|
Post by UberCranky on Dec 2, 2002 10:44:13 GMT -5
This is got to be the biggest bunch of b*llSaperlipopette I have ever read from a paper. They rate Traverse and Brisebois above Koivu? Are they out of their freaken mind? Someone please tell me that I am misreading and mis-translating all this. PLEASE. Is there something beyond that has nothing to do with hockey? I don't want to play a certain "F" card but my God, what the hell are THEY watching? What kind of MORONS are they? No one in the league wanted Travesty for FREE an yet he is playing better then Koivu(and others)? They know as much about hockey as my dead hamster. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ www.cyberpresse.ca/reseau/sports/0212/spo_102120163455.html~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ La Press At the end of the two first months of the season, the Canadian rediscovers itself in a squeezed fight for a place with a view to the series éliminatoires. The last year, the Canadian had attained the series in extremis. It seems that it will be necessary the same effort kind in season end to return to the big dance of the spring. To similar date the last year, the Canadian presented nevertheless a better one to card (12-8-3-1) comparatively to his yield of 10-9-4-1 this season. The difference does not be situated some attacks since it marked three goals of more (64-61). But in defense, it some granted 16 of more (75-59). The steep-sided hidings against the Cut down Buffalo (6-1), the Flyers of Philadelphie (6-2 and 6-2), the Blues of St.Louis (5-2), the Devils of the New Jersey (5-1) and especially the Hurricanes of the Caroline (7-3) situate this raise of the goals granted. The return some forces Saku Koivu did not be in a position to to compensate for to the bad season beginning of José Théodore and equally to the poor performances of a team in research of an identity. Since the beginning of the season, the individual grades allow us to assert that Jeff Hackett was the only player without reproaches at the heart of this team. It is necessary to wonder where she some would be if André Savard had exchanged this custodian! Some attacks, duet zednik-koivu put the shoulder to the wheel without never to find a capable one of straight winger to complete their efforts on an uniform basis. The defensive trio formed of Juneau-Bulis one-Dackell equally accomplished good work. With the defenders, Andrei Markov proves itself a beautiful surprised one just as Patrick Crosses. But even if Patrice Brisebois is adequate, it is not the general that can give the tempo to a game. And, as a whole, this defensive body is not so sturdy. To all the matches, we attributed a grade of 1 to 10 to each of the players. Them average appears in the entitled picture «The bulletin». Here besides, our evaluation of each... - - - > 1. Jeff Hackett (8,7) - THIS IS the first one of class. As early as his first game, a victory of 3-2 to Detroit, it announced its colors while obtaining the first star. Of fact, it deserved the first star at the time of its four matches in October. And it did not slow down in November. His to card is of 5-3-2. But he must stop 93% of the directed rondelles towards him to deserve such a file. > 2. Andrei Markov (7,5) - It asserts himself some attacks by way of the better marker and meter with the backs of the Canadian. One rediscovers even his name among the leaders of the LNH some attacks. But one do not more talk about an one-dimensional player. It has in fact improved his defensive game and his to card of + 1 is worth him the confidence of its entraîneurs in the important positions. > 3. Rich individal Zednik (7,3) - It resumed where it had left the last season before to be put K. -O. by Kyle McLaren, Boston Bruins. It dominates the markers of the Canadian with 12 goals and directs itself towards a season of 40. It is without indisputably attacking it the most excessive one of the team. > 4. Patrick Traverse (7,3) - It began the season in the gradins, but as early as his entry in scene it asserted himself by his regularity. Its pass are precise some gone out of zone and it rarely is beaten in the positions to an against a. Of more, it is well served by his big reach. > 5. Patrice Brisebois (7,2) - THIS IS the liked evil of certain supporters. This is all simply that the expectations too students. This is not a great-super-vedette, but this is an effective defender that gives ice time of quality to its entraîneurs. While playing 24:24 minutes by game, it will commit errors. But with a yield of -2 facing the better elements of the adverse team, it is acceptable.
|
|
|
Post by UberCranky on Dec 2, 2002 10:44:57 GMT -5
> 6. Saku Koivu (7,2) - at the beginning of season, one felt sometimes an energy decrease with the captain of the Canadian, especially at the time of the third periods. But, since a certain time, it maintains his from beginning to end intensity. In his case, it is unbelievable. One never will not be able to say that it preaches by the example.
