|
Post by JohnnyVerdun on Oct 25, 2002 14:06:24 GMT -5
This next move by Savard will be a crucial one for the direction of the team over the next year or two. It needs to be a bold move and it needs to address our size and strength up the middle (first and foremost) or on the wing.
I could live with a "rebuild" type of move, if the guy coming back is young and not yet proven but has thick legs and weighs in at 215 pounds or more, with a bit of a nasty streak and some as yet untapped offensive skill. That's what we need.
|
|
|
Post by Viper on Oct 25, 2002 14:12:32 GMT -5
the demand is high and the supply is low you know what that means.
|
|
|
Post by Boston_Habs on Oct 25, 2002 14:21:12 GMT -5
The UFA route is tough, so a trade is the only way we are going to be able to add the missing link.... big, tough forward who can skate and score. There is nobody on the farm who fits that description.
Our young depth at D is the only asset we can use to get something like that in return. If it weren't such a buyers market for goalies, perhaps Garon could get you something good, but that's not the case.
|
|
|
Post by BadCompany on Oct 25, 2002 14:45:33 GMT -5
Unfortunately, all of our expendable assets have been dealt, with little to show for it.
Personally, I am not a big fan of moving one of the big three hopes on defence (Markov, Hainsey, Komisarek) if it can at all be avoided. We have the potential to have an extremely balanced, strong defensive corps in the future, and I am not all that keen on shredding that potential. While we can argue about "depth" the truth is, beyond those three there isn't much. Unless you are hoping one of Linhart, Shasby or Archer pulls through, but those are all long shots. So I would keep what we got, and look at doing something else.
In all honesty, and I think I have been true to this right from the beginning, I have never really liked the direction Andre Savard has taken the team. Not that I don't think it will work - can't argue with last year's success - its just that I would have preferred to have built a much different team. I have said in the past, that I like big, fast skating teams, in the Edmonton Oilers mold. While a guy like Chad Kilger may not have the natural offensive ability of a Donald Audette, in my team concept I take Kilger over Audette any day of the week, strange as that may sound. Give me 4 lines of skating fury, and I think you can embarrass a lot of teams, even if you don't end up with a 50 goal scorer.
If Savard wanted to go in that direction, then I don't think he has to sacrifice any of our young defenceman. Instead, he has to go back to what made us love him in the first place - more Zholtok for Kilger type deals. Zednik, Bulis, Kilger, these are guys who could play for me any day of the week. Hard working (for the most part) good skaters, good size, not afraid to use it when motivated. Not the most natural finishers in the world, but I can live with that. In that respect then, I do think guys like Audette, Czerkawski, Dykhuis, etc. can be used. Heck, we gave up Asham (who almost fits my bill) to get Czerkawski, didn't we? How about Audette for Lubos Bartecko? Dykhuis for Todd Harvey or Matt Bradley? Bag of pucks for Rob Niedermeyer? Jason Weimer? Not every trade has to be a home run. Again, Savard's best deals, in my opinion, were the ones where he went for the underachievers, like Kilger, Zednik and Bulis. Its when he goes for "name" players, like Quintal, Audette and Czerkawski, that he starts to get into trouble. Because people know these names, they think they are great deals - everyone, with a few notable exceptions (me! me!) thought the Audette deal was fantastic. RDS, after the Czercawski deal, ran a poll asking if this was the best trade in the history of the Montreal Canadiens. Thats just silly.
Lots of guys out there who fit my definition of big, fast, physical guys. The trouble is, most, if not all, of them don't have the finishing touch to be more than 3rd or 4th liners. So if we were to go my route - and we won't of course, but lets play anyways - we would need to accept a fundamental shift in team policy. We aren't going to be snipers, with superstar goal scorers - we are going to be an aggravating, difficult, tiring team to play against. Plus, one of them may break out, and if not, I can live with 9 forwards scoring 15-25 goals, if its a balanced, defensively responsible set of forwards.
But thats just me.
|
|
|
Post by PTH on Oct 25, 2002 15:27:37 GMT -5
I don't think AS has the assets to move to get a big piece, unless it involves sacrificing the future, big time.
