|
Post by PTH on Sept 10, 2002 22:53:00 GMT -5
www.cyberpresse.ca/reseau/sports/0209/spo_102090135191.htmlThis team has talent and decent depth.... but what about team unity ? This team basically gave up in the end against Carolina, when the series was still within reach. Soft, talented players who aren't renowned for their 2-way play.... this kind of guy tends to hurt team unity, IMO, since they don't pay the price, so other players don't want to pay it anymore, either. And leader-wise, who do we have ? Gilmour and Saku, Rivet as a fill-in, but that's about it. This could be a terrific team, or this could get very painful.
|
|
|
Post by Doc Holliday on Sept 11, 2002 7:45:02 GMT -5
For sure.
Savard went out of his way to put his hands on veterans like Perreault, Juneau, Quintal, McKay and Gilmour. That's all fine and dandy and we praise St Savard for the newly acquired depth but do we seriously think that after leading the team offensively Perreault will be happy as a 3rd line center? That Gilmour would be happy in a support role? That Juneau would be happy on a 4th line or be removed from a center spot which he likes better ? Do we see Petrov on a 3rd or 4th line? How about guys like Odjick and Bulis? Sure they are not very important players, but they create distraction if they aren't happy... And if the plan isn't to use them then by all means they'll want to be given an opportunity to go somewhere they can play...
Last year around Christmas Savard had to go down to the dressing room to address the players because the team was going nowhere and indeed we saw in the playoffs that the team isn't too solid and that not every players are happy campers with Therrien... It's quite simple, there are too many players that can do about the same job.
As I said in the coach topic, I do believe this team will have a serious players/coach clash very early in the season and Savard will have to adddress that...
|
|
|
Post by MPLABBE on Sept 11, 2002 7:46:40 GMT -5
Good point...few have thought about this and it has been basically forgotten.
That's why it's important to get off to a good start...the best way to form chemistry is winning.
|
|
|
Post by Disgruntled70sHab on Sept 11, 2002 10:03:54 GMT -5
I honestly don't think the team gave up in the final game in as much as they ran out of gas, PTH. However, where I think they gave up and ultimately lost the series was game 4. You could see the meltdown happening when it was only 3-0; the one-handed rushes up ice (one of those from our leaders no less), lackadasical line changes. Hindsight is golden but at that point I would have liked to have seen Therrien call his time out and rip these guys a new .... What are others supposed to do when they see their leaders doing that? I still remember the final game of the series watching no-look behind the back passes that were intercepted. Again, one our leaders was responsible for doing that; again, how does that affect others? I agree, Koivu the heart of the team, Gilmour the go-to guy in the dressing room and general club clown, Rivet high-fiving everyone as they go on to and leave the ice. Both Koivu and Gilmour will make the sacrifices you referred to. Rivet is capable of doing that, but as many have pointed out in the past, perhaps it was his injury that prevented him from ascerting himself. As for the lack of two-way players; hmm .... might account for the 40-odd shots Théodore had to face game-in, game-out. Just a question; do any of you remember what Houle had to do in order to replace injured players during that 2-season, injury-filled time we had. Knowing the situation Houle was in, his fellow GMs wouldn't trade up with him unless it was on their terms. Or, they just didn't want to trade with him period. He had no choice but to make call ups from the farm. Remember that? They may not have won too many games with an AHL-filled lineup, but they were in just about every game and rarely got blown out. They were entertaining because they were young and energetic, playing for jobs, and had absolutely nothing to lose. These young guys listened to Vigneault and gave it their honest all. Too bad young millionaires can't do the same. Cheers.
