|
Post by Viper on Nov 9, 2002 1:18:41 GMT -5
I must openly admit i am not a fan by any standard and when he came in to replace Hainsey i believe that was a huge mistake by the organization which has shattered Ron's confidence and resulted in his inconsistent "fearful" effort's lately. That being said i can't really say Traverse has been absolutely horrible since coming in.
I would definately feel more comfortable right now with him in the lineup than Q-Ball. I also almost fell out of my seat when he split the d the other night and hit the post i was thinking why the hell can't we get that kind of effort from our forward's. All in all i would just like to let the board know that even though Him replacing Ron pisses me off as it should be Q-ball in the minor's he's been a pleasant surprise to me.
|
|
|
Post by montreal on Nov 9, 2002 2:18:15 GMT -5
I must openly admit i am not a fan by any standard and when he came in to replace Hainsey i believe that was a huge mistake by the organization which has shattered Ron's confidence and resulted in his inconsistent "fearful" effort's lately. That being said i can't really say Traverse has been absolutely horrible since coming in. I would definately feel more comfortable right now with him in the lineup than Q-Ball. I also almost fell out of my seat when he split the d the other night and hit the post i was thinking why the hell can't we get that kind of effort from our forward's. All in all i would just like to let the board know that even though Him replacing Ron pisses me off as it should be Q-ball in the minor's he's been a pleasant surprise to me. Yea I hear ya. I am having a hard time saying this, but Traverse hasn't looked too bad. Lets remember he's a 7th defencemen that has been in and out of the lineup so many times, they probably don't even have to tell him when he's benched, just a nod from Therrien and he knows its off to the press box for who knows how long. If Quintal gets his game back from last year, ( I really hope so) it wont be so bad. We could use his size and toughness, its just that his crappy play has me worried. He has to start clearing the front of the net, cause no one is doing that, so maybe our biggest defencemen will start the new trend. Plus I do look forward to seeing Quintal paired with Souray when he comes back. As for Traverse, I remember when he first got here, he made this end to end rush and scored. I thought I was having a flash back to Malakov days. ;D Anyway, the one thing that really has impressed me with Traverse, is I have seen him taking the body, which I never saw him do much off or if he did it was a scary site (or laughable if you were on the other team). If Traverse falls apart, then Hainsey will most likely get the call.
|
|
|
Post by UberCranky on Nov 9, 2002 4:55:16 GMT -5
It's the type of game that Traverse play's that makes him attractive to our coaching staff. Safe, no risk hockey, do the minimum, get rid of the puck, don’t join the rush, stay behind hockey.. Coach’potatoe Greens ideal mobile cone.
Traverse gives hope to every junior defenseman in the known universe in that if you just can achieve a level of mediocrity then you have a future in the NHL. And if by some fortuitous event you are playing for the Hab’s, you will be very well compensated for it. Heck, a hockey playing, hockey’madman friend of mind keeps mumbling something about “why Traverse and not me?” *sigh*
I don’t know about you guys but every time I see Traverse on the bench, never miond the ice, I get depressed. It is anathema to everything that I love about my Hab’s. Harvey, Laperriere, Lapoint, Savard, Robinson and then Traverse? Good grief, give me a bag to wear over my head.
Good thing that I’m senile and I quickly forget the pain.
|
|
|
Post by MPLABBE on Nov 9, 2002 10:10:59 GMT -5
Exactly HA him and Dykhuis make Green drool. Just shoot the damn puck off the glass. Forget about the damn transition game, don't hit anyone. Arggghh.
That said, if Traverse could add 20 pounds and a mean streak to his 6'4' frame he'd be a decent NHL d-man.
I would still take the Cube instead of Traverse as a 7th d-man though.
|
|
|
Post by Disgruntled70sHab on Nov 9, 2002 11:28:35 GMT -5
It's nice to hear somepositives come out about Traverse. I near gagged when I saw him split the defence last game. He's been playing well.
I don't like the Hainsey demotion any more than the rest of you that's for sure. I honestly thought he'd start the season in the pressbox. However, the timing for his demotion is about as confusing as his benching was earlier this season. I know he's making mistakes, but there are veterans out there not playing to the standard they can.
Will the demotion hurt Hainsey? I honestly don't think it will all that much. Who was it that pointed out that Markov's last demotion may have been just what he needed (forgive me my short-term memory is on it's way back)? Very good point.