I'm not sold on the depth and grit approach that BC suggests, though.
I would have wanted to see us have some veterans in place, and have some pots open for kids - and if our aren't ready, we get some re-treads from other teams. Hoglund, Bure and Tucker were all dealt fairly cheap or given away, you can get useful young talent in this league if you're willing to give it a chance it can be a way of compensating for awful drafting. And rather than filling up the roster with free agents, we'd have a much more balanced team on the ice.
As to what AS can do NOW, well, he's painted himself into a corner, IMO. 3 goalies, a surplus of NHL contracts, and not small ones at that, and a defense corps that can't seem to get its act together. All this and an ageing, expensive team.
I'm going to go back to one of my favourite points - AS bet big time on the Linden deal, he dealt his two biggest assets then, and he needs Zednik and Bulis to work out, otherwise the next season or two will be bad. And unless AS and Boivin can ignore the fan expectations they built up, the years after that will be depressing too, as we get to see our kids develop elsewhere since we'll need to deal them to ice a decent squad in the short-term.
If AS is anything like the talent spotter people say he is, he should be able to get us a Leclair or an Allison for cheap....
|
|
|
Post by JohnnyVerdun on Oct 25, 2002 15:30:51 GMT -5
In fairness to Donald Audette, he came back from a nasty injury with less than 100% feeling in his arm and still managed 10 points in 10 playoff games. The guy can help offensively, but he can't do it unless he's playing with a center who's on his game, which Perreault and Gilmour certainly aren't.
A certain lack of size and physical play isn't necessarily fatal, whether at center or on the wing, but the combination of both is horrendous. Seeing Perreault and Gilmour cruising around out there with all their savvy and experience but without wingers who are digging and fighting is depressing. Almost as depressing as watching talented wingers with soft hands who don't have the linemates needed to allow them to do their thing.
The reason Dackell and Juneau are outscoring Gilmour and the rest has to do with the balance on that line and their work ethic. A guy like Czerkawski needs a playmaking center who's on his game (minimum) and/or a physical banging winger on the other side to get the cycle going, to fight off checks and make it to the front of the net, and to create some chaos. MT can put Perreaul and Audette out there all he likes, but 5 on 5 they're likely to fail. Gilmour, at his best at this age, needs a guy like Zednik or Bulis.
What does all this tell me? Well, since Bulis and Zednik have their spots, the only physical wingers left are Mckay and Kilger, so Chad's got to get more than 10 minutes of ice and Mckay's got to give way to Czerkawski or Petrov on the first line so that they can get and keep that line going the way it was when Gilmour centered it at the end of last season. My vote would be for Czerkawski for at least 8 games. If he can't get on the board with Koivu and Zednick then you know he's got a problem.
Second, although I earlier proposed a line of Kilger/Gilmour/Petrov, the decision that has to be made is whether Gilmour or Perreault should be the second center (after Saku) that they're going to look to for serious production. If it's Perreault, then give him Kilger and Audette or Kilger and Petrov and let them work it out over 4 or 5 games before you decide it can't work. Throwing them together for an evening and then trying something else if it doesn't click is a sure way to end up trying something else.
Third, one of the trio of scoring forwards (Petrov, Audette, Czerkawski) is going to have to be the odd man out. Constantly trying to find spots for all these guys where they can play their type of game is more of a problem than anything. It's problematic depth, at least until one of them gets injured.
|
|
|
Post by MPLABBE on Oct 25, 2002 15:37:31 GMT -5
I have to go with BC here.
AS needs to make a Zholtok for Kilger kind of deal. Use that blueprint for a deal.
If you remember at the start of that season, Zholtok was struggling and looked terrible(alot like many of our small forwards right now). I thought his good year of the year before was a fluke. He was shipped out and we still got a young player in return with size and speed. Not a great deal but not a terrible one either.
A deal similar to that is what we need. Deal one of the soft underachievers to get a big winger or center. BC mentionned Rob Niedermayer and Jason Wiemer. Obviously, like Kilger, both of them have dissapointed big time in this league, but that doesn't mean they can't help teams. Especially ours.
