|
Post by MPLABBE on Nov 14, 2002 18:34:59 GMT -5
Zednik-Koivu-Audette Chow-Perreault-Petrov Juneau-Gilmour-McKay Kilger-Bulis-Dackell
Comments?
|
|
|
Post by GARB08 on Nov 14, 2002 18:48:11 GMT -5
Bulis should be on the number one line. The third line is a good checking line and the second line is ok but could use a little size...But so can everythign else on our team.
|
|
|
Post by Patty Roy on Nov 14, 2002 19:03:32 GMT -5
Zednik-Koivu-Audette Chow-Perreault-Petrov Juneau-Gilmour-McKay Kilger-Bulis-Dackell
Comments? Not bad...at least the right 2 guys are sitting...but what has Bulis done to deserve being demoted to the 4th line? All in all though i think its an improvement over the lines weve seen the last few weeks. I never thought that Chow worked on the "top line" and i figured Gilmour would eventually find his way back to C.
|
|
|
Post by JohnnyVerdun on Nov 14, 2002 19:15:14 GMT -5
It all kind of sucks, frankly.
Juneau and his line have been playing excellent hockey. If anything, what should happen is that Bulis should be rewarded for his effort with a shot on the 2nd line and Kilger should slide into his spot next to Juneau. As it is, what's really happening is that Juneau is being told to step aside for the underperforming Doug Gilmour, Czerkawski's being bumped from a line that's been generating a fair bit offensively so that they can try and get Audette on track, and Bulis gets shunted down the chart to center the 4th for 7 minutes a night (plus PK duty). So, the way I see it, two underperforming vets (DG & DA) are determining the set up rather than the guys who are playing well. That's backwards.
If it works I'll be surprised. But hey, I've been surprised before.
|
|
|
Post by Viper on Nov 14, 2002 19:23:02 GMT -5
This is the typical brain dead plan of attack by MT what an idiot. Builis play's excellent so ends up on the fourth line audette sucks royally so he ends up on the first line chow Perreault and Petrov should look nice getting knocked around the ice half the night. The Bulis Kilger Dacks line intrigues me though i'd like to see that as the second unit. unless MT plans on rolling High ho silver again could be ugly if that's the case.
|
|
|
Post by JacquesInFL on Nov 14, 2002 19:41:50 GMT -5
I second what JV, Viper et al just said. Like Johnny Verdun, MT seems to be catering to RatDog and Mr. April-May. My fingers are crossed for two points tomorrow, but this looks like poorly conceived strategy.
Yes, MThead is to coaching (zone coverage, transition, line balance & ice time logic) what Euclid is to geometry and Bayes is to statistics...
|
|
|
Post by MPLABBE on Nov 14, 2002 19:43:55 GMT -5
I don't get it as well The top 2 lines don't bother me...but the last 2 do...why not go Bulis-Juneau-Dackell and Kilger-Gilmour-McKay? the defensive line is kept together and you have a grind line. There is no slow line(like the 3rd line we will have) and those guys should be able to create a little but of offence.