I don't have a cyrstal ball, but I think Hainsey will come back from this with a vengence. I say that because I remember Savard referring to Hainsey as "the best prospect in our system." That should have been a wake up call for Markov who was also in the A a the time. I don't know it that comment had anything to do with motivating Markov, but he's an untouchable on the club right now.
And I'll go out on a limb; I honestly feel we're going to see Hainsey back in the lineup before the year is out. We don't hear all of his wheelings and dealings, or if we do, we sometimes hear about it much later. But it seems Savard always has his ear open for business. I think he has his ear working even as we banter back and forth here on the board.
Anyway, yep, I think Ron will be back this year. And, he'll be back in form. Cheers.
|
|
|
Post by MPLABBE on Nov 9, 2002 11:37:14 GMT -5
Will the demotion hurt Hainsey? I honestly don't think it will all that much. Who was it that pointed out that Markov's last demotion may have been just what he needed (forgive me my short-term memory is on it's way back)? Very good point. A few people have. But let's not forget Markov when he was sent down to the AHL in late 2000-01 was going down there for the first time. Hainsey's going to the AHL for a second time already. Well Markov probably didn't hear it or understand it because of his problem with the english language but I am sure he took the 2 demotions to the AHL as a kick in the butt to work harder defensively and improve his english. I agree. Our blueline is so fragile, he'll get another chance for sure. And btw for those who were wondering, Hainsey is taking the demotion well. He was quoted as saying ''it's better for me to play alot down there than 7 and a half here''..he also said something like ''it's a good thing no one got injured and I would have stayed up because of it''. Hainsey-Komisarek together in the AHL. That will be something to watch for sure.
|
|
|
Post by KR on Nov 9, 2002 11:41:49 GMT -5
Exactly HA him and Dykhuis make Green drool. Just shoot the damn puck off the glass. Forget about the damn transition game, don't hit anyone. Arggghh. . Finally, someone else that sees Dykhuis for the stiff he is (right Dis?) I've been beating this subject to death on HabFans. DYkhuis is absolutely brutal with the puck. Focus on him tonight and watch how many times he ices the puck, puts it right on the opposition's stick or rings it around the board with his head down and no idea who it's going to. I didn't mean to detour the thread, but it was too good an opportunity to pass up.
|
|
|
Post by Disgruntled70sHab on Nov 9, 2002 11:50:11 GMT -5
Finally, someone else that sees Dykhuis for the stiff he is (right Dis?) I've been beating this subject to death on HabFans. DYkhuis is absolutely brutal with the puck. Focus on him tonight and watch how many times he ices the puck, puts it right on the opposition's stick or rings it around the board with his head down and no idea who it's going to. I didn't mean to detour the thread, but it was too good an opportunity to pass up. Since you and I were bantering back and forth on this, I've watched Dykhuis a tad more than what I had in the past. I see what you mean about shooting the puck around the boards regularly. I've also noticed how opposing forwards have gotten around Karl one-on-one. It's happened four times already this season, once at the game you and I went to, and it always seems to be the same move. Funny thing is, MT doesn't bench for that. If he had, it would either make or break him. Ah well, I've posted that last para before. I still think he's been playing better than Quintal, but I'd still have him sit out the odd shift or even the odd game. But that's just me. What do you do? Cheers.
|
|
|
Post by Disgruntled70sHab on Nov 9, 2002 11:53:31 GMT -5
I agree. Our blueline is so fragile, he'll get another chance for sure. Fragile? That's another way of putting it I guess. We've had some outstanding performances this year, but they're still giving Hack and Théo the odd 40-shots a game at times. Not good. Try and compare Hainsey to any of the young lads Savard sent down in recent years. Hainsey has a strong character, indicative moreso by his statements you've cited. He'll be back. Cheers.
|
|
|
Post by Viper on Nov 9, 2002 12:42:07 GMT -5
Well for the record regarding Traverse i'll add another thought or two. Is a guy who play's that safety net game not worthwhile as a 5th or 6th d- man especially on a team with the lapsing likes of dykhuis and Q-Ball not to mention the giveaway tendencies of a briser or a rivet. I don't know about you guys but right now considering the blueline situation late in a game with a lead the safety net of a no nonsense(albeit horrible at anything else but dumping the puck) guy like that gives me more peace of mind than Quintal dykhuis do that's for sure.
