|
Post by MPLABBE on Nov 5, 2002 23:04:02 GMT -5
Man that is just absurd. Traverse and Rivet out there instead of Hainsey on the PP. Nice way to build the kid's confidence And Hainsey went +1 on the night... If you aren't even going to use him on the PP then why even have him up here when he could play 25 minutes in the AHL and dominate. The Blues have Jackman, a fellow 21 year old rookie, and he plays on the top pair with MacInnis and gets plenty of ice time(21:53). I know we have no MacInnis, I know Jackman is more likely to have success than Hainsey because Jackman is a tough as nails physical d-man who is great defensively, while Hainsey is more likely to make mistakes out there because he is offensive minded. But still, why just bench Hainsey and play him so little. ...Like BC points out even when Markov struggled he got PP time... This organization leaves me
|
|
|
Post by seventeen on Nov 6, 2002 1:35:26 GMT -5
If we swapped Hainsey for Jackman, right now, Hainsey would be getting 21 minutes and Jackman 11... at least until the first time he didn't bank it off the boards, then he'd be benched. What's the difference? Confidence. Not the players. The organizations. Pleau and Quenneville are both quality people. I rest my case.
|
|
|
Post by montreal on Nov 6, 2002 1:36:03 GMT -5
Man that is just absurd. Traverse and Rivet out there instead of Hainsey on the PP. Nice way to build the kid's confidence And Hainsey went +1 on the night... If you aren't even going to use him on the PP then why even have him up here when he could play 25 minutes in the AHL and dominate. The Blues have Jackman, a fellow 21 year old rookie, and he plays on the top pair with MacInnis and gets plenty of ice time(21:53). I know we have no MacInnis, I know Jackman is more likely to have success than Hainsey because Jackman is a tough as nails physical d-man who is great defensively, while Hainsey is more likely to make mistakes out there because he is offensive minded. But still, why just bench Hainsey and play him so little. ...Like BC points out even when Markov struggled he got PP time... This organization leaves me Well I might not make any friends saying this, but I agree with what they are doing with Hainsey. He was great in preseason, but has done very little since day one. I'm a big fan of Hainsey's, and I think he will be a good talent in the future, but right now he should be brought along slowly until he shows improvement. That said, I think tonight he showed some improvement, so its a start in the right direction. I will crunch numbers just like anyone else, but I'm sure we are all aware that stats don't tell everything. But to me the number that I have a problem with (not that he's a -1 on the season) but he is not getting any shots on goal. He has a very good shot, but I never see him use it. I don't know what Therrien/Green are telling him, but I would like to see him shoot the puck more. I would not give him more ice time, until he plays better over a good chunk of games. I do think its good that he doesn't get put into situations were he could make a mistake, but at some point he does have to get some ice time on the PP (especially once the game is out of hand). As for tonights game, I was happy to see Hainsey seemed to be better with his positioning, and made some decent plays. Hopefully he can bulid on this game, and come back even better against the Isles on Thrusday.
|
|
|
Post by Vichab on Nov 6, 2002 1:47:44 GMT -5
There is no doubt that H has a great shot as he is accurate and he keeps it low. That's why he deserves, and we deserve to see him on the pp. not only is that where he can develop confidence, the team gives up nothing as the alternatves after Brise and Markov are players with no talent and even less imagination.
MT just doesn't get it. being out shot by a large margin in every game is somehow called a system. Markov has become a great player in spite of MT. Let's hope H can over come MT as well. Advantage Markov may have had is that he couldn't understand a word MT said.
|
|
|
Post by montreal on Nov 6, 2002 1:56:53 GMT -5
There is no doubt that H has a great shot as he is accurate and he keeps it low. That's why he deserves, and we deserve to see him on the pp. not only is that where he can develop confidence, the team gives up nothing as the alternatves after Brise and Markov are players with no talent and even less imagination. MT just doesn't get it. being out shot by a large margin in every game is somehow called a system. Markov has become a great player in spite of MT. Let's hope H can over come MT as well. Advantage Markov may have had is that he couldn't understand a word MT said. Well I understand what you are saying, as I want to see more of what Hainsey can do, but I don't think he should be given more ice time, until he proves he can handle it. To me, he should have to earn his ice time, and he's just not doing that. Yes tonight, he was better, so maybe he should get a little more ice time, but most of his games, he has been out of position, and he has yet to play with any confidence at all, IMO. I may get flamed for this, but I think everyones' jumping on Therrien/Green/Savard, way to fast. To me its the players, and some of their crappy performances that should be questioned more so then Therrien and company (not that I am a big supporter of Therrien, but he's the coach, so I don't try and understand what he's doing, since I have no ideal) Whereas the players, I can see when they are not giving an effort or just lack the skills to get it done. (not saying Hainsey lacks skills or effort, just hasn't played well for the most part, IMO) I think Hainsey will get their sooner then later, but I don't think the coaches should just put him out their. To me, Hainsey has to do some really good things out there first and then give him more quality ice time.
|
|
|
Post by MPLABBE on Nov 6, 2002 8:12:22 GMT -5
Montreal, the 11 minutes of ice time isn't what bothers me, it's the zero power play time that bothers me. I think Hainsey's confidence will really take off when he scores a goal or gets that first point. What better way to get it than to score it on a big PP?