|
|
|
Post by Habs_fan_in_LA on Sept 11, 2002 11:46:29 GMT -5
I honestly don't think the team gave up in the final game in as much as they ran out of gas, PTH. However, where I think they gave up and ultimately lost the series was game 4. You could see the meltdown happening when it was only 3-0; the one-handed rushes up ice (one of those from our leaders no less), lackadasical line changes. Hindsight is golden but at that point I would have liked to have seen Therrien call his time out and rip these guys a new .... What are others supposed to do when they see their leaders doing that? I still remember the final game of the series watching no-look behind the back passes that were intercepted. Again, one our leaders was responsible for doing that; again, how does that affect others? I agree, Koivu the heart of the team, Gilmour the go-to guy in the dressing room and general club clown, Rivet high-fiving everyone as they go on to and leave the ice. Both Koivu and Gilmour will make the sacrifices you referred to. Rivet is capable of doing that, but as many have pointed out in the past, perhaps it was his injury that prevented him from ascerting himself. As for the lack of two-way players; hmm .... might account for the 40-odd shots Théodore had to face game-in, game-out. Just a question; do any of you remember what Houle had to do in order to replace injured players during that 2-season, injury-filled time we had. Knowing the situation Houle was in, his fellow GMs wouldn't trade up with him unless it was on their terms. Or, they just didn't want to trade with him period. He had no choice but to make call ups from the farm. Remember that? They may not have won too many games with an AHL-filled lineup, but they were in just about every game and rarely got blown out. They were entertaining because they were young and energetic, playing for jobs, and had absolutely nothing to lose. These young guys listened to Vigneault and gave it their honest all. Too bad young millionaires can't do the same. Cheers. I agree with PTH on this one. They gave up because they ran out of gas or they ran out of gas because they gave up. It really doesn't matter. We see the Rangers with the payroll, stars and no unity. We saw the Hurricanes with no stars but a team work ethic. Montreal in a small market with all the disadvantages of the Canadian teams needs to hustle and outwork opponents. We can't afford to get out shot every night and still hope to win. Team chemistry is of paramount importance. Along the racist note, i've noticed that the Russians and Czech's have been more interested in their personal skills and stats than their teamwork. On international teams they fly and develop wonderful creative plays, but in the NHL they collect paychecks and the fattest czech goes to the personal stats. Maybe Don Cherry was right, not about "ChickenSaperlipopette Swedes" but about disgruntled selfcentered Russians and Czech's.
|
|
|
Post by MPLABBE on Sept 11, 2002 12:11:23 GMT -5
Montreal is a small market? how come is our payroll is in the top 15?
We are a mid market team. Small markets are Edmonton, Calgary, Ottawa,etc
|
|
|
Post by Disgruntled70sHab on Sept 11, 2002 13:01:27 GMT -5
Maybe Don Cherry was right, not about "ChickenSaperlipopette Swedes" but about disgruntled selfcentered Russians and Czech's. Cherry has said a lot of things about foreign hockey players' ethics and priorities. Unfortunately, when the press jumps all over him for his non-political viewpoints he is labelled a racist, etc. One comment he made several times was that he thought the Russians to be quitters. He supported that with several examples but then again he riled up emotions. "That's my job I guess" was his quote during a Jim Rome interview. Though I don't agree with everything he says, I still think he knows his stuff and isn't intimidated in expressing himself. Cheers.
|
|
|
Post by Doc Holliday on Sept 11, 2002 15:59:19 GMT -5
Another comment Cherry made on National TV during the Olympics of Nagano was that French Quebecers were all whiners and separatists that should not be allowed to carry the Canadian flag.
I believe he was called a racist after that one too...
|
|
|
Post by habwest on Sept 11, 2002 16:31:13 GMT -5
Hmmm.... obviously Cherry hasn't met Kovalchuk. He was quoted as saying that when players say nasty things about his mother or country he just goes and scores a goal. Right now that Russian would be the second pick on my team, right after a top goalie.
|
|
|
Post by HFTO on Sept 11, 2002 17:20:40 GMT -5
PTH, I too am very cautious,I'm not quite convinced there will be any middle ground for this club.Adding MacKay will help but is it enough? Like Doc mentioned will certain players assume a different role and accept it? I think when the schedule came out Marc started a perdictioin thread.The first month is a tough one,we will have an idea of how this team shapes up.MT better hope this team gets off to a decent start or it maybe a very long season. Another thing to consider is the so called crack down on the way the game is played.We could very well benefit with a fast team,on the other hand I can see our D struggling. Lets hope the boys come together Go Habs HFTO
|
|
|
Post by MPLABBE on Sept 11, 2002 17:32:54 GMT -5
PTH, We could very well benefit with a fast team,on the other hand I can see our D struggling. Lets hope the boys come together Go Habs HFTO I think it can really help us...but will the refs finally maintain for the whole year?
|
|
|
Post by Disgruntled70sHab on Sept 11, 2002 18:08:00 GMT -5
Another comment Cherry made on National TV during the Olympics of Nagano was that French Quebecers were all whiners and separatists that should not be allowed to carry the Canadian flag. I believe he was called a racist after that one too... No doubt he was. I remember the comments, but can't for the life of me think of why he'd say it. Not on. Cheers.