AS has to be creative and like JV said it has to be a bold move.
|
|
|
Post by HFTO on Oct 25, 2002 15:43:33 GMT -5
To me its all about balance there is room for Audette's and Petrovs but not when it makes up 75% of the team. Andre Savard was under the gun to put this team in the playoffs so he found the best available talent from the rest of the teams and put them under one big roof.Theproblem is all the players are of similar skill and stature,add to the fact hat he is over paying and poof he has quite a dilema on his hands.IMO opinion AS is wary of making a big deal for the fact it may the team a playoff spot if things don't pan out in the short term.By making the layoffs and having a succesful run expectations are high,not only by the fans but by the owner.Old George loved those extra $$$ in his wallet and I'm sure Andre is all to wary of that. AS has to prove his worth,if it means long term good I could handle a minor setback. HFTO
|
|
|
Post by MPLABBE on Oct 25, 2002 16:01:31 GMT -5
problem is if AS doesn't make a trade and take that risk we won't make the playoffs unless Theodore returns to last year's form.
We need a high risk/high reward type of deal or just making minor pick ups here are there
A Savage for Berezin safe kind of deal is the LAST thing we need right now.
|
|
|
Post by JacquesInFL on Oct 25, 2002 16:06:23 GMT -5
What we are witnessing, I think, is not really a choice between a faster team with plenty of two-way forwards or a hi ho silver posse of snipers.
The real sad part of this is that we keep recycling second tier snipers (out goes Rucinsky and Savage, and in comes Berezin, Audette and Czerkawski). If all we can actually acquire or afford is the second tier type, then I'd much rather build in the mold BC suggests. Let's make no mistake, we have some very good prospects that may well be able to light the lamp. Our 86 and 93 Cups were stocked with many good two-way performers and a stud goalie. And the Habs made the playoffs last year without Berezin or Audette doing much of anything).
Well, at least I bet a Hab fan down the road that Audette wouldn't pot 30 goals this year -- 15 lbs of the Gulf's finest shrimp and three cases of Moosehead should provide a good basis for a little Habs playoff party in April (or else it can be a Therrien, Green, Charron walking-the-plank party).
|
|
|
Post by PTH on Oct 25, 2002 16:09:07 GMT -5
I have to go with BC here. AS needs to make a Zholtok for Kilger kind of deal. Use that blueprint for a deal. Let's not forget that was essentially a salary dump. Kilger makes well over a million, Zholtok made 500K or so. We might already be maxed out salary wise.
|
|
|
Post by PTH on Oct 25, 2002 16:14:03 GMT -5
What we are witnessing, I think, is not really a choice between a faster team with plenty of two-way forwards or a hi ho silver posse of snipers. The real sad part of this is that we keep recycling second tier snipers (out goes Rucinsky and Savage, and in comes Berezin, Audette and Czerkawski). If all we can actually acquire or afford is the second tier type, then I'd much rather build in the mold BC suggests. .... Well, we sure can afford better. But to do that you have to shave spendings elsewhere. Only one goalie making real money, not 3 similar players, not always getting UFAs to fill gaps rather than project-type kids. Zednik-Koivu-Amonte Kilger-Perreault-Petrov Bulis-Juneau-Asham Ribeiro-Malhotra-Lindsay That's what I suggested should be our lineup by now. Nothing unrealistic about it, IMO. Take Dykhuis off the D and add Hainsey as a regular rather than an injury fill-in for Souray, and Traverse is our #7 guy. AS went for depth and more depth, and right now we're choking in that depth.
|
|
|
Post by MPLABBE on Oct 25, 2002 16:14:59 GMT -5
Let's not forget that was essentially a salary dump. Kilger makes well over a million, Zholtok made 500K or so. We might already be maxed out salary wise. True. let's hope Gino retires so we can save his salary ;D
|
|
|
Post by M. Beaux-Eaux on Oct 25, 2002 17:15:11 GMT -5
hossa.
|
|
|
Post by Viper on Oct 25, 2002 17:55:52 GMT -5
BC as soon as i started reading your post my brain went DING DING DING we have a winner in this idea and as i read through it all my brain realized another thing(two realization's in one day it's time for bed.) San Jose Sharks 6 guys with 20 plus goals 2 in the teens (17 and 19) nobody hit 30 goals but 3 more guys had 9 goals. That's some seriusly well balanced offense.