Obviuosly this defense of his play is a result of our extremely confusing defense corps but at the end of the day he's doing a better job than a couple of our other guy's. It's not a good job by any mean's but still a better one.
All this being said i think i'll take one of those bags HA is gonna wear because if Travesty is one of our more dependable d men we're in serious trouble.
|
|
|
Post by Disgruntled70sHab on Nov 9, 2002 13:09:45 GMT -5
Since we're on the topic of great gentlemen's spots er ... defensemen I honestly feel Markov and Brisebois have been our best; not necessarily in that order of course. I can acknowledge the experience Rivet has shared with Markov, but that injury is really hurting his game some nights. He can be outstanding one night, and prone to giveaways the next. I hope he finds the right medical advise soon, hockey not being the main issue. If you leave something like that for a while, who says you won't adversely affect you down the road (a la Dave Mason). Or, even look at Gary Roberts. As for Brisebois, AS said he was our best defenseman when he signed him to his last lucky contract. While I don't think he's worth that kind of dough, he has been our best this year. Go figure. Brisebois and Markov; Traverse has played well enough not warrant criticism for a while. But, give his hecklers time. I have a suspecion that there will be hounds all over his first big noticable mistake. Quintal; I don't know if there's a distraction or not, but he is capable of more. Dykhuis; see Quintal. Hainsey; he'll be back. That's about all I'm willing to put on the table in my own amateur kind of way. Cheers.
|
|
|
Post by MPLABBE on Nov 9, 2002 13:20:04 GMT -5
Finally, someone else that sees Dykhuis for the stiff he is (right Dis?) I've been beating this subject to death on HabFans. DYkhuis is absolutely brutal with the puck. Focus on him tonight and watch how many times he ices the puck, puts it right on the opposition's stick or rings it around the board with his head down and no idea who it's going to. I didn't mean to detour the thread, but it was too good an opportunity to pass up. This year I have really noticed what you are talking about. Dykhuis is a player who should be close to Bret Hedican. He has the skating stride, he has the size,etc. But he isn't.
|
|
|
Post by MPLABBE on Nov 9, 2002 13:21:41 GMT -5
Fragile? That's another way of putting it I guess. We've had some outstanding performances this year, but they're still giving Hack and Théo the odd 40-shots a game at times. Not good. Fragile physically. Brisebois has a bad ankle, Rivet and Souray have bad wrists, Quintal has a bad finger,etc Yup.
|
|
|
Post by MPLABBE on Nov 9, 2002 13:23:47 GMT -5
Well for the record regarding Traverse i'll add another thought or two. Is a guy who play's that safety net game not worthwhile as a 5th or 6th d- man especially on a team with the lapsing likes of dykhuis and Q-Ball not to mention the giveaway tendencies of a briser or a rivet. I don't know about you guys but right now considering the blueline situation late in a game with a lead the safety net of a no nonsense(albeit horrible at anything else but dumping the puck) guy like that gives me more peace of mind than Quintal dykhuis do that's for sure. End of game: Brisebois and Rivet should be out there. Markov hasn't played in many last minute 1 goal lead situations in his career yet But no Traverse-Quintal-Dykhuis. Can you imagine the 5 or 6 best offensive players out there on the ice with 2 of those 3 out there for us
|
|
|
Post by montreal on Nov 9, 2002 13:37:47 GMT -5
End of game: Brisebois and Rivet should be out there. Markov hasn't played in many last minute 1 goal lead situations in his career yet But no Traverse-Quintal-Dykhuis. Can you imagine the 5 or 6 best offensive players out there on the ice with 2 of those 3 out there for us Well Markov was out there against the leafs, when he got the empty net goal. Man that was classic, the way he raised his arms and looked over at the leafs bench after Sundin had given him the elbow to the head. I think we'll see more of Markov and less of Dykhuis. To me, Quintal is the one that has to improve his game. He was very good in the playoffs last year, but hasn't been the same since then. Whatever it is, I hope he turns it around fast. Dykhuis has been our +/- leader the last 2 years (last year +16) but man am I getting tired of his game. He turns the puck over by either icing it or throwing it up the glass/boards and our small forwards lose the puck in less then 2 seconds. Well I just don't understand how he has been the +/- leader, I would think Brisebois has something to do with those numbers (Brezzy +9 last year). Right now I would take Traverse over Dykhuis or Quintal, and that aint good, but I do think that Quintal will turn it around.