> 7. Joé Juneau (7,1) - THE EXPERIENCE of the left wing was disastrous in his case. To this stadium of his career, it is to his better in a defensive role. His vision of the game allows for him to neutralize the better ones attacking LNH in the pivot role of a defensive trio. Besides, a to card of + 1 in a defensive role témoigne of his effectiveness.
> 8. Jan Bulis (7,1) - It is the leader with the Canadian with a yield of + 4. But it is necessary for him again, to this stadium of his career, the presence of Juneau to give a direction to his game. In his defensive role, it puts to profit his big speed. Its occasions to mark are numerous, but one do not talk about a natural one to the approaches of the adverse net.
> 9. Yanic Perreault (6,9) - It marked five of its 11 goals in numerical advantage. This is equally a specialist of the placements in game with an effectiveness rate of 62%. This a player a lot more effective one to residence where his entraîneur can choose his opponent. That especially jumped to the eyes at the time of the visit of the Canadian to Boston where it finished his work day to -4.
> 10. Craig Rivet (6,9) - A chronic injury to a wrist removes him the capacity to be sturdy. His handling of the stick some suffers equally. But, as a whole, it accomplishes an honest very one so certain works evenings, as that was the case to Boston, it knows poor performances.
> 11. Doug Gilmour (6,9) - It did not advance at first season. But, during the course of the last matches, it knew a beautiful sequence with Perreault before to collapse to Boston. This is a player that again can help the cause of the Canadian. But the weight of the years left tracks and his energy level occasionally lowers.
> 12. José Théodore (6,8) - One was not accustomed the last season to classify it also far in our bulletin. But it knew a season beginning difficult. One talk about his technique, but this is especially his confidence that was downwards. One has the impression that it put himself a huge burden on the shoulders. On the other hand, it does not be necessary to forget that the cream always has tendency to date back to the surface in the world of the sport.
> 13. Andreas Dackell (6,8) - THIS IS an honest player that does not do waves. But this season, it knew some bad sequences in defensive that did to lose patience to his entraîneur. And, just as Bulis, it does not seem there to have salvation for him when it is not in the presence of Juneau.
> 14. Karl Dykhuis (6,6) - One tends him to launch the rock easily because it is not so effective with the rondelle. Its wingers never will be its friends because it tends to do for them the pass by the glassy bay. But, as a whole, this is a reliable guy in his territory where his speed helps it to recover the free rondelles.
> 15. Oleg Petrov (6,5) - Where is passed his beautiful intensity of the last years? Its efforts are sporadic. It nevertheless had got used to us a beautiful consistency. To be effective, it must want the rondelle and exercise a constant pressure on the adverse defenders. Without these qualities, it not at all there has any salvation for such a player in the LNH.
> 16. Stéphane Quintal (6,5) - It knew a slow season beginning. It is not the quickest one and it suffered at the time of the first month of the harsh application of the regulations. Of more, in company of Ron Hainsey, one felt than it wanted some to do too. But, during the course of the last month, it was more effective when it contented doing the simple things. Doubled to Dykhuis, one feels it more to the comfort.
> 17. Randy McKay (6,4) - THIS IS a vétéran that knows to play, but it is limited because following the example of Gilmour, the time began to éroder his talent. Besides, one attempted to double it to Gilmour and the experience did not be conclusive. It is more to his place on a fourth trio. Of more, it can give a hand on specialized unities.
> 18. Chad Kilger (6,3) - In appearance, it possesses the trumps to be an impact player. But it contents playing a trains quiet. It puts himself therefore in a role of réserviste. The following step can well to be worth him a rétrogradation in the leagues minors.
|
|
|
Post by UberCranky on Dec 2, 2002 10:45:09 GMT -5
> 19. Mike Ribeiro (6,5) - Injured to the entraînement camp, it really had not the luck to emphasize itself with the team since his return to the game. This is not while playing some minutes by game that it will do himself justice. One hopes only that the leaders of the Canadian will not pass next to a beautiful offensive talent!
> 20. Mariusz Czerkawski (6,2) - Incapable to play left wing, it did not know to maintain the rhythm on the straight flank on the trio Koivu and Zednik. One feels that it possesses a certain talent when there is space to maneuver. But it does not seem capable of create his space when the opponent closes the game.
