|
Post by JohnnyVerdun on Dec 6, 2002 22:48:35 GMT -5
Unless there's something big and fast coming back. I've been pissing and moaning for a year and a half that this guy is not being used to good effect. His versatility alone is reason enough to hang on to him. But for Therrien "versatile" means "can sit on the shelf indefinitely until all stupid ideas have been exhausted"....
|
|
|
Post by PTH on Dec 6, 2002 23:09:32 GMT -5
Well, let's see if Chad can keep this up for a few games. Kilger has always impressed a lot, for short spurts.
|
|
|
Post by JohnnyVerdun on Dec 6, 2002 23:21:58 GMT -5
True. But it's always been a bit of a mystery to me as to why he gets benched, demoted or scratched. He doesn't make boneheaded plays or take stupid penalties very often at all and he's not lazy. It seems to me that if Therrien doesn't see him hitting people that's enough. But the hit's aren't always there. And the good hitters will tell you that experience teaches you not to run around and press for the hits but to take the opportunities when they present themselves. I've never seen Kilger play a stretch of games where I thought to myself "this guy shouldn't be on the ice". Frankly, I think they're just prejudiced against him for some reason. It's as if they don't see him as anything other than a role player so he's the first guy they bounce when there's someone else they want to get into the lineup. Someone pointed out that he had 25 points in 43 games when he arrived. Instead of building on that and cultivating it, Therrien has been quick to squash it. For someone who sees the Habs braintrust as always and forever blowing opportunities to develop the younger guys they have, you seem to be accepting that they've actually done the right thing in constantly limiting and reducing Kilger's role. To me, Kilger's been more consistent than Bulis, who is now a fixture on Juneau's wing. So what is it about Kilger that makes him less worthy of the patience and attention that you'll surely demand if Jason Ward is called up? Kilger, though older, than Ward, is hardly incapable of further development, wouldn't you agree?
|
|
|
Post by MPLABBE on Dec 6, 2002 23:39:56 GMT -5
Like PTH says let's hope he keeps it up!
|
|
|
Post by HFTO on Dec 6, 2002 23:42:26 GMT -5
MT has proven he does not utiliuze his players to their abilities he has to go to make a clear evaluation! HFTO
|
|
|
Post by zenseeker on Dec 6, 2002 23:50:22 GMT -5
It seems like MT has a view of what kind of player Kilger is, and no matter what he does it seems not to make the grade.I have been pressing for a long time that he should be playing on the top two lines to create soom room and give us a physical presence especially considering his speed. I guess it will be a wait and see game on the future, because MT doesn't always follow logic.
|
|
|
Post by MPLABBE on Dec 6, 2002 23:57:20 GMT -5
BTW that hit on Forsberg was AWESOME!!!
|
|
|
Post by habwest on Dec 7, 2002 1:07:34 GMT -5
I'd be happy to see Kilger as the 4th line center of he got 10-12 minutes a game. Or someplace else. But as JV says ol' MT doesn't seem to have much of an idea of how to actually develop players.
It seems to me that Kilger should be given a clear role and position to play and that the coach should stay with it for a while. To say, on the one hand, that we have a small team and then, on the other, not to play one of the few (two) big guys on the team regularly doesn't appear to make much sense to me. But if you can count on MT for anything it's that his coaching decisions often don't make sense.
|
|
|
Post by PTH on Dec 7, 2002 1:08:53 GMT -5
JV : I think Kilger has room left to improve, but I also think he'll never be more than a good 3d line center or 2nd line winger. What he needs now is a clear role to play and stability.
I'm not going to say if his benchings were warranted or not, there is a lot of stuff happening that I don't see.
Let's say I'd like to see him play consistently well for a stretch, but of course he can only do that if he's given the chance, with regular linemates and a stable role.
|
|
|
Post by habruti on Dec 7, 2002 1:48:54 GMT -5
For someone who sees the Habs braintrust as always and forever blowing opportunities to develop the younger guys they have, you seem to be accepting that they've actually done the right thing in constantly limiting and reducing Kilger's role. To me, Kilger's been more consistent than Bulis, who is now a fixture on Juneau's wing. So what is it about Kilger that makes him less worthy of the patience and attention that you'll surely demand if Jason Ward is called up? Kilger, though older, than Ward, is hardly incapable of further development, wouldn't you agree? I totally agree and i would not bring up Ward to the cost of Kilger but more in addition to Kilger. I liked what he did today, he created more room for Koivu and complemented Koivu and Zednik far better then what I have seen from the others. I always hoped he was considered in the core of the team.