|
|
|
Post by BadCompany on Nov 14, 2002 20:01:22 GMT -5
I second what JV, Viper et al just said. Like Johnny Verdun, MT seems to be catering to RatDog and Mr. April-May. My fingers are crossed for two points tomorrow, but this looks like poorly conceived strategy. Yes, MThead is to coaching (zone coverage, transition, line balance & ice time logic) what Euclid is to geometry and Bayes is to statistics... RatDog... Hee, hee, hee... I like it! ;D I will be real interested to see how this works this weekend. Normally, you should give somebody the benefit of the doubt, and who knows, it may work great, and we may sweep the Devils - not like we could play any worse, now is it? But if MT starts changing them up, 10 minutes into the game, then we will really know he doesn't have a clue.. (Down HA, down...) While I wouldn't have broken up the 1st or 3rd lines myself (cause, you know, I'm like a master coach or something... ) the team HAS been playing very badly, getting horrendously outshot and all, so a shakeup was probably needed. Still, not the way I would have done it: Zednik - Koivu - McKay : I still like this idea, and I think it was seriously underated when it was together. You got a north-south skating shooter (Zednik), an east-west skating playmaker (Koivu) and a stationary screen in front of the net (McKay). Perfect balance, in my opinion. Having Zednik and Audette on the same line, to me anyways, defeats the purpose, because they are both shooters. Bulis - Perrault - Czerkawski : This line needs a tonne of work, but given our options, I don't know what else to do. Bulis is the north-south shooter, Perrault is the playmaker (in that he controls the faceoffs - I know he isn't a natural playmaker, though he is somewhat underated) and Chow... well, I'm not sure what Chow does. Another shooter/playmaker in the Perrault mold, I guess. Juneau - Gilmour - Dackell : I actually don't think this would be a bad line. Lots of defensive awareness (assuming Dougie concentrates on playing defense) with just enough pop to scare opposing teams if they get a little careless. Sure, its small, going up against the beasts in the east, but again, we have limited options here... Petrov - Kilger - Audette : Maybe Lindsay instead of Audette. 4th line should be your crash and bang energy line. Petrov brings energy, Kilger brings crash, as does Lindsay. Only reason I would even think of putting Audette there, is to maybe use him on the 2nd powerplay unit. Maybe. A recent trend in coaching, started I think by Scotty Bowman (I think all recent trends in coaching were started by Scotty Bowman) has coaches thinking not in terms of line trios, but in terms of line duos. What can TWO players paired together do together, as opposed to three. In this respect, looking at my lines, Zednik and Koivu are the duo that are paired together, and who compliment each other on the 1st line, Juneau and Dackell on the 3rd line, and I guess Bulis and Perrault and Kilger and Audette for the 2nd and 4th lines respectively. The 3rd player on the line is extra, who you hope doesn't get too much in the way of the first two, or who has a very specific, role. Like McKay, who should be told to just go stand in front of the net on every single offensive play. I would guess then, that the goal behind this strategy, is to set up your duos, and then find the appropriate support players for those duos. Does that make any sense? Do you think MT and Savard should be trying for something like that?
|
|
|
Post by Doc Holliday on Nov 14, 2002 20:29:24 GMT -5
I think it's worth a second look... First off everybody remembers how Gilmour hates to play on the wing and his return to center was to be expected. When he signed to come to Montreal it was with the promise that he would be a center. Make no mistake Therrien couldn't keep him a LW forever and anyway his inept play as a LW on an offensive line was a problem. Gilmour still provides leadership and character so demoting him to center a checking line is a good move in itself. Gilmour's spot is open, Bulis plays on the left wing and he's one of our best player this year, seems natural that Bulis would step up... Not so fast. You got another situation to adress on that team and it's Donald Audette with his nice contract still good for 3 seasons. Savard can't trade him (he tried for weeks...) and at 37K a game, he's got to find a way to use him. You know Audette can be a fan favorite and he can score 25-30 goals on a scoring line. You start thinking and you know your first line works well, but you also know it's got nothing to do with Czerkowsky since a monkey could play with Koivu and Zed and get some points. So you stick Audette there with the hope that, like for Chow, it's gonna get Audette out of his slump and you're gonna start getting a little bit of return on your investment. So we now have Audette on the first, Gilmour on the 3rd, an open spot on the second and Chow without a spot. What do you know, Chow was acquired in the first place by Savard to be the 2nd line LW. What a coincidence!!! Heck now that Chow seems to be out of his funk, maybe he'll continue to do OK in the spot he was suppose to be in. Bulis and Kilger together... mmm! Think about it guys, if they click together don't these 2 represent the core of a darn good line for years to come... Fast, big, rough, good in one-on-one... If MT can roll out these 4 lines with good ice time, it might be crazy enough to work... ... ...( trying to be positive... )
|
|
|
Post by Viper on Nov 14, 2002 21:39:40 GMT -5
Doc your Final thought's on Kilger Bulis are similar to my train of thought but i'd like to see them get a fair shake especially Jan who has been excellent thus far and by no means deserves a cut in ice time with a demotion to the fourth line.
|
|
|
Post by Doc Holliday on Nov 14, 2002 21:54:20 GMT -5
Viper, I think MT will spread the icetime... Call me crazy but the "second line" could be the one getting the least 5 on 5 icetime.