The interesting thing is only 2 guys on the forward lines are under 6 feet tall Mike Ricci and a rookie center named Mark Smith who is 5'10 but 203. Not one guy hit 70 points Nolan had 66 to lead the team which was 34th in the league. Their blueline is huge and young the smallest guy is Marchment and he's the enforcer and at 33 the old guy back there as well.
It seems to me this is the model your after and it's pretty hard to argue against the fact that this team would most likely kill any team in the east if they made the finals they are most definately a contender and a good model for future success.
Their Veteran's are Marchment(33), Adam graves(34) Vinny D(34) Teemu Selanne(32), Nolan(30) and Ricci(30) all of those guy's have at least 2 or more quality year's left in the tank. That's the model we should be after.
|
|
|
Post by MPLABBE on Oct 25, 2002 18:04:54 GMT -5
BC as soon as i started reading your post my brain went DING DING DING we have a winner in this idea and as i read through it all my brain realized another thing(two realization's in one day it's time for bed.) San Jose Sharks 6 guys with 20 plus goals 2 in the teens (17 and 19) nobody hit 30 goals but 3 more guys had 9 goals. That's some seriusly well balanced offense. The interesting thing is only 2 guys on the forward lines are under 6 feet tall Mike Ricci and a rookie center named Mark Smith who is 5'10 but 203. Not one guy hit 70 points Nolan had 66 to lead the team which was 34th in the league. Their blueline is huge and young the smallest guy is Marchment and he's the enforcer and at 33 the old guy back there as well. It seems to me this is the model your after and it's pretty hard to argue against the fact that this team would most likely kill any team in the east if they made the finals they are most definately a contender and a good model for future success. Their Veteran's are Marchment(33), Adam graves(34) Vinny D(34) Teemu Selanne(32), Nolan(30) and Ricci(30) all of those guy's have at least 2 or more quality year's left in the tank. That's the model we should be after. It helps when you finish among the worst teams in the league and draft a Marleau and a Stuart 2 years in arrow It helps when you can deal a Jeff Friesen and his endless ''potential'' to get a Selanne. Anyone know the Sharks payroll?
|
|
|
Post by Viper on Oct 25, 2002 19:43:27 GMT -5
i don't care how Marc i just used it as an example to strive for. They are a well balanced machine.
|
|
|
Post by MPLABBE on Oct 25, 2002 19:56:25 GMT -5
i don't care how Marc i just used it as an example to strive for. They are a well balanced machine. I agree. All I am saying is they drafted well when they had top choices and have made great trades. Another team to look at is the Kings...they were far from an impressive team 3-4-5 years ago. Now they have a very good team with plenty of talent in it's prime. They robbed Palffy, they got Allison, they traded Blake and got Deadmarsh, Miller, Aulin and a 1st rounder. Signed Schneider and Potvin for nothing. Made some good draft picks(Frolov),etc. Habs need to rob a team. It's time for us to steal someone for a change.