|
|
|
Post by Lupien on Sept 11, 2002 18:32:33 GMT -5
No doubt he was. I remember the comments, but can't for the life of me think of why he'd say it. Not on. Cheers. I can Dis. He's an uneducated, hateful, and ugly bigot. He's a clown, just like the folks who run the CBC. Lupe
|
|
|
Post by seventeen on Sept 11, 2002 19:59:49 GMT -5
Another comment Cherry made on National TV during the Olympics of Nagano was that French Quebecers were all whiners and separatists that should not be allowed to carry the Canadian flag. I believe he was called a racist after that one too... I like Cherry. Not when he makes silly comments like the above, but he's right often enough that he's worth listening to. I suspect he goes over the line occasionally either because of his passion or because he deliberately wants to get a rise out of people. He has his favourites (anyone from Kingston), prairie boys, tough guys...and if you don't fall into those categories, he can be tough on you. But when I see someone, regardless of their ethnic origin, not giving it everything, or making stupid on-ice decisions, or not supporting their teammates..I get pretty annoyed too. Cherry's just in a position to make those opinions known. And he sometimes generalizes, when that generalization is obviously wrong. Would you call Igor Ulanov a quitter? Yashin, maybe, but not Ulanov, nor Petrov, nor any number of other solid Russian players. How about Rucinsky? (Of course we would). But there are Czech's who'd go through a brick wall for their team. (Not sure why, because that would hurt, but there you have it). Is Forsberg soft? Hah. Regardless, Cherry is spot on with most of his observations, far more often right than wrong, that I admit to watching Coaches Corner pretty consistently. Now if he could just lose that Leafs bias, I'd like him a whole lot more.
|
|
|
Post by Disgruntled70sHab on Sept 11, 2002 22:41:08 GMT -5
Yeah, he rambles on sometimes for sure. That Quebeçois reference I remember because I read either here on the board or elsewhere. I honestly didn't see the telecast in which he said it.
Still, it's comments like that, that give him his reputation as a redneck.
I have to admit that I try not to miss his Coaches Corner segments as well. He is bang on the mark when he sticks to his hockey.
Cheers.
|
|
|
Post by MPLABBE on Oct 24, 2002 21:17:36 GMT -5
Congrats to PTH. He warned us...
|
|
|
Post by PTH on Oct 25, 2002 11:55:12 GMT -5
Everyone on the board is basically agreeing with what I've been saying all summer long....
I hate it when I'm right.
|
|
|
Post by The Habitual Fan on Oct 25, 2002 13:10:16 GMT -5
As for Cherry saying Quebecers where whiners and seperatists should not be allowed to carry the Canadian flag was in reference to the Olympics a few years back and I remember him saying the whiner he was referring to was a woman who was a French Canadian delegate at the Olympics who complained about having too many Canadian flags displayed in the village. And he had said that if an athelete is a known seperatist it is hyprocritical that they would carry the flag and should not be allowed.
Not that I always agree with Cherry, but it is taking things out of context that can help label anybody a racist. If Cherry is anything he is very proud of being Canadian.
|
|
|
Post by JohnnyVerdun on Oct 25, 2002 14:00:42 GMT -5
PTH might have been right about the mess up front (mainly) but it remains to be seen whether Savard can turn things around and extricate himself and the team from this mess.
To me, the problem really does begin at the center position, though that's not the only problem. Savard had to be counting on Gilmour being an effective second line center and generating some offence, failing which Perreault would get it done, or vice versa. In either event, it just hasn't happened. The result is that we've got three or four non-physical wingers who aren't getting any chances on the break or out of the cycle, and they're not playing good defence either. Fact is, these guys are better with the puck than without it and we're not getting it off theface-off and we're not capable of getting it back without doing the dirty work along the boards and in the corners.
As is often the case, problems have a way of linking up with other problems and creating situations. The problem at center is being compounded by the loss of all the battles at our own blueline when trying to get out of the zone. Two things folllow from this: first, we're giving up second and third attacks on our goal when our players are sucking air and need to get off the ice; and second, we're not getting these guys who can handle the puck out on the break nearly enough.
The other problem is that when Gilmour and Perreault do get to lug the puck to othe opposition blueline they're typically going about 3 kilometers an hour and their passing isn't crisp, so that we're not getting good shoot-ins and neither are we getting any inventive, quick play coming into the zone. And when we do dump it we can be pretty sure that Czerkawski and Audette and Gilmour and Perreault aren't going to get it back for us.
One strong playmaking center about 6-2 215 pounds would change the look in a hurry. But who is that guy and how do we get him?
|
|
|
Post by Boston_Habs on Oct 25, 2002 14:11:44 GMT -5
How about Trevor Linden!!
Just kidding. I floated the idea of Jason Arnott in a previous post, but do we have enough of what Dallas would want, assuming they even want to deal him? He's injured right now, but he could look pretty good on a line with McKay and Czerkawski, for example.
It all comes down to how much Markov and/or Hainsey are worth, since nobody wants who we want to get rid of (Audi, Perreault, Gilmour), and our other guys like Petrov and Kilger aren't all that attractive either.
Markov, Kilger, plus a pick for Arnott???
|
|
|
Post by JacquesInFL on Oct 25, 2002 14:29:46 GMT -5
Good post, JV. Savard has a tough job because there is simply no way without trading top prospects to acquire a 6'2" 215 centre that can skate, pass and be the defensive saviour for a line with wingers like Audette or Czerk.