|
|
|
Post by MPLABBE on Nov 9, 2002 13:41:17 GMT -5
Well Markov was out there against the leafs, when he got the empty net goal. Man that was classic, the way he raised his arms and looked over at the leafs bench after Sundin had given him the elbow to the head. I think we'll see more of Markov and less of Dykhuis. That was a 2 goal lead my friend. He was also out there against the NYI(pass on Gilmour's empty netter) I agree...Brisebois makes Dykhuis look good.
|
|
|
Post by Disgruntled70sHab on Nov 9, 2002 21:01:17 GMT -5
Well Markov was out there against the leafs, when he got the empty net goal. Man that was classic, the way he raised his arms and looked over at the leafs bench after Sundin had given him the elbow to the head. I think we'll see more of Markov and less of Dykhuis. I don't know about that actually. Therrien usually has Brisebois and Dykhuis on against the opposition's big guns; see Mario and Pittsburgh. That may change from time to time, but that's what I've noticed anyway. As for Markov raising his arms, I thought it was bush league gesture at best. Nothing like fueling the fires for the rematch I guess. As you know Dykhuis was playing with Brisebois last year as well. He wasn't only our +/- leader last year, but the year before that as well. If you're saying that Brisebois made Dykhuis look good last year, I'll contest that. In fact, I'll qualify it by saying that Brisebois has been the main whipping boy for many on this board and elsewhere for the past few seasons. To say he made Dykhuis look good in past years I honestly don't feel is justified. However, this year might be a tad different that's for sure. Unfortunately, my buddy, KR, as me to watch Dykhuis from time to time. I have, and I'm not too impressed this year. Darn! And to think that Traverse is one of our better defensemen now. Like you, I can give credit where credit is due, but it doesn't give me a warm-fuzzy when I go down the defence roster. Cheers.
|
|
|
Post by montreal on Nov 9, 2002 21:08:47 GMT -5
That was a 2 goal lead my friend. He was also out there against the NYI(pass on Gilmour's empty netter) I agree...Brisebois makes Dykhuis look good. Whoops, I missed the 1 goal part and just saw the last minute part. If Markov keeps playing the way he is, he will be there at the last minute during 1 goal leads.
|
|
|
Post by montreal on Nov 9, 2002 21:16:20 GMT -5
I don't know about that actually. Therrien usually has Brisebois and Dykhuis on against the opposition's big guns; see Mario and Pittsburgh. That may change from time to time, but that's what I've noticed anyway. As for Markov raising his arms, I thought it was bush league gesture at best. Nothing like fueling the fires for the rematch I guess. As you know Dykhuis was playing with Brisebois last year as well. He wasn't only our +/- leader last year, but the year before that as well. If you're saying that Brisebois made Dykhuis look good last year, I'll contest that. In fact, I'll qualify it by saying that Brisebois has been the main whipping boy for many on this board and elsewhere for the past few seasons. To say he made Dykhuis look good in past years I honestly don't feel is justified. However, this year might be a tad different that's for sure. Unfortunately, my buddy, KR, as me to watch Dykhuis from time to time. I have, and I'm not too impressed this year. Darn! And to think that Traverse is one of our better defensemen now. Like you, I can give credit where credit is due, but it doesn't give me a warm-fuzzy when I go down the defence roster. Cheers. The Markov gesture I loved. Sundin gave him an elbow up high a few minutes before that, but who knows if he was just happy he scored, was looking at Sundin/Quinn/bench/a fan/just looked left??? I took it that he was pissed about the elbow, and was showing Sundin his thanks for the cheap shot. Markov has seen his ice time increase, and so has his role. He's now on the PK, and was on the ice in the last few minutes of the game but they were with 2 goal leads. His role is becoming more important, and Dykhuis's should be less. As for last years +/- I think Brisebois has something to do with that, as Dykhuis brings little offence, whereas Brezzy has skills on offence, so Dykhuis benefits having the goals scored when he's on the ice, even though he has little skills on offence. That and the fact that Brezzy is more skilled, so it helps having him as a partner then say a Dykhuis Quintal duo. Even though Brezzy is subject to his turnover passes, I would take Brezzy over Dykhuis anyday. T
|
|
|
Post by MPLABBE on Nov 9, 2002 21:37:26 GMT -5
I also loved the Markov move. The Laughs have done nothing but kick our butt over the years and have done a few taunting moves. IN THERE FACE I say. Screw 'em.