|
|
|
Post by Disgruntled70sHab on Oct 25, 2002 20:01:32 GMT -5
I don't think AS has the assets to move to get a big piece, unless it involves sacrificing the future, big time. Right! Without a doubt this is the brightest part of our future. However, you have to admit, if any of these three were dangled, there'd be plenty of takers. It's funny isn't it? Every year everyone, including myself, gets pumped for the junior draft; we see the "potential" that is drafted and then hyped on the boards. However, I, like everyone else, continues to wait for that one ringer to emerge. I honestly feel Théodore is one of those ringers, but he has to find his groove again. Andrei Markov and Ron Hainsey are two more, but where is that power forward every team seems to have but us? As for Hoglund, well, he had an opportunity to play with Sundin and cashed in on it. He didn't have that chance in Montreal being on the 4th line. But still, HA could do as well as Jonas, had he Sundin as his centre. Tucker went down south in a six-player deal that saw the Habs get tougher. Patric Poulin, Mick Vukota and Igor Ulanov came this way when we sent David Wilkie, Darcy Tucker, and Stéphane Richer south. The Habs needed that enforcer in Vukota, and though Ulanov was a wild cannon at times, he was a strong team guy. I hated losing Tucker but the trade worked for both sides. Richer and Wilkie are both gone. Tucker wore an "A" and then the "C" in Tampa. Vukota didn't last long. But Uly and Poulin played their roles for a few years after. You know something else? Tucker and Asham hated each other. But I think one of they could have been one of the most effective tandems we had, had we iced them together. Sure is looking that way. Bummer! Who'd have thought big Johnny would develop the way he did? You know something? It was BS luck I figure! No way Bob Clarke knew what he was getting back then. Made him look pretty good, while Houle took it on the chin ... BIG TIME. Cheers.
|
|
|
Post by Disgruntled70sHab on Oct 25, 2002 20:19:53 GMT -5
Unfortunately, all of our expendable assets have been dealt, with little to show for it. Personally, I am not a big fan of moving one of the big three hopes on defence (Markov, Hainsey, Komisarek) if it can at all be avoided. We have the potential to have an extremely balanced, strong defensive corps in the future, and I am not all that keen on shredding that potential. While we can argue about "depth" the truth is, beyond those three there isn't much. Unless you are hoping one of Linhart, Shasby or Archer pulls through, but those are all long shots. So I would keep what we got, and look at doing something else. That about sums it up really. These three are probably the brightest spot we have WRT our future. What are you going to do? I honestly liked the direction the team went if for no other reason than the elevated talent level Savard brought to the team. He injected not just new blood, but an entire transfusion; that is compared to what he inherited to work with. I'd love to have a much bigger team, but where and how? As PTH pointed out, most of our tradable assets are gone. It would be nice if WE got lucky on a trade for a change. I think we're due for it. I have my fingers crossed that Bulis can keep this going. Kilger reminds me of Turner Stevenson right now, and Zednik seems to be unfettered by the high sticks he's been taking to his face over the last three games. Who are you kidding, BC? You'd take Asham on your team wouldn't you? I sure would. Cheers.
|
|
|
Post by seventeen on Oct 25, 2002 20:33:59 GMT -5
Still not a consensus. I like most of BC's idea, except that at some point you need to have some guy who's a natural goal scorer, whether he's a rock or soft as goose down. But you can go a long way with a disciplined, defensive team and good goaltending.
Please, everyone, don't even suggest trading Markov, Hainsey or Komi. The only thing harder to find than a good young power forward is a good young defenseman. We have 3, we're keeping them!
Lastly, please don't lump Charron in with Green and Therrien. The guy has done nothing to deserve that kind of known company. He won a WJC, and that's more than MT"s Memorial Cup in my opinion. And he was an intelligent player when he played. I'd be willing to give him a chance (and suggested he may have been hired explicitly to take over for MT when he was signed). What's there to lose? He doesn't pan out, he was just interim anyway...no big salary to eat, no PR problem. And we give the team a kick-start. Bring up some kids, somehow, at the same time.
|
|
|
Post by MPLABBE on Oct 25, 2002 20:36:35 GMT -5
Please, everyone, don't even suggest trading Markov, Hainsey or Komi. The only thing harder to find than a good young power forward is a good young defenseman. We have 3, we're keeping them! but if they can bring you that power forward.... *bangs head on table*
|
|
|
Post by Disgruntled70sHab on Oct 25, 2002 20:40:54 GMT -5
But you can go a long way with a disciplined, defensive team and good goaltending ... Please, everyone, don't even suggest trading Markov, Hainsey or Komi. The only thing harder to find than a good young power forward is a good young defenseman. We have 3, we're keeping them! If we're to have any players to build around in the future, these would be them, IMHO. Cheers.
|
|