It's not like we have 4 PP QB's on this team...
|
|
|
Post by UberCranky on Nov 6, 2002 8:23:31 GMT -5
I may get flamed for this, Well I might not make any friends saying this, Montreal, don't even think about statements like these. NEVER. Never, ever think that we post our opinions to make friends or go with the flow. We all have different opinions ands speak our mind. Mind you, be prepared for an opposing view and a lengthy debate on it. If someone is opposite to your view, then you may respond or you may not. An opposite view is not seen here as a slap on the face but merely what it is, an opinion, nothing more. No one "wins" debates here and we frown upon posters who think that debates are some type of challenge or prize fight. Like I said before, this place is different. P.S. Never disagree with me because I am always right it's just that you haven't seen my Godly opinion in the right frame of mind. P.S.S. Go spill your guts out over here (yup, we are building CIA file on you ...: : habsrus.proboards4.com/index.cgi?board=Profiles
|
|
|
Post by BadCompany on Nov 6, 2002 9:02:44 GMT -5
No one "wins" debates here and we frown upon posters who think that debates are some type of challenge or prize fight. What are you talking about?? I win debates here all the time! I am like, a master debater, and I master debate all the time. If the font size on these screens weren't so small - seems I'm losing my eyesight for some reason - I would probably win a lot more debates. Nobody is the master debater that I am. Nobody. As for Hainsey, I don't mind bringing him along slowly, but as Marc says, why isn't he getting any powerplay time? Its not like we are lighting it up on the powerplay, and don't want to break up a good thing, or anything. What could it hurt? Is Patrick Traverse really that much better on the powerplay? Does Traverse have as much future in this organization as Hainsey does? Another thing worth noting - or not, lies, damned lies and statistics afterall - is that Hainsey is +5 since Quintal went down. Quintal has struggled himself this year, is he really the best person to be bringing Hainsey along?
|
|
|
Post by MPLABBE on Nov 6, 2002 9:34:23 GMT -5
wow...and that is in 3-4 games playing with Traverse ! It boggles the mind. I mean +5...but we all know Q-ball will take his place back in the lineup when he comes back despite his -6..
|
|
|
Post by UberCranky on Nov 6, 2002 9:41:53 GMT -5
What are you talking about?? I win debates here all the time! I am like, a master debater, and I master debate all the time. If the font size on these screens weren't so small - seems I'm losing my eyesight for some reason - I would probably win a lot more debates. Nobody is the master debater that I am. Nobody.
*sigh*
Yup, I noticed that you had hairy palms.
|
|
|
Post by Viper on Nov 6, 2002 11:00:54 GMT -5
What's this about nobody winning debate's i don't even bother anymore because winning them is so easy around here ;D
|
|
|
Post by Ged on Nov 6, 2002 11:11:38 GMT -5
Rivet played 24 minutes with a limp wrist and was - 3. I have yet to see our future PP quarterback on the PP. What the hell is that all about? The reason he has no shots on net is because he's played 90 percent of his ice time running around in his own end like his teammates. Putting Traverse and Juneau on the second PP unit is silly. Let the kid play. That's the only way he'll ever get any confidence. The way he's being used now is damaging to him I think.
|
|
|
Post by habfan4 on Nov 6, 2002 11:47:35 GMT -5
My inaugural post:
While I agree that seeing Traverse on the PP is unsettling (almost as much as seeing Juneau on the point). There is a catch 22 with giving Hainsey more PP time, it will eat into Markov's time. I thought Hainsey played better last night, he seemed to be keeping it simple (clearing the net and taking the body more frequently). If Hainsey cuts down on his mistakes, he should be rewarded with some powerplay time. If that day comes, hopefully Therrien will ensure there is traffic in front of the net or Hainsey's hard low shot will be wasted.
|
|
|
Post by MPLABBE on Nov 6, 2002 11:53:46 GMT -5
welcome aboard! ;D I believe you are another HF refugee?