|
|
|
Post by JohnnyVerdun on Dec 7, 2002 2:09:09 GMT -5
JV : I think Kilger has room left to improve, but I also think he'll never be more than a good 3d line center or 2nd line winger. What he needs now is a clear role to play and stability. Why do you say "but"? "But" he'll never be more than a good 3d line center or 2nd line winger? I'd be ecstatic if he was developed to play either of those roles. As you know, the real "but" is this: but he'll never be either of those things if he goes from the pressbox to playing 7 minutes on the 4th line and then back to the pressbox again, especially if the reasons are as mysterious to him as they seem to me. And in fact, judging from his comments, he does seem to be a bit uncertain as to why it is that he sits for game after game after game, then plays sporadically, and then sits again. I don't think he's dense, so either Therrien is simply not communicating with him or what he is saying doesn't make a whole hell of a lot of sense to Kilger. Both of those scenarios seem utterly plausible to me, in light of what we know about Therrien. In any case, this team is desperately short on the kind of game Chad can bring to the table, and it seems to me he's never done anything to warrant the cold shoulder. In fact, as someone else pointed out, he seems to rise to the level of the expectations of his coach. Something tells me that if Kilger were handed a significant but realistic role, we'd be pleasantly surprised. Only time will tell if he gets the chance; but I hope he does, because I can really picture him being a part of the puzzle when the temps move on and the draft picks move in. And we all know that's going to be sooner than later.....
|
|
|
Post by montreal on Dec 7, 2002 2:53:02 GMT -5
Well the problem I have with Kilger, is that he doesn't seem to skate hard all the time. I watched him tonight, and it was great to see him get a goal (and the hit on Forsberg) but if he kept his feet moving and played with more energy (which would result in more hitting, and no JV, I don't mean he has to go out and hit everything, but a few more hits wouldn't hurt either) I don't see Kilger as a top line player, as he doesn't have any instincts with the puck, and his hands of stone take a lot of offence out of the top line. He did have a good game, and I would like to see more of it, as he can work the boards, create room, and is very responisble in his own end. (I would rather see Chad with Perreault, cause Yanic just stinks in his own end) But its great to see a guy thats been benched, come back and get a goal and play a decent game.
|
|
|
Post by haborama on Dec 7, 2002 3:09:30 GMT -5
while Kilger worked well on the 1st line tonight, I don't know if he's a keeper there. Though he can create room, we may see the stone hands little too often. Definitely better that Audette though.
My view is to put Bulis on the first line with Koivu and Zed. Can't hurt at all, Bulis can bang bodies and work in the corners, and has some finish. Did he not play with Zed a bit in the Washington days?
Then, we put Kilger on the Juneau-Dackell line permanently.
as for the second and 4th lines.. Yikes.
|
|
|
Post by JohnnyVerdun on Dec 7, 2002 3:16:03 GMT -5
Montreal:
I don't think anybody sees him as a long term solution on the first line, but the second line is not out of the question. You don't need 6 forwards for the top two lines who all have real scoring finish. If a guy like Kilger can get 15 goals on the second line but make life easier for his linemates, so that they get 25 and 30, he belongs. And the defensive ability and awareness can't be overlooked. Gilmour had 2 even strength points tonight (and 1 on the pp) but was -1. Perreault, by the way, was -3 tonight. Kilger was +1. Audette could play 10 games on the first line and get you 7 points if he was on his game and he'd still end up -3 in that span. That hurts and it adds up. That's a big part of the reason I favor using a guys on each of lines one and two who has the defensive skills that players like Perreault and Audette are lacking.
|
|
|
Post by UberCranky on Dec 7, 2002 8:17:50 GMT -5
Montreal: I don't think anybody sees him as a long term solution on the first line, but the second line is not out of the question. You don't need 6 forwards for the top two lines who all have real scoring finish. If a guy like Kilger can get 15 goals on the second line but make life easier for his linemates, so that they get 25 and 30, he belongs. And the defensive ability and awareness can't be overlooked. Gilmour had 2 even strength points tonight (and 1 on the pp) but was -1. Perreault, by the way, was -3 tonight. Kilger was +1. Audette could play 10 games on the first line and get you 7 points if he was on his game and he'd still end up -3 in that span. That hurts and it adds up. That's a big part of the reason I favor using a guys on each of lines one and two who has the defensive skills that players like Perreault and Audette are lacking. Is Perreault and Audette really lacking the "skill" or do they just don't give a sh*t about that aspect of ther game? I think it's obvious. Why does everybody think that you need some kind of scoring sensation to round out a line? It is far more important to have someone hard working and defensivly responsible plus bring other tribultes like size and willingness to use it then to score an extra 5 goals in a season. Kilger is fine on that line and Bulis works great on the third line. The issue is to try to make something out of the second and fourth line. If you look closely, the remainder of this players is what is causing half the proble. What exactly can you make out of Gilmour, Petrov, Yanic, Audette, Cherkawski, my old underwear and the rest of the hockey elite that are left over. Until Gilmour finds his game, sometime in March, we do not have a reasonable second line. Yanic does not believe he should rise above medocrity. None of the left over work hard enough to make anything usefull. And if they do work hard (Petrov), their hands have a fine coating of cement. I just love this well balanced team.
