|
Post by UberCranky on Nov 5, 2002 23:18:37 GMT -5
While in the game the other night I was watching Savard up in the press box and trying to figure out from his body language what he was looking at. One thing that I noticed is when the other team scored on us in the third period, he jumped backwards, wrote something down and a minute later he was furiously pacing back and forth in the booth. Hands to side, hands to chin, peeking down at the game in progress and then back to pacing inside the booth. His body language displayed agitation. What was he thinking? What? What did he see that set him off? Was he annoyed as to how the goal was scored and who was on the ice? I don’t remember who was there for the second goal but it Savard certainly did. Was Boullion on the ice and blundered? Was he thinking of bringing him up? Ward? Hossa? It certainly was no one else on the team. Fichaud would be irrelevant, like he doesn’t have 3 goalies clogging up the bathroom. I can not think of anything else that would annoy him. Unless of course there where more scouts (besides me : in the stands and one of our tradeables showed his ugly side? That’s not very likely. Plak and Balej are too raw. Komi is a blue chip. Hossa is strong 2-3rd liner and not too valuable to someone else (yet). Boullion was given away and like some mangy old dog, he keeps coming back. But I could not help but wonder if he had something in mind as far as trading or player movement and what he saw dampened them. I guess I will never know and I am really disappointed he didn’t come over to ask me.
|
|
|
Post by PTH on Nov 5, 2002 23:26:35 GMT -5
Hm, my guess would be that he saw someone make a bad play of some kind, nad jotted it down to be sure he'd remind the coaching staff about it. Maybe someone made the same mistake he was supposed to be correcting, maybe he just suddenly realised Komi wasn't going to be a saviour come Christmastime....
|
|
|
Post by Viper on Nov 5, 2002 23:30:05 GMT -5
Hmmm what we're you thinking not approaching him with your infinite wisdom. Oh wait that was my job and i never followed through that fateful Sunday that ended in yet another 2 all tie.
The fact he never hung around for O/T kinda surprised me and actually add's to the idea that he was agitated in some way. There's got to be something brewing in his head regarding our roster situation. Something has to give unless more injuries arise and keep's the potential overflow at bay. (knock on wood) I really am still flabergasted that bluoin has also returned when O'dette could do the same thing. The last couple week's have been wierd regarding roster movement.
Boillion comes back get's a couple games in then we here about a potential wrist problem with Rivet. Did the organization keep this hidden until AS could find depth to replace him.
Blouin comes in to add a spark immediately followed by Kilger hitting the press box Is Sather really that interested and is there a possible package going to the rag's for CK and JH.
What is going through the mind of our leader.
|
|
|
Post by Viper on Nov 5, 2002 23:32:50 GMT -5
Hm, my guess would be that he saw someone make a bad play of some kind, nad jotted it down to be sure he'd remind the coaching staff about it. Maybe someone made the same mistake he was supposed to be correcting, maybe he just suddenly realised Komi wasn't going to be a saviour come Christmastime.... PTH don't remind me of that christmas time thing I've been raising that flag for a while now and to be totally honest it's flying at half mast right about now.
|
|
|
Post by JohnnyVerdun on Nov 5, 2002 23:33:55 GMT -5
...maybe he just suddenly realised Komi wasn't going to be a saviour come Christmastime.... Savard has never harbored that illusion. I would bet on it. Savard is down there to check in on the future. What's going on down there has little if any impact on his thinking about what's going on in Montreal. There is nobody down there who can help -- or whom he'd call on -- other than the usual suspects: Gratton and Bouillon.
|
|
|
Post by UberCranky on Nov 5, 2002 23:50:21 GMT -5
Savard has never harbored that illusion. I would bet on it. Savard is down there to check in on the future. What's going on down there has little if any impact on his thinking about what's going on in Montreal. There is nobody down there who can help -- or whom he'd call on -- other than the usual suspects: Gratton and Bouillon. I forgot about Gratton. I did not pay much attention to him because, to be honest, I don't see much future for him. He has hustle and grit in a small package but what does that mean? We don't need an undersized third line checker and he has no elite tools. Someone once compared him to Gilmour and I fell off my chair laughing (still laugh about it in my sleep). Grattons grit as compared to Gilmours is potatoe chips to fillet mignion.
|
|
|
Post by JohnnyVerdun on Nov 6, 2002 0:10:54 GMT -5
The difference is that Gratton would happily center our fourth line whereas Gilmour will not. It's academic in any case because Therrien seems happy to use Lindsay at center on the fourth, and of course there's always Kilger if he doesn't get traded first.