> 21. Donald Audette (6,0) - A slow season beginning was worth him a stay in the gradins. To his return, it knew some good matches. But its efforts lack regularity. This is not a player so present in defensive zone or again in central zone. One can live with this reality. But it must be more present in offensive zone. With only two goals and four pass, it does not produce according to the expectations.
> 22. Bill Lindsay (6,0) - It plays very little. Nevertheless, at the time of its rare presences, it shows a beautiful intensity. This is a team guy that understands his role. If it could play more often, one would have maybe beautiful things to say to his subject.
> 23. Sylvain Blouin (6,0) - THIS IS a policeman that will pass surely to the squad of the detectives because it does not clothe so often the uniform.
> 24. Ron Hainsey (5,5) - It cost a goal as early as his first presence of the season to New York and it did not never rediscover his confidence. It appeared slow at the time of his passage with the Canadian. Nevertheless, this is not the case in the American League. For the moment, it cannot evict the three left-handed defenders with the Canadian.
==============================================
A bulletin rather harsh for certain players as Perrault, Koivu or Brisebois; I am not totally agreed with him. On the other hand, how can one to judge Hainsey in the classification with the number of game that it played. Similar for Ribeiro.
|
|
|
Post by Doc Holliday on Dec 2, 2002 10:59:59 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by The New Guy on Dec 2, 2002 11:07:03 GMT -5
Okay...
Who's been getting the french press drunk while they write their articles?
Seriously though... this article, Pam and gentlemen, is the the most copious quantity of male bovine excriment I have seen in a long time.
|
|
|
Post by Doc Holliday on Dec 2, 2002 11:26:21 GMT -5
Okay... Who's been getting the french press drunk while they write their articles? I often read how the "french media" is this and the "french press" is that... Just to clear things up a little, the "fench press" is not a small united front... Just like for the english press it has it's buffoons and it's good writers and there certainly is more then one opinion coming out of it. Tagging this as representative of the french press is like saying the English media is well represented by Al Strachan....
|
|
|
Post by Ged on Dec 2, 2002 11:35:36 GMT -5
Continuing on the excrement theme. Horse hockey. Cow cookies & donkey dung. That report isn't worth the paper it's written on. I'd take Colonel Potter behind the bench at this point in a heartbeat.
|
|
|
Post by MPLABBE on Dec 2, 2002 11:50:04 GMT -5
Funny in my paper they did not put the grades. Ha, what a joke that piece is. Markov deserves a 9, Zednik and Koivu AT LEAST a 8.5(christ, one is on pace for 40 goals and the other for about 70-75 points), no way does Theodore deserve a 6.8...6 MAXIMUM. Quintal a 6.5? what the bloody hell? 5 maximum Hainsey the lowest note? based on what? 20 minutes of ice time in his last 4 games? he was ONLY -1 with ZERO PP time after his first game it seems What a pile of garbage
|
|
|
Post by The New Guy on Dec 2, 2002 12:36:36 GMT -5
I don't mean to sound anti-french or anything. It was just a comment on recent events and the like. Wasn't it Demer's (a member of the french media) who was busy extolling the virtues of Traverse on national TV? And one of them picked Traverse as the first star about a week ago.
It just seems like lately someone's been spiking their Wheaties with hard liquor. Either that, or Traverse has come into some very incriminating pictures.
Of course there are idiots in the English media as well. And poor stories. Just about anything printed in Toronto has about the equivalent merit of this article (-:. Like I said, just seems to be lately everyones been jumping on the Traverse bandwagon.
|
|
|
Post by MPLABBE on Dec 2, 2002 12:52:23 GMT -5
Yeah Demers is the one who picked Traverse as the first star of the ATL game
|
|
|
Post by Patty Roy on Dec 2, 2002 13:15:30 GMT -5
Problems i have with this list...
1. Traverse is way too high. He's played better than i would have expected from him (which isn't saying much), but to rank him ahead of guys like Koivu, Brisebois, Perreault, etc...is a joke.
2. Gilmour and Perreault have the same ranking? Sorry, but Yanic has more than double Dougie's points and is the team's second leading scorer. I know Yanic isn't the most popular of Habs players, but where would we be without his offence?