|
|
|
Post by MPLABBE on Dec 7, 2002 8:58:59 GMT -5
Good point HA.
Perreault is mediocre at best defensively. I think he just doesn't care about it most of the time and the fact he is slow doesn't help him out.
Bulis-Koivu-Zed Kilger-Perreault-one of the 3 RW
Kilger and Bulis can play some defence and chip in with decent offence
|
|
|
Post by habruti on Dec 7, 2002 9:53:12 GMT -5
Good point HA. Perreault is mediocre at best defensively. I think he just doesn't care about it most of the time and the fact he is slow doesn't help him out. Bulis-Koivu-Zed Kilger-Perreault-one of the 3 RW Kilger and Bulis can play some defence and chip in with decent offence Why is everyone keen on moing Bulis to one of the scoring line. He is young, he had onsistency problem and for once this year he does not have any problems a plays very well. Lets not mess with that. I do not care if we have other problems on the second and third line but Bulis is where he belongs this year and on top of that he gets to play a lot. I agree that Kilger may not be the long term solution on the first line but could do ery well until the end of the year. I agree with JV is role on a second line creating room for his line mate just has he did yesterday could be crucial. Has for the ones who says he is not hitting enough well I realy dont care. He is doing what I thing is crucial on that line which is run for the puck in the corners and keep it in the offensive zone. He prevented the puck from getting out of the Avs zone on multiple occasions last night and that is his role IMO. The longer term solution might be to have Hossa on the top line but for the moment lets leave it has is and find somthing to kickstart the second line (it was way too slow IMO).
|
|
|
Post by BadCompany on Dec 7, 2002 10:47:02 GMT -5
I have to admit, I am not a huge Kilger-on-the-first line fan.
I like Kilger. I really do. Its just that I don't think he has the hockey instincts to be a natural scorer, and while its true that you need bangers and muckers on your scoring lines as well, it would be nice to have somebody who can do a little bit of both. Like McKay, when he was scoring 20 some-odd goals for Jersey. As I have said in the past, Kilger has only once passed 17 goals in a season, going back to his days in junior. That's one season in 10 that he has topped 17 goals. To me, that suggests he isn't suddenly going to start popping them in with John Leclair regularity.
Where I like Kilger, where I have always liked Kilger, is as a 3rd line defensive center. I am one of those rare people who think that the 3rd line is just as important, perhaps more so, than the first line, so this is in no way a slight against Kilger. On my team, I would have him being groomed for one of the most important roles on the ice. Its like HabWest says, give him a clear role, a purpose, and then stick with it. 4th line center for the moment, getting 8-10 minutes a game there, plus another 3-5 on the penalty kill, plus another 1-2 in dying minutes of periods and games when we are protecting leads. That would be what? 12-17 minutes a game? Room him with Joe Juneau. Have him take faceoffs in practice until his hands bleed. Make him watch tapes of Guy Carbonneau, Bob Gainey, Doug Jarvis and Mike Peca until his eyes water. We saw last night that when he is focussed, and given a limited role, he can be very effective. Last year, when he was all over Joe Thornton in the playoffs, I thought "yeah, thats what he can do." He has size, he has speed, he has strength, dedication and a good work ethic, I seriously think we could turn him into one of the best, if the best checking line centers in the NHL. Chad Kilger for the Selke? Why not?