There were so many awful moments from the game last night that highlight what you are saying. For me, that Primeau goal was like a tragi-comedy. Perreault's line finally succeeded in crossing the blueline with the puck but then he is removed (well, demolished) by the d-man and, while he lies on the ice, the Flyers speed through neutral zone and create 5 on 3. Audette is backchecking like he's in beer league on this play.
If things don't improve by the end of October, I vote for sitting a couple non-performing, unmotivated vets (Sure it would be great to trade one or two but someone like Audette is, IMO, virtually untradeable).
|
|
|
Post by Boston_Habs on Oct 25, 2002 14:35:56 GMT -5
Good post, JV. Savard has a tough job because there is simply no way without trading top prospects to acquire a 6'2" 215 centre that can skate, pass and be the defensive saviour for a line with wingers like Audette or Czerk. There were so many awful moments from the game last night that highlight what you are saying. For me, that Primeau goal was like a tragi-comedy. Perreault's line finally succeeded in crossing the blueline with the puck but then he is removed (well, demolished) by the d-man and, while he lies on the ice, the Flyers speed through neutral zone and create 5 on 3. Audette is backchecking like he's in beer league on this play. If things don't improve by the end of October, I vote for sitting a couple non-performing, unmotivated vets (Sure it would be great to trade one or two but someone like Audette is, IMO, virtually untradeable). The value of top prospects is two-fold... either you use them to build your own team or trade them to get the piece you need. Markov or Hainsey is going to have to go if you want to fix the problem now, because fans will not tolerate a step backwards after last year. We have some good prospects with good trade value. Markov has continued to show terrific offensive instincts and we could package him and get something good.
|
|
|
Post by The Habitual Fan on Oct 25, 2002 14:49:26 GMT -5
If this team was one player (like Arnott) away from contending for the cup then trading away a top prospect would make some sense. This team cannot trade 1 or 2 prospects just so they can make the playoffs. In 3 or 4 years from now when Markov and Hainsey are solid NHL players if not all-stars, but playing for another team I don't want to look back and say "Oh yeah, but we went to the second round on 2003"
|
|
|
Post by PTH on Oct 25, 2002 15:20:12 GMT -5
PTH might have been right about the mess up front (mainly) but it remains to be seen whether Savard can turn things around and extricate himself and the team from this mess. .......... One strong playmaking center about 6-2 215 pounds would change the look in a hurry. But who is that guy and how do we get him? You're right that I didn't identify the problems all that well, but I think I was right in being cautious and about fearing getting stuck with multiple big contracts and losing flexibility. As to who we need, we can't hope to get that one key guy. What we an hope for is multiple moves.... CGY needs more offense ? Maybe they'd be willing to take on Czerkawski if we pick up some of his salary, add in a throw-in and maybe we can get lucky and get a Marc Savard back. That gives us playmaking. Then play the guy with a big winger or two (Kilger comes to mind) and you start to have a decent 2nd line... We need multiple minor upgrades, the key problem being that way too many of our guys are nearly impossible to move these days.
|
|
|
Post by JohnnyVerdun on Oct 25, 2002 15:48:43 GMT -5
That's true, but the theory wasn't that bad. If Gilmour picks up where he left off, and with Perreault back in the regular season where he can play effectively, we should by now have seen a competitive battle among Petrov, Czerk and Audette for time. In other words, two of the three should be producing. If they were, the team wouldn't be looking so bad and you'd only have to move one of them: the odd man out. Problem is, all three are not producing (though Petrov is working as usual) and Montreal is now as desperate to deal as any team in the league (or should be). Plus, it's very early in the season, where hope is still the order of the day in most GMs offices.
Again, we wouldn't be in this boat if even one of these guys was getting it done. The fact that none of them are is a surprise to me and, evidently, to Savard as well.
|
|
|
Post by MPLABBE on Oct 25, 2002 15:51:34 GMT -5
Markov, Kilger, plus a pick for Arnott??? It won't happen. We need Markov and Dallas is stacked on defence.
|
|
|
Post by MPLABBE on Oct 25, 2002 15:55:11 GMT -5
As to who we need, we can't hope to get that one key guy. What we an hope for is multiple moves.... CGY needs more offense ? Maybe they'd be willing to take on Czerkawski if we pick up some of his salary, add in a throw-in and maybe we can get lucky and get a Marc Savard back. That gives us playmaking. Then play the guy with a big winger or two (Kilger comes to mind) and you start to have a decent 2nd line... We need multiple minor upgrades, the key problem being that way too many of our guys are nearly impossible to move these days. The minor upgrades could certainly help. The Caps have done that (Grier, Miller, Berry, return of guys like Johansson and Konwalchuk from injury) and they are a different team. That's a good example. I doubt we need Marc Savard all that much. The guy is a headcase and a whinner. He's a talent, no doubt though. But where do you play him? center is stacked right now
|
|