|
|
|
Post by Disgruntled70sHab on Nov 9, 2002 21:49:40 GMT -5
Markov has seen his ice time increase, and so has his role. He's now on the PK, and was on the ice in the last few minutes of the game but they were with 2 goal leads. His role is becoming more important, and Dykhuis's should be less. I understand what you're saying but the only way that will happen is if Brisebois gets a new defence partner. If you'd like to see Markov's ice time increase more than his regular shift and PP duties, he'll either have to be moved away from Rivet or, these two will have to be moved up as the number-1 pair. So, if Brisebois is responsible for Dykhuis' +/- success, he should by all rights be the same +/- as Dykhuis. He wasn't. Whether it was due to injuries or just playing with another defense partner, Dykhuis accomplished it somehow. However, not too many people will acknowledge that. What have you done for me today I guess is the question. Pity. While I can admit that Brisebois is our best defenseman this year, I honestly felt Brisebois' performance last year wasn't all that good. He was prone to giving the puck away and sometimes played with little confidence (no wonder with the media microscope on him 24 hours a day). Sorry, buds, but you're not going to convince me that his skill was responsible for Dykhuis' +16 last year. Some of that was Karl's doing. While I can admit that Dykhuis' performance has been bad this year, I'm starting to get the feeling that a new Montreal whipping boy is being identified. Win, lose, or draw, someone will always have something bad to point out about Dykhuis. It was the same with Brisebois, Hoglund, Bellows, and scores of others. Anyone care to comment on Audette's performance? Ah well, nothing I say or do will change that. Cheers.
|
|
|
Post by montreal on Nov 9, 2002 22:14:14 GMT -5
I understand what you're saying but the only way that will happen is if Brisebois gets a new defence partner. If you'd like to see Markov's ice time increase more than his regular shift and PP duties, he'll either have to be moved away from Rivet or, these two will have to be moved up as the number-1 pair. So, if Brisebois is responsible for Dykhuis' +/- success, he should by all rights be the same +/- as Dykhuis. He wasn't. Whether it was due to injuries or just playing with another defense partner, Dykhuis accomplished it somehow. However, not too many people will acknowledge that. What have you done for me today I guess is the question. Pity. While I can admit that Brisebois is our best defenseman this year, I honestly felt Brisebois' performance last year wasn't all that good. He was prone to giving the puck away and sometimes played with little confidence (no wonder with the media microscope on him 24 hours a day). Sorry, buds, but you're not going to convince me that his skill was responsible for Dykhuis' +16 last year. Some of that was Karl's doing. While I can admit that Dykhuis' performance has been bad this year, I'm starting to get the feeling that a new Montreal whipping boy is being identified. Win, lose, or draw, someone will always have something bad to point out about Dykhuis. It was the same with Brisebois, Hoglund, Bellows, and scores of others. Anyone care to comment on Audette's performance? Ah well, nothing I say or do will change that. Cheers. Well the last few games Markov's ice time has been increased, if I'm not mistaken. And with him getting PK time in as well, they are showing a lot of confidence in him or lack of confidence in some of the others depending on how you look at it. In ES scoring, Markov is 2nd in the league behind Lidstrom (I think) Markov has 7pts ES, and his 11 pts puts him 4th in the league for defencemen scoring. I'm not saying Brisebois is the reason for Dykhuis's +16. What I am saying is that his offence ability had something to do with Dykhuis's +16. No they dont have to have to same +/- cause theres lots of factors that could go into Brezzy being -7 to Dykhuis. Brezzy does usually get the most ice time, so it would make sense that he is on the ice for a few more goals. And even though he was our leader in +/- he still found himself benched, and it wasn't so the star could get some rest. But I agree Brezzy blind pass turnovers are painful to watch, but so is Dykhuis's throw it up the boards down the ice for icing/turnovers. (which he was doing last year also) I also agree that Dykhuis could become the new whipping boy, but right now Therrien/Audette seem to have that, and Traverse is just waiting to take over for them, so Dykhuis may have to wait in line. I thought that Brezzy had a much better year last year but after going -31 its not to hard to improve off that. Audette, wow he sure is struggling. He can't do anything right now, but I think he will turn it around, hopefully.
|
|
|
Post by MPLABBE on Nov 9, 2002 22:48:02 GMT -5
Markov didn't play on the PK tonight..right?
It was Traverse-Brisebois Quintal-Rivet
Modano and Guerin must be licking their chops already..
|
|