|
|
|
Post by MPLABBE on Nov 14, 2002 21:55:04 GMT -5
Could very well be Doc. Plus the 4th line will kill penalties so they'll get ice time.
|
|
|
Post by MPLABBE on Nov 14, 2002 22:04:58 GMT -5
MT:
''with 2 games in 2 nights, we will roll 4 lines''
Hope that answers some of your questions.
|
|
|
Post by seventeen on Nov 14, 2002 22:11:11 GMT -5
Help me through this guys. All the time that lines have been posted, I thought perhaps it was Marc's idea of starting a debate. It's starting to sink into my fuzzy wee head that the source for these lines is the team itself. Am I right? If so, the reason it's taken me so long to clue in is that I couldn't imagine a team posting their line-up before they had to. Why would you give the opposition any heads-up at all? Please tell me I'm wrong.
|
|
|
Post by HFTO on Nov 14, 2002 22:21:05 GMT -5
Clearly something had to be done I guess we'll see how good of a monkey Audette will make! HFTO
|
|
|
Post by Doc Holliday on Nov 14, 2002 22:21:39 GMT -5
Help me through this guys. All the time that lines have been posted, I thought perhaps it was Marc's idea of starting a debate. It's starting to sink into my fuzzy wee head that the source for these lines is the team itself. Am I right? If so, the reason it's taken me so long to clue in is that I couldn't imagine a team posting their line-up before they had to. Why would you give the opposition any heads-up at all? Please tell me I'm wrong. Well not many teams has the "Therrien-surprise-lineup-mixup" strategy... Normally you pretty much know in advance what the other team's lineup will be. But not for us no siiiiiireee... we got MT... the brain... "...aha!, tonight I will surprise them and break the 2 lines that worked... I will play a RW at the LW, a center on LW and a LW on center... this will suprise the other coach... He will never guess my lineup... I am the mad-coach-of the opera... moooooo-hooo-hooo-ha-ha! "
|
|
|
Post by seventeen on Nov 14, 2002 22:33:26 GMT -5
Well not many teams has the "Therrien-surprise-lineup-mixup" strategy... Normally you pretty much know in advance what the other team's lineup will be. But not for us no siiiiiireee... we got MT... the brain... "...aha!, tonight I will surprise them and break the 2 lines that worked... I will play a RW at the LW, a center on LW and a LW on center... this will suprise the other coach... He will never guess my lineup... I am the mad-coach-of the opera... moooooo-hooo-hooo-ha-ha! " Do you think we finally have a nickname for MT? The Phantom?
|
|
|
Post by PTH on Nov 14, 2002 23:50:32 GMT -5
Just saw those lines.
Ouch, they suck.
The break up most combinations that have done well, and basically mean everyone out there will be confused.
I think MT is doing very badly in the tough spot AS put him in, with like 5 copies of basically the same guy.
If wonder if we can get insurance to cover Audette's salary if he retires ? I mean, he's obviously lost it....
|
|
|
Post by GoMtl on Nov 15, 2002 0:06:20 GMT -5
well what did mckay do to be put on the 4th in the first place, get injured to start the season? i think these lines might work. sure it sucks that bulis has been demoted but audette needs to get some playing time (i wouldnt have broken up the first line to get him in there, but he could have been placed on the second). let's see how things go tomorrow night, and then we can agree with or tear apart therrien like everyone seems to want to do these days.
|
|
|
Post by Habs_fan_in_LA on Nov 15, 2002 4:37:54 GMT -5
I've stopped speculating on the lines. It's like rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic. We need bigger forwards who can skate fast with the puck and hit and knock down the other team. The titanic needed better deckchairs that could float.