If everyone agrees that Kilger isn't the long term solution on the top two lines, why not start grooming him NOW for a position he is suited for? So that when those other solutions arrive, he will be in place and ready?
|
|
|
Post by Thanatos on Dec 7, 2002 10:57:30 GMT -5
... Until Gilmour finds his game, sometime in March, we do not have a reasonable second line. ... Gilmour does have 12 points in 25 games and three goals since the Atlanta game. I do think the man could play with more intensity, but he has picked up his game considerably the last couple of weeks or so.
|
|
|
Post by UberCranky on Dec 7, 2002 11:21:34 GMT -5
I have to admit, I am not a huge Kilger-on-the-first line fan. I like Kilger. I really do. Its just that I don't think he has the hockey instincts to be a natural scorer, and while its true that you need bangers and muckers on your scoring lines as well, it would be nice to have somebody who can do a little bit of both. Like McKay, when he was scoring 20 some-odd goals for Jersey. As I have said in the past, Kilger has only once passed 17 goals in a season, going back to his days in junior. That's one season in 10 that he has topped 17 goals. To me, that suggests he isn't suddenly going to start popping them in with John Leclair regularity. Where I like Kilger, where I have always liked Kilger, is as a 3rd line defensive center. I am one of those rare people who think that the 3rd line is just as important, perhaps more so, than the first line, so this is in no way a slight against Kilger. On my team, I would have him being groomed for one of the most important roles on the ice. Its like HabWest says, give him a clear role, a purpose, and then stick with it. 4th line center for the moment, getting 8-10 minutes a game there, plus another 3-5 on the penalty kill, plus another 1-2 in dying minutes of periods and games when we are protecting leads. That would be what? 12-17 minutes a game? Room him with Joe Juneau. Have him take faceoffs in practice until his hands bleed. Make him watch tapes of Guy Carbonneau, Bob Gainey, Doug Jarvis and Mike Peca until his eyes water. We saw last night that when he is focussed, and given a limited role, he can be very effective. Last year, when he was all over Joe Thornton in the playoffs, I thought "yeah, thats what he can do." He has size, he has speed, he has strength, dedication and a good work ethic, I seriously think we could turn him into one of the best, if the best checking line centers in the NHL. Chad Kilger for the Selke? Why not? If everyone agrees that Kilger isn't the long term solution on the top two lines, why not start grooming him NOW for a position he is suited for? So that when those other solutions arrive, he will be in place and ready? We agree on what's needed on the first line but we don't agree on who. Unless you buy several thousand little red pep pills for McKay and shovel them into his mouth like an old locomotive fire box, you will not get the energy and speed out of him. He is so slow, he drags that line down. He never had any speed but now he does not even “bang and crash” with any authority. You may be wishing for "that" McKay of four years ago but practically a third of the way through the season and he has shown nothing of any consequence. There must be a reason why the Devils did not offer him a contract. Tell me we have someone better for the first line. Except for Bulis, no one else brings the energy, size and speed.
|
|
|
Post by BadCompany on Dec 7, 2002 11:30:08 GMT -5
We agree on what's needed on the first line but we don't agree on who. Unless you buy several thousand little red pep pills for McKay and shovel them into his mouth like an old locomotive fire box, you will not get the energy and speed out of him. He is so slow, he drags that line down. He never had any speed but now he does not even “bang and crash” with any authority. You may be wishing for "that" McKay of four years ago but practically a third of the way through the season and he has shown nothing of any consequence. There must be a reason why the Devils did not offer him a contract. Tell me we have someone better for the first line. Except for Bulis, no one else brings the energy, size and speed. Oh, I didn't necessarily mean that McKay of this year should be there, I just meant that if you are going to have a banger and a crasher on the 1st line, it should be someone who can score 20+ goals, like McKay did WHEN he was with Jersey. Not now. In my opinion, Kilger is not the 20+ goal scorer needed for the 1st line. Therefore, when that 20+ banging scorer does arrive, Kilger will get bumped off the line. Better then, since he is not the long term solution there (in my opinion again), to groom him for a spot where he would be a long term solution. To use an extremely bad analogy, it would be like taking Komisarek and sticking him on the wing. Sure, he may be a little bit better than what we currently have on the wing, but in the long run that is not the answer, and in the meantime you miss a chance to develope something special at the postition he is meant to play. Ditto for Kilger. That's all.
|
|
|
Post by Doc Holliday on Dec 7, 2002 11:44:16 GMT -5
Kilger needs to hit and play a rough game to be effetive and appreciated. Sometimes he gets away from it and this is when he ends up in the dog house of every teams and coaches that gave up on him in the NHL. Once he gets away from a rough game, he's a Pat Poulin clone and gets treated like a filler. He's not special for his shot, his hands or his smarts, he's generally solid but he's special for the roughness he can provide.