To me it's simple...the PP time you give to Rivet and Traverse...give some of it to Hainsey...Markov-Breezy still get the bulk of it.
|
|
|
Post by habfan4 on Nov 6, 2002 12:14:42 GMT -5
welcome aboard! ;D I believe you are another HF refugee? To me it's simple...the PP time you give to Rivet and Traverse...give some of it to Hainsey...Markov-Breezy still get the bulk of it. Thanks for the welcome. IMO the coaching staff and the PP units look a little shell shocked by the special teams performance this year and are coaching/playing to avoid mistakes, hence the questionable personnel decisions. Hainsey seems to be playing with a little more determination, so hopefully it's only a matter of time before he bumps Traverse of the PP.
|
|
|
Post by Viper on Nov 6, 2002 12:20:14 GMT -5
Welcome aboard Habfan4, how did you decide to come over here cheer's viper P.S. don't forget to do a poster profile confess all your sin's to the rest of us ;D
|
|
|
Post by The Habitual Fan on Nov 6, 2002 14:48:13 GMT -5
If we swapped Hainsey for Jackman, right now, Hainsey would be getting 21 minutes and Jackman 11... at least until the first time he didn't bank it off the boards, then he'd be benched. What's the difference? Confidence. Not the players. The organizations. Pleau and Quenneville are both quality people. I rest my case. Sounds like your wanting a coaching change ;D
|
|
|
Post by Rhiessan on Nov 7, 2002 5:17:13 GMT -5
I just heard heard about this place this afternoon and enjoying every minute of it ;D. Anyway I just don't understand MT's thinking (from what i've read I'm not the only one) in reguards to Hainsey. Sitting him in place of Traverse before was just appauling. I'd much rather see RH out there making a rookie mistake and learning from it than PT making the same mistake over and over again. I do agree that his icetime should be limited to 5th or 6th d-man but he's gotta have some PP time.
|
|
|
Post by MPLABBE on Nov 7, 2002 9:09:32 GMT -5
welcome aboard. Glad you are enjoying it.
Nice to see so many newbies!
|
|
|
Post by montreal on Nov 7, 2002 14:48:38 GMT -5
I just heard heard about this place this afternoon and enjoying every minute of it ;D. Anyway I just don't understand MT's thinking (from what i've read I'm not the only one) in reguards to Hainsey. Sitting him in place of Traverse before was just appauling. I'd much rather see RH out there making a rookie mistake and learning from it than PT making the same mistake over and over again. I do agree that his icetime should be limited to 5th or 6th d-man but he's gotta have some PP time. Well my theory on Hainsey's lack of PP, is that the SH goals against have really hurt, so they don't want to put Hainsey in a position where he could really do some damage. I think they are trying to work him in slowly. My personal feeling is that he doesn't deserve to play on the PP right now. So far he hasn't been very good, and he makes me neverous everytime he's on the ice. I do think that he played a better game against the blues, cause he kept it simple. If he continues to play like he did the other night, I think he will get his time in on the PP. I'm a big Hainsey fan, I think he's got a lot of skill, and maybe I'm being to hard on him, but so far he hasn't looked so good. But it's early, and last game was something for him to build off of. My opinion, I think Traverse is playing just as good if not better then Hainsey. (Traverse is 2nd on the team in +/- +3) The difference is I've seen Traverse taking the body whereas Hainsey needs to use his size more, get better positioning, and get back to one of his strengths that I saw from him last year, and that's playing a very clam game. The few times I saw him play, the things that always stuck out where his skating and how calm he always seemed to play. I thing that may be effecting him is the 2nd game when Lindsay lost the puck when Hainsey was pinching in and was wide open, but cause of the turnover, he got caught out of position, and they scored. Ever since then I haven't seen him jump into the play. Well maybe he'll turn it around tonight and get his 1st one.
|
|
|
Post by Viper on Nov 7, 2002 15:22:57 GMT -5
I just heard heard about this place this afternoon and enjoying every minute of it ;D. Anyway I just don't understand MT's thinking (from what i've read I'm not the only one) in reguards to Hainsey. Sitting him in place of Traverse before was just appauling. I'd much rather see RH out there making a rookie mistake and learning from it than PT making the same mistake over and over again. I do agree that his icetime should be limited to 5th or 6th d-man but he's gotta have some PP time. welcome aboard Rhiessan
|
|
|
Post by MPLABBE on Nov 7, 2002 15:53:04 GMT -5
I thing that may be effecting him is the 2nd game when Lindsay lost the puck when Hainsey was pinching in and was wide open, but cause of the turnover, he got caught out of position, and they scored. Ever since then I haven't seen him jump into the play. Well maybe he'll turn it around tonight and get his 1st one. actually that was the first game, it led to the Samuellson goal. Let's hope he gets that elusive 1st point or goal tonight. Too bad he couldn't follow Hossa's lead who scored in his first game
|
|