Moving smurfs from one line to another still leaves you with smurfs. If you put lipstick on Bonnie Lindros and move her to another row of seats, she's still Bonnie Lindros.
|
|
|
Post by UberCranky on Nov 15, 2002 5:45:49 GMT -5
I've stopped speculating on the lines. It's like rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic. We need bigger forwards who can skate fast with the puck and hit and knock down the other team. The titanic needed better deckchairs that could float. Moving smurfs from one line to another still leaves you with smurfs. If you put lipstick on Bonnie Lindros and move her to another row of seats, she's still Bonnie Lindros. How can one speculate on lines when a clown is juggling them?
|
|
|
Post by MPLABBE on Nov 15, 2002 6:53:06 GMT -5
Help me through this guys. All the time that lines have been posted, I thought perhaps it was Marc's idea of starting a debate. It's starting to sink into my fuzzy wee head that the source for these lines is the team itself. Am I right? If so, the reason it's taken me so long to clue in is that I couldn't imagine a team posting their line-up before they had to. Why would you give the opposition any heads-up at all? Please tell me I'm wrong. no, it's MT's new lines!
|
|
|
Post by Rhiessan on Nov 15, 2002 7:05:14 GMT -5
Bowman did this to compliment his left wing lock, which of course is a SYSTEM and we know Montreal doesn't have just one. Our "system" seems to depend on which forwards are on the ice with which defencemen and if we acually scored the first goal(not often). Now as far as lines go I agree with the McKay on the 1rst line and if not him then Kilger(try turning Kilger loose say to him go in crash everyone in site get the puck give it to Saks go to the net) someone to make room for Zeddy and Saks. 2nd line's a tough one but I go with Chow-Yanni-Petrov, that leaves Bulis-Juneau-Dackel(leave this line alone) and Kilger/McKay-Gilmour-Audette. Now my question is what happens when Ribeiro comes back does MT just start picking from a hat or what? Oh and one more thing Quintal is horrible send him down to Hamilton to learn own zone coverage who says old dogs can't..........learn something!!!
|
|
|
Post by MPLABBE on Nov 15, 2002 7:20:40 GMT -5
Ribs will probably get more than his share of pressbox time and when we play a big tough team will be scratched for Lindsay and/or Blouin
|
|
|
Post by Boston_Habs on Nov 15, 2002 9:19:42 GMT -5
Why did Savard pick up the option on Gilmour? Why? Why? I begged him not to do it, but he did it anyway. Now he's nothing but a problem.
A lot of these line combinations are predicated on giving Gilmour the ice time and linemates he clearly doesn't deserve. This is the downside of loading up on too many vets, but for some reason MT has no problems benching Audette. Gilmour, on the other hand, seems untouchable.
Things would be so much easier if Dougie was out of the picture.
|
|
|
Post by HabBoy on Nov 15, 2002 10:41:01 GMT -5
Looks like the Habs are still trying to make a gourmet chicken salad outta chicken feces!!
No matter how you slice it, it still stinks.
I say Audette better get at least a point tonight, or, thats it...later with him.
I do like the suggestion of Gilmour centering Mackay and Kilger, sounds a bit intruiging!
|
|
|
Post by Habs_fan_in_LA on Nov 15, 2002 15:23:23 GMT -5
I've seen more thought put into setting up lines by Cheech and Chong in "Up in Smoke".
|
|
|
Post by MPLABBE on Nov 15, 2002 17:37:58 GMT -5
Why did Savard pick up the option on Gilmour? Why? Why? I begged him not to do it, but he did it anyway. Now he's nothing but a problem. A lot of these line combinations are predicated on giving Gilmour the ice time and linemates he clearly doesn't deserve. This is the downside of loading up on too many vets, but for some reason MT has no problems benching Audette. Gilmour, on the other hand, seems untouchable. Things would be so much easier if Dougie was out of the picture. probably because our number 1 center has a history of injuries and was fighting cancer a few shorts months ago?
|
|
|
Post by UberCranky on Nov 15, 2002 22:51:41 GMT -5
RatDog... Hee, hee, hee... I like it! ;D I will be real interested to see how this works this weekend. Normally, you should give somebody the benefit of the doubt, and who knows, it may work great, and we may sweep the Devils - not like we could play any worse, now is it? But if MT starts changing them up, 10 minutes into the game, then we will really know he doesn't have a clue.. (Down HA, down...) then we will really know he doesn't have a clue.. (Down HA, down...)Do you need more proof?
|
|
|
Post by MPLABBE on Nov 15, 2002 22:54:49 GMT -5
He changed them..well about 25 minutes in
|
|