On the subject of Savard's thoughts, I can't say for sure, but something tells me that Kilger's being in the pressbox for 3 games in a row is not just Therrien's way of communicating to him that he wants more physical play. I think Savard is prepared to move him and I think it will be a big mistake if he does. I think Kilger's being used badly and that he could be a really useful player for a few years to come. In fact, if you think of what our roster could look like if we didn't feel absolutely compelled to use some of the veterans, and if we used some of the guys who are in secondary roles in primary ones instead, we could ice a pretty good team with a lot of energy:
Zednick/Koivu/Czerk Bulis/Juneau/Petrov Mckay/Kilger/Dackell Lindsay/Gratton/Blouin
As you can see, I'm of the opinion that our problems are down the middle, and I think they're especially evident at even strength (for obvious reasons). Juneau evidently has a lot more in the tank than we might've guessed. He's got more jump, better speed, he gets the cycle going and he and Bulis are able to create chances. In any case, the lineup above is one which would win us more faceoffs, would be better at even strength, and would have more overall toughness and skating ability than the present lineup. Perreault and Gilmour are where our problems lie. I am not joking when I say that the group set out above would win us more games and compete more effectively night after night than the current lineup with Gilmour and Perreault in it. I really believ that.
|
|
|
Post by UberCranky on Nov 6, 2002 0:57:26 GMT -5
The difference is that Gratton would happily center our fourth line whereas Gilmour will not. It's academic in any case because Therrien seems happy to use Lindsay at center on the fourth, and of course there's always Kilger if he doesn't get traded first. On the subject of Savard's thoughts, I can't say for sure, but something tells me that Kilger's being in the pressbox for 3 games in a row is not just Therrien's way of communicating to him that he wants more physical play. I think Savard is prepared to move him and I think it will be a big mistake if he does. I think Kilger's being used badly and that he could be a really useful player for a few years to come. In fact, if you think of what our roster could look like if we didn't feel absolutely compelled to use some of the veterans, and if we used some of the guys who are in secondary roles in primary ones instead, we could ice a pretty good team with a lot of energy: Zednick/Koivu/Czerk Bulis/Juneau/Petrov Mckay/Kilger/Dackell Lindsay/Gratton/Blouin As you can see, I'm of the opinion that our problems are down the middle, and I think they're especially evident at even strength (for obvious reasons). Juneau evidently has a lot more in the tank than we might've guessed. He's got more jump, better speed, he gets the cycle going and he and Bulis are able to create chances. In any case, the lineup above is one which would win us more faceoffs, would be better at even strength, and would have more overall toughness and skating ability than the present lineup. Perreault and Gilmour are where our problems lie. I am not joking when I say that the group set out above would win us more games and compete more effectively night after night than the current lineup with Gilmour and Perreault in it. I really believe that. I am from the old classic school of hockey line ups. Two offensive, one checking and one nose bleeding line. None of this New Age, Ying-Yang, run and gun offence for me. Kilger can fit the bottom two like a tee and pinch for the first two lines without looking like a Gino’s cousin. He has the size to hit, the speed to check and the semi-stone hands to play on the first lines as a corner badger. So why would Savard trade him? Is there anyone else in the system like him? Ward? Only the size but Popiel Onion Chopper skating. Hossa? If he has a mean streak and a desire to hit people it has been well hidden. If you use the fourth line to agitate and annoy people then you need someone nastier and bigger then Gratton to do it with. Gratton would be better off as a third line checker but he does not have the size as checking center. I hardly ever post line-ups because we do not have enough talent with clear cut capabilities to neatly slot players. I heard someone, somewhere mention that we have too many small, “semi-skilled” forwards.
|
|
|
Post by Doc Holliday on Nov 6, 2002 12:47:41 GMT -5
While in the game the other night I was watching Savard up in the press box and trying to figure out from his body language what he was looking at. One thing that I noticed is when the other team scored on us in the third period, he jumped backwards, wrote something down and a minute later he was furiously pacing back and forth in the booth. Hands to side, hands to chin, peeking down at the game in progress and then back to pacing inside the booth. His body language displayed agitation. What was he thinking? What? What did he see that set him off? Was he annoyed as to how the goal was scored and who was on the ice? I don’t remember who was there for the second goal but it Savard certainly did. Was Boullion on the ice and blundered? Was he thinking of bringing him up? Ward? Hossa? It certainly was no one else on the team. Fichaud would be irrelevant, like he doesn’t have 3 goalies clogging up the bathroom. I can not think of anything else that would annoy him. Unless of course there where more scouts (besides me : in the stands and one of our tradeables showed his ugly side? That’s not very likely. Plak and Balej are too raw. Komi is a blue chip. Hossa is strong 2-3rd liner and not too valuable to someone else (yet). Boullion was given away and like some mangy old dog, he keeps coming back. But I could not help but wonder if he had something in mind as far as trading or player movement and what he saw dampened them. I guess I will never know and I am really disappointed he didn’t come over to ask me. Body Langueage: - Jumped backwards - Hands to side - Hands to chin - Pace back and forth - Peek down Obviously Savard was practicing his Irish dancing ;D
|
|
|
Post by KR on Nov 6, 2002 13:26:48 GMT -5
My guess is that AS already all the changes he wants to make mapped out and in priority sequence. He's just waiting for the proverbial straw that broke the camel's back. He's one heck of a patient man. I would have been making some big moves by now.
|
|