3. Craig Rivet is too high. I like this guy as much as the next Habs fan, but i think he's been extremely mediocre lately. Too bad we lost Robidas, cause if we still had him i would probably want to see Robidas get his wrist fixed, but with the current lack of d-depth, what choice do they have but to play Rivet, who is clearly far from 100%.
4. Dackell is too high. Mediocre offensive contributions and he has to take some heat for our terrible PK.
5. Ribeiro doesn't deserved to be ranked as he hasn't played enough.
|
|
|
Post by darz on Dec 2, 2002 13:50:12 GMT -5
koivu, zednik, markov got to be the top 3. koivu might not be scoring the lights out, but game in and game out he is our best player. traverse has had a few games where he has looked o.k., but i assume when souray comes back, and hainsey gets called up, traverse is going back to the press box.
|
|
|
Post by MPLABBE on Dec 2, 2002 13:59:03 GMT -5
I think Dykhuis will be the guy eating pop corn.
Traverse has been playing better.
|
|
|
Post by rocky on Dec 2, 2002 14:15:19 GMT -5
This is far worse that the crap that we all lace the Toronto media about. This is sick, this is wrong, this is depressing. Traverse is an absolute disgrace. We've had some poor management, poor coaching before, but nothing near as bad as these wankers who are all wonderful according to the french media. Man, the Montreal management should be getting blistered in the press everyday of the week, but with these clows printing total nonsense they feel safe. Fifty years of being a Hab fan makes my blood red, white, and blue, other than that I'd be gonzo. Sorry, but that Traverse rating was just too hard to swallow for me.
|
|
|
Post by darz on Dec 2, 2002 14:15:57 GMT -5
I think Dykhuis will be the guy eating pop corn. Traverse has been playing better. when souray AND hainsey come back, i think traverse, dykhuis and quintal will be rotated in the line up as no.6, with quintal playing more than the other two, til we can get rid of one.
|
|
|
Post by MPLABBE on Dec 2, 2002 14:25:21 GMT -5
when souray AND hainsey come back, i think traverse, dykhuis and quintal will be rotated in the line up as no.6, with quintal playing more than the other two, til we can get rid of one. Could be. But knowing the Habs they will do anything to keep the great Traverse and Bobby Orr clone Dykhuis in the lineup and that stiff Hainsey out
|
|
|
Post by MPLABBE on Dec 2, 2002 14:26:39 GMT -5
and you know what is funny...translate Patrick Traverse into english...''Patrick Crosses'' I chuckle every time I see that
|
|
|
Post by darz on Dec 2, 2002 14:27:58 GMT -5
Could be. But knowing the Habs they will do anything to keep the great Traverse and Bobby Orr clone Dykhuis in the lineup and that stiff Hainsey out i don't know if i should laugh or cry about that?
|
|
|
Post by PTH on Dec 2, 2002 16:35:11 GMT -5
Actually, I think the article is pretty much bang on. HA, hang in there a minute before banning me from the board.... This isn't a 1-time rating from La Presse, it's the sum of their evaluations from all the games to date. And each reporter has his own way of evaluating - but several evaluate as relates to expectations, and the guys role. In other words, the ranking doesn't mean Traverse is better than Koivu, but it says that Traverse is a better #7 defenseman than Saku is a #1 center, and that I have to agree with. Keep in mind, I hate Traverse, I really do. So do a lot of other peole - which also means everyone expects him to be awful. When he's almost not puke-worthy, people are pleasantly surprised, hence the decent marks. BTW: I'm with Doc about French media this, or French media that. People make it sound like there's a mob-type effect with everyone thinking the same way. For some reason, those are usually the ones who can't read French....
|
|
|
Post by Yossarian on Dec 2, 2002 17:08:08 GMT -5
I don't know, maybe its just me, or something was lost in the translation. But to rate Koivu a 7.2 because he noticed that his energy level hasn't been that great in the third period? I know the guy is probably writing from a hockey perspective and is lost in his own little hockey world, but if what he says is true (which I don't entirely agree with), what else would he expect from a guy who is less than a year removed from having his body pumped with toxic chemicals that after each treatment leaves you weak and nauseous for days. Obviously this guys knows nothing about anything, let alone having to deal with an illness as serious as cancer, and the toll it takes on patients. Saku is in remission, but he is not yet cured. Knowing that he is still living day to day with a cancer as serious as the one he has, just playing in this league is nothing short of amazing. Koivu, to be playing at the level he is playing at, deserves a 10, anyway you look at it, and certainly shouldn't be ranked behind some of the few he has been. What a tool!!!!