That first line managed only 3 shots in an offensive galore. No shots from Zed... I am not impressed at all. I agree with those who see Kilger on a checking line.
|
|
|
Post by montreal on Dec 7, 2002 12:58:03 GMT -5
Montreal: I don't think anybody sees him as a long term solution on the first line, but the second line is not out of the question. You don't need 6 forwards for the top two lines who all have real scoring finish. If a guy like Kilger can get 15 goals on the second line but make life easier for his linemates, so that they get 25 and 30, he belongs. And the defensive ability and awareness can't be overlooked. Gilmour had 2 even strength points tonight (and 1 on the pp) but was -1. Perreault, by the way, was -3 tonight. Kilger was +1. Audette could play 10 games on the first line and get you 7 points if he was on his game and he'd still end up -3 in that span. That hurts and it adds up. That's a big part of the reason I favor using a guys on each of lines one and two who has the defensive skills that players like Perreault and Audette are lacking. Ok I agree with that. I would like to see Kilger with Perreault, as it would help the line in their own end, and give the line some speed. A Kilger Perreault Petrov line would be fast (except in the middle) and Perreault can score on his own. He just pisses me off when the puck is in our end, cause it almost always leads to a shot on goal. Gilmor has been better of late, and I really hope he picks it up. But this has to be his last run, IMO. Hossa would look much better coming down that LW, and he's much younger, bigger, and cheaper, so please Dougie make this your last year. HA, I think Audette doesnt give a Saperlipopette about his own end, whereas Perreault seems to try, but just sucks at it. I watched him try and tie up McAmond, and he did for about 10 seconds, then McAmond got free and scored. I even saw Perreault get outmuscled by that giant forward Alex Tangay and all 180 lbs of him.
|
|
|
Post by montreal on Dec 7, 2002 13:03:59 GMT -5
I have to admit, I am not a huge Kilger-on-the-first line fan. I like Kilger. I really do. Its just that I don't think he has the hockey instincts to be a natural scorer, and while its true that you need bangers and muckers on your scoring lines as well, it would be nice to have somebody who can do a little bit of both. Like McKay, when he was scoring 20 some-odd goals for Jersey. As I have said in the past, Kilger has only once passed 17 goals in a season, going back to his days in junior. That's one season in 10 that he has topped 17 goals. To me, that suggests he isn't suddenly going to start popping them in with John Leclair regularity. Where I like Kilger, where I have always liked Kilger, is as a 3rd line defensive center. I am one of those rare people who think that the 3rd line is just as important, perhaps more so, than the first line, so this is in no way a slight against Kilger. On my team, I would have him being groomed for one of the most important roles on the ice. Its like HabWest says, give him a clear role, a purpose, and then stick with it. 4th line center for the moment, getting 8-10 minutes a game there, plus another 3-5 on the penalty kill, plus another 1-2 in dying minutes of periods and games when we are protecting leads. That would be what? 12-17 minutes a game? Room him with Joe Juneau. Have him take faceoffs in practice until his hands bleed. Make him watch tapes of Guy Carbonneau, Bob Gainey, Doug Jarvis and Mike Peca until his eyes water. We saw last night that when he is focussed, and given a limited role, he can be very effective. Last year, when he was all over Joe Thornton in the playoffs, I thought "yeah, thats what he can do." He has size, he has speed, he has strength, dedication and a good work ethic, I seriously think we could turn him into one of the best, if the best checking line centers in the NHL. Chad Kilger for the Selke? Why not? If everyone agrees that Kilger isn't the long term solution on the top two lines, why not start grooming him NOW for a position he is suited for? So that when those other solutions arrive, he will be in place and ready? Well if you put Kilger at center, where does Juneau go, our best PKer? I think Kilger should be where Bulis is, but Bulis is playing well there, so where do you move him? I think Bulis and Zednik have chemistry, so I would like to see them on a line again, if Kilger were to take over the 3rd line LW. I really don't think he makes a good center, but it does give us size down the middle. I would vote for LW still, as we rely on our centers a lot (which is part of the problem) and I don't think Kilger is best suited for that role, and from what I read, he doesn't like it too much either.
|
|
|
Post by MPLABBE on Dec 7, 2002 14:34:01 GMT -5
Why is everyone keen on moing Bulis to one of the scoring line. He is young, he had onsistency problem and for once this year he does not have any problems a plays very well. Lets not mess with that. I do not care if we have other problems on the second and third line but Bulis is where he belongs this year and on top of that he gets to play a lot. viper care to do the honours? ;D
|
|
|
Post by JacquesInFL on Dec 7, 2002 15:19:34 GMT -5
I would be less excited to see Bulis move to Perreault's line because, like a few say, when a 24 yr old is showing consistency in an important role, why change it. -- But Jan understands Zed's game and I think his passing and puckhandling could complement both Zed and Saku.
