needs (a) some bump, and (b) somebody who can skate well enough to keep up with Koivu and Zed (sorry, McKay)
2nd line: Gilmour/Perreault/McKay..... 13-15 minutes per game This line is old and slow, so 13-15 minutes is probably the right amount of ice. Gilmour can make plays (in theory), Perreault's can finish, and McKay can bump and grind.
3rd line: Bulis/Juneau/Dackell..... 15-17 minutes per game Underscores how important the 3rd line is when matching up, ice time will depend in large part on how much PK time there is. This line isn't sexy but it gets the job done.
4th line: Petrov/Ribeiro/Czerkawski.... 10 minutes per game Not a bad place to put these guys if you can give them some decent ice time (like 10 minutes a game), and some spot PP duty. Not a good line if you're trying to play defense, but you can pick your spots with a 4th line, especially at home.
Audette sits, or he takes Czerk's spot on the 4th line. His 1st line, 17 minutes a game days should be over.
These should be the set line and MT should stick with them at least until Jan. 1. If Petrov is on fire one game, you can run him through the Perreault line a couple of times; if Bulis is flying out there, give him a few shifts on the Koivu line. But MT needs to settle down the forward rotation once and for all, while still being flexible from game to game.
|
|
|
Post by JacquesInFL on Dec 9, 2002 17:08:09 GMT -5
Good post. Boston Hab, I generally agree with what you say. Since the roster still has three one dimensional RWs and no size down the middle, the lineup we saw against Colorado and Phoenix is more balanced than most we see.
I hope we see Kilger stay with 1st line for week or two. It takes time to evaluate if Chad's simple game helps create more scoring opportunity for 1st line than his bad hands, below average passing/anticipation foil for Zed and Saku. 1st lines often benefit from a "role player" (i.e. physical element or defense conscience) but I see that type of guy in the Dahlen mold with Modano & Guerin. In other words, few guys in NHL with hands like Chad hold down 1st line role long-term.
Gilmour wants 15-16 min/game, so Habs are living with line vulnerable defensively that has no effective forechecking. -- And the 4th line probably saw time because of big lead against Coyotes but nothing in MT's tenure leads me think 4th line plays much in close games. And there is plenty reason to worry about rolling out Czerk-Ribeiro-Petrov in close game. Two woeful defensive lines is a problem that Theo, Hack and the d-corps should not be asked to confront. I want to see Ribeiro develop, but I like our fourth line a lot better with size and grit. Rib’s vision and passing make Gilmour a good candidate to give up the odd game for Mike but that is not going to happen. In my opinion, logic dictates you can only be pro-Gilmour AND pro-Ribeiro IF you are willing to defer Ribeiro’s playing time until next year.
Well, 750 days in the Burritozoic Era should tell us that MT never will get it.
|
|
|
Post by Viper on Dec 9, 2002 17:10:48 GMT -5
I didn't see the Phoenix game, but I looked at the forward lines and their minutes played and I must say this may be the most balanced lineup I've seen this year. If there aren't going to be any trades or callups, I can live with the following: 1st line: Kilger/Koivu/Zednik..... 17 minutes per game. No, Kilger isn't the long-term answer, but this line needs (a) some bump, and (b) somebody who can skate well enough to keep up with Koivu and Zed (sorry, McKay) 2nd line: Gilmour/Perreault/McKay..... 13-15 minutes per game This line is old and slow, so 13-15 minutes is probably the right amount of ice. Gilmour can make plays (in theory), Perreault's can finish, and McKay can bump and grind. 3rd line: Bulis/Juneau/Dackell..... 15-17 minutes per game Underscores how important the 3rd line is when matching up, ice time will depend in large part on how much PK time there is. This line isn't sexy but it gets the job done. 4th line: Petrov/Ribeiro/Czerkawski.... 10 minutes per game Not a bad place to put these guys if you can give them some decent ice time (like 10 minutes a game), and some spot PP duty. Not a good line if you're trying to play defense, but you can pick your spots with a 4th line, especially at home. Audette sits, or he takes Czerk's spot on the 4th line. His 1st line, 17 minutes a game days should be over. These should be the set line and MT should stick with them at least until Jan. 1. If Petrov is on fire one game, you can run him through the Perreault line a couple of times; if Bulis is flying out there, give him a few shifts on the Koivu line. But MT needs to settle down the forward rotation once and for all, while still being flexible from game to game. I think it was Pat benatar ewho said something about being wide awake in dreamland. We the fans are wide awake while MTHead is playing around in dreamland. I hope like heck your right and he does finally just pick a lineup and run with it for a while but i'm not crossing my fingers that's for sure.
|
|
|
Post by MPLABBE on Dec 9, 2002 17:16:53 GMT -5
I can't believe it has been 750 days with MT at the helm and it looks like we may get at least 100 more
|
|
|
Post by PTH on Dec 9, 2002 20:57:55 GMT -5
I think MT basically realised that he had to play his own game, and let AS take the flak for having 6+ million sitting on the sidelines.