|
|
|
Post by MPLABBE on Dec 2, 2002 17:15:12 GMT -5
For those who are wondering, this guy is not the beat writer(s). He just sits at home and watches the game on TV and gives an analysis of it in the paper the next day.
|
|
|
Post by habadabaddoo on Dec 2, 2002 19:56:07 GMT -5
what a load of doggie dodo. Thsy sure can't be watching the same games we are seeing. This is why we do not see any rookies in the line up. Also they probably forget that a lot of people have satelite dishes and see more games than before
|
|
|
Post by BadCompany on Dec 2, 2002 20:23:45 GMT -5
Actually, I think the article is pretty much bang on. HA, hang in there a minute before banning me from the board.... This isn't a 1-time rating from La Presse, it's the sum of their evaluations from all the games to date. And each reporter has his own way of evaluating - but several evaluate as relates to expectations, and the guys role. In other words, the ranking doesn't mean Traverse is better than Koivu, but it says that Traverse is a better #7 defenseman than Saku is a #1 center, and that I have to agree with. Keep in mind, I hate Traverse, I really do. So do a lot of other peole - which also means everyone expects him to be awful. When he's almost not puke-worthy, people are pleasantly surprised, hence the decent marks. BTW: I'm with Doc about French media this, or French media that. People make it sound like there's a mob-type effect with everyone thinking the same way. For some reason, those are usually the ones who can't read French.... Yeah, I think that's exactly it. Even the most anti-Traverse people on this board, have to admit that Traverse has done what was expected of him this year. Granted, the expectations were low, but isn't that the point of a "team?" Everybody has a role, and plays that "role" to the best they can? Patrick Traverse has been the 6th-7th defenseman, and as far as 6th-7th defensemen go, he has been quite okay. Even good. If we wanted him to be our 3rd or 4th defenseman, on the other hand, then his ranking would be much lower. I can quibble with some minor details on the rankings, but I don't see much reason to get too excited over it, one way or the other.
|
|
|
Post by wade on Dec 2, 2002 20:43:46 GMT -5
Hey guys!!! maybe traverse is actually really good!!!!! no wait.. who am i kidding???
|
|
|
Post by Doc Holliday on Dec 2, 2002 20:58:49 GMT -5
Actually, I think the article is pretty much bang on. HA, hang in there a minute before banning me from the board.... This isn't a 1-time rating from La Presse, it's the sum of their evaluations from all the games to date. And each reporter has his own way of evaluating - but several evaluate as relates to expectations, and the guys role. In other words, the ranking doesn't mean Traverse is better than Koivu, but it says that Traverse is a better #7 defenseman than Saku is a #1 center, and that I have to agree with. Keep in mind, I hate Traverse, I really do. So do a lot of other peole - which also means everyone expects him to be awful. When he's almost not puke-worthy, people are pleasantly surprised, hence the decent marks. BTW: I'm with Doc about French media this, or French media that. People make it sound like there's a mob-type effect with everyone thinking the same way. For some reason, those are usually the ones who can't read French.... Interesting angle PTH. Still Traverse ranking is off IMO. I can agree that he was OK at his particular job but there is no way I put him up there with Richard Zednik, Markov, Breezer and Koivu. I would put him in the Perreault area. Another guy who's ranked too high is Gilmour. I just can't see why he would get a better rank then Chow or Audette. Why is McKay so low? He has more goals then Audette, Chow, Gilmour or Dackell, provides a good 2way game and plays a physical game... IMO he's one of the few guy on this team that does plays his role. Koivu is the main reason why Zed is finally having his breakthrough season and he made Chow and Audette look a little less flat... He's making his linesmate better and that is the sign of a good first line center.... The jury is still out but Saku is getting there IMO...
|
|
|
Post by UberCranky on Dec 2, 2002 21:00:34 GMT -5
PTH wrote:
HA, hang in there a minute before banning me from the board....