For now, though, giving Kilger a chance to bring a simple offensive game to the 1st line is not a bad move. I hope it lasts a few games.
If Habs drop out of playoff picture, Savard should start planning for next year and the year after. For me, this would mean grooming Kilger for the 3rd line checking centre role, as BC makes case, and giving Jan a chance to play with Zed and Saku.
|
|
|
Post by Disgruntled70sHab on Dec 7, 2002 15:25:13 GMT -5
True. But it's always been a bit of a mystery to me as to why he gets benched, demoted or scratched. He doesn't make boneheaded plays or take stupid penalties very often at all and he's not lazy. It seems to me that if Therrien doesn't see him hitting people that's enough. But the hit's aren't always there. And the good hitters will tell you that experience teaches you not to run around and press for the hits but to take the opportunities when they present themselves. I've never seen Kilger play a stretch of games where I thought to myself "this guy shouldn't be on the ice". Frankly, I think they're just prejudiced against him for some reason. It's as if they don't see him as anything other than a role player so he's the first guy they bounce when there's someone else they want to get into the lineup. Someone pointed out that he had 25 points in 43 games when he arrived. Instead of building on that and cultivating it, Therrien has been quick to squash it. For someone who sees the Habs braintrust as always and forever blowing opportunities to develop the younger guys they have, you seem to be accepting that they've actually done the right thing in constantly limiting and reducing Kilger's role. To me, Kilger's been more consistent than Bulis, who is now a fixture on Juneau's wing. So what is it about Kilger that makes him less worthy of the patience and attention that you'll surely demand if Jason Ward is called up? Kilger, though older, than Ward, is hardly incapable of further development, wouldn't you agree? I haven't read the rest of the thread just yet, JV, because I wanted to give you my two-cents worth first. Andre Savard knew he was getting a solid third-line player when he got him. However, he's been a bonus as far as I'm concerned. He's adequately filled in on the top-two lines when he's had to and when he's on top of his game, he's a physical presence as well. Why he's continually benched is beyond me. You pointed out, while he won't win you a lot of games, he doesn't lose games for you either. I just don't know why he's continually being benched. He's a solid, role-playing, physical forward who contributes. Just doesn't make any sense. Chers.
|
|
|
Post by MPLABBE on Dec 7, 2002 15:32:20 GMT -5
I agree with Jacques. Bulis has more talent than most 3rd liners. This is a kid who got a 0.6 PPG average with the Caps 2-3-4 years ago as I recall. There is no reason why he can't do the same with Koivu and Zed IMO. He HAS the talent. If we fall out of it, I want to see him get his shot with those two and Kilger with Juneau and Dackell.
|
|
|
Post by Rhiessan on Dec 8, 2002 1:29:57 GMT -5
In my humble opinion I leave Kilger on the first line. Not because he's gonna get 20 goals there but because he does two things better than any of our other forwards. He opens up more space than anyone else and who better to use this space more effectivly than Saks and Zedder. He is also one of the only forwards that can carry/push/drag/kick and power the puck over the red line or blue lines, whether it's to get the puck out to relieve pressure or in to create a deep forecheck or much needed line change. Not to mention who do you want sticking up for Saks and Zedder? Audette, Chow, Bulis...no Kilger is the best all around choice.
|
|
|
Post by PTH on Dec 8, 2002 11:37:31 GMT -5
Well, there's a consensus here - Kilger needs a home.
3d line winger, top 2 line winger who has to grind away, 4th line center to groom him for Juneau's role in a season and a half. But he needs a stable home.
Personally, I think giving Bulis a shot on the top 2 lines is worthwhile, Bulis hasa bit of adefensive conscience (he's the offensive guy on his current line though), and IMO doesn't have the grit or hands to really click with Koivu and Zed, but he can't be worse than Audette or Chow. Kilger playing alongside Juneau will learn how to play a solid defensive game, and I'd even tell him why he's being played there.
But hey, give him just about any stable role with a simple purpose, and play him.
If the Habs were regularly playing Bulis, Ribeiro, Kilger and Hainsey, I'd be a lot less worried about the long-term prospects for this team. We'd at least have some youth in the lineup. Of course, adding Malhotra and Asham would be even better..... a guy can dream, right ?
|
|