Maybe AS made MT realise he has to win, regardless of who sits or plays, so MT finally gets to coach and not have his hands tied by his micromanaging GM...
|
|
|
Post by Disgruntled70sHab on Dec 9, 2002 21:14:02 GMT -5
I never really thought of it that way, PTH. I don't read all of the media stories as I just don't have the time. Was there anything maybe suggesting that?
But, I always envisioned that it was Savard putting out the fires Therrien couldn't handle; Therrien was over his head, yadda, yadda, yadda ... At least that's what I had been reading anyway.
While he may be over his head in some areas, the other side of the coin could very well be that Savard took it upon himself to take matters into his own hands.
If so, it may explain a lot. Interesting. Cheers.
|
|
|
Post by PTH on Dec 9, 2002 23:07:12 GMT -5
Dis, I'm just playing Devils advocate. Everyone has been against MT IMO unfairly, since most of his moves, especailly this season, have been practically dictated by the lineup AS gave him. For quite a while MT has been the problem and AS the solution, yet somehow I think blame - and credit - should be placed equally on both guys shoulders.
If AS fires MT, and the MT replacement runs into the same problems MT had..... who do you think goes next ?
|
|
|
Post by montreal on Dec 10, 2002 1:11:24 GMT -5
Dis, I'm just playing Devils advocate. Everyone has been against MT IMO unfairly, since most of his moves, especailly this season, have been practically dictated by the lineup AS gave him. For quite a while MT has been the problem and AS the solution, yet somehow I think blame - and credit - should be placed equally on both guys shoulders. If AS fires MT, and the MT replacement runs into the same problems MT had..... who do you think goes next ? Well my opinion is that MT wont be fired. Savard knows that right now he needs to buy time until "his" picks are ready to step in and take over. So he's got a few more years to get a top notch coach, so for now, let MT hang around with the rest of the stop gap players he has assembled, getting some decent draft picks along the way with our average team, that isn't a cup contender or doesn't totally suck. A couple of drafts around the middle of the pack, and then his picks should be ready to step in, while his then recent picks will be not to far away. By then, the MT, Green's, Gilmor's, Quintal's, Dykhuis's, Traverse's, McKay's, Chow's, Audette's, Petrov's, Perreault's, Juneau's, Dackell's, Lindsay's, will all be gone. ;D
|
|
|
Post by habwest on Dec 10, 2002 1:20:47 GMT -5
Well PTH, AS giving MT a roster of players is not evidence of micro managing. It's evidence of giving him a bunch of players and saying to MT "here, you figure it out". You and others have criticised AS from the beginning of the season on the makeup of the team being wrong and I think that a valid argument can be made on this issue. But that's a different thing than micro managing the team on a daily basis. Is there any actual evidence for the micromanaging aspect? It's a serious question as with the death of Montrealsports I no longer read the Gazette and cannot read French so I may be missing a lot of pertinent info. As to blaming MT too much I think you raise a good point. I happen to think that he is not a very good coach but, after all, it's not his job to get out on the ice and actually play the game. He can't do the player's jobs for them. I offer two points in his defence: 1) Rivet saying that the players were not playing the system the coaches want. Now I must admit that MT's system has always been something of a mystery to me (and many others here) but if the player's aren't following the coach's plan they have to assume some of the responsibility; 2) apparently Friday the players had a player's only meeting where the conclusion was that they were not playing with enough emotion, which seems to me to be a flat out admission of their culpability in the lackluster efforts to date. Also, those making the unbalanced team argument could maintain that AS has made MT's life more difficult by the addition of Czerkawski this season. Having said that I think that he's a mediocre coach on a mediocre team and if our team gets better then so will our coaching need to get better. Just my 2 cents. Cheers.
|
|
|
Post by Rhiessan on Dec 10, 2002 2:26:15 GMT -5
I think it's way to early to give any credit to MT. If his changing of the lineup to a more offensive makeup and "system" gets us more wins than losses then maybe I stop bashing him. As for praising him when it took 20+ games to figure out(or get up the b*lls) that most of the players on this team are much better at putting the puck in the net than keeping it out....NOT A CHANCE! Some are gonna say that he tried it in the beginning and we got bombed but we got bombed because lets face it Theo stunk it up. He shrank under the media pressure then and is finally now getting up th b*lls (or starting to figure out that caving to the media will probably get him fired even faster) to try it again away from the Phone booth without the big hoopla that it would of stirred there. I've said it before and I'll say it again "I will take our goalies in a shoot out anytime over just having our goalies in a shoot on". That it looks like Hacks is starting in Bos tonight leads me to believe he's starting to get a sense of his job security or lack of.
|
|
|
Post by Habs_fan_in_LA on Dec 10, 2002 22:17:34 GMT -5
Dis, I'm just playing Devils advocate. Everyone has been against MT IMO unfairly, since most of his moves, especailly this season, have been practically dictated by the lineup AS gave him. For quite a while MT has been the problem and AS the solution, yet somehow I think blame - and credit - should be placed equally on both guys shoulders. If AS fires MT, and the MT replacement runs into the same problems MT had..... who do you think goes next ? What is this world coming to? I find myself agreeing with you 99%. The only way I disagree is that I think the blame is fair. BOTH of them are equally at fault. AS can no longer fire MT and expect that all the blame will go with him. They are siamese twins joined at the hip and they should go together.
|
|