This isn't a 1-time rating from La Presse, it's the sum of their evaluations from all the games to date. And each reporter has his own way of evaluating - but several evaluate as relates to expectations, and the guys role.
In other words, the ranking doesn't mean Traverse is better than Koivu, but it says that Traverse is a better #7 defenseman than Saku is a #1 center, and that I have to agree with. Keep in mind, I hate Traverse, I really do. So do a lot of other peole - which also means everyone expects him to be awful. When he's almost not puke-worthy, people are pleasantly surprised, hence the decent marks.
BTW: I'm with Doc about French media this, or French media that. People make it sound like there's a mob-type effect with everyone thinking the same way. For some reason, those are usually the ones who can't read French.... BadCompany wrote:
Yeah, I think that's exactly it. Even the most anti-Traverse people on this board, have to admit that Traverse has done what was expected of him this year. Granted, the expectations were low, but isn't that the point of a "team?" Everybody has a role, and plays that "role" to the best they can? Patrick Traverse has been the 6th-7th defenseman, and as far as 6th-7th defensemen go, he has been quite okay. Even good. If we wanted him to be our 3rd or 4th defenseman, on the other hand, then his ranking would be much lower.
I can quibble with some minor details on the rankings, but I don't see much reason to get too excited over it, one way or the other.My French is not that good so I need to understand and clarify something here. DID the reporter ACTUALLY SAY that he is comparing the player to their previous years performances and rating them in that manner? Because the way I understand it is that he is evaluating the entire team. The points are relative to the other players. In other words, Koivu is playing as well as Traverse. *beat my head with a bat* The reporter is saying the “individual grades”. He is summing up the individual performances per game, summing them up and averaging them. Nowhere do I see or understand that he saying that he is grading them within their capabilities. If MY understanding of his evaluations are correct then BadCompany, are you prepared to say that Traverse(7.2) has played better then Koivu(7.2)? Are you prepared to say that Brisebois(7.3) is playing better then Koivu(7.2)? What about you PTH, if I am correct in my understanding of this article, are you prepared to say that Traverse is playing as well as Koivu? As the rating suggest. Doc, you are a francophone, tell me that I am wrong in my understanding of the ratings.
|
|
|
Post by MPLABBE on Dec 2, 2002 21:55:26 GMT -5
callis... de tabarn...pourquoi personne comprends le maudit francais ;D
the quote from the article:
''À tous les matches, nous avons attribué une note de 1 à 10 à chacun des joueurs. Leur moyenne apparaît dans le tableau intitulé «Le bulletin». Voici par ailleurs, notre évaluation de chacun...''
It's the culmination of the notes the reporter gave each player after each game. Nothing compared to last year
And I am glad Doc mentionned McKay. For a guy playing with a broken bone in his foot, almost saw his daughter die and his adjusting to new digs, he has done his job IMO
Besides, we got him for the end of the season/playoffs.
|
|
|
Post by PTH on Dec 2, 2002 22:02:46 GMT -5
"Nowhere do I see or understand that he saying that he is grading them within their capabilities. "
True - I'm going off a LaPresse article I read a few years ago about that very grading system, when I think someone complained that Quintal was getting ranked too high.
The key thing is that like it or not, players are ranked according to their roles. Blouin deserves a 9/10 on a night where he plays 5 minutes, lays out 3 big hits and beats up some goon - yet overall his play isn't nearly as good as Koivu's might be that night - but Koivu is the #1 center and we expect him to perform offensively day in and day out, so Koivu might just get a 7 while getting a couple of points.
There's nothing about comparing to last year...
|
|
|
Post by PTH on Dec 2, 2002 22:05:37 GMT -5
Doc - I can't argue with you on the exact rankings, I was just trying to argue that the rankings do make some sense. There is a rationale behind it all.
I for one haven't seen enough games this year to really know how players are performing relative to one another. That's what comes with the moral high ground of saying I refuse to pay for Cable to pay those damned millionnaires ;-)
|
|
|
Post by MPLABBE on Dec 2, 2002 22:12:30 GMT -5
"Nowhere do I see or understand that he saying that he is grading them within their capabilities. " True - I'm going off a LaPresse article I read a few years ago about that very grading system, when I think someone complained that Quintal was getting ranked too high. lol...It was him...who says players don't read the papers...LOL
|
|