|
|
Post by Doc Holliday on May 26, 2009 8:33:29 GMT -5
I see him as a guy who won't let people down his side without a bit of sweat pouring off them and who can make a decent first pass. In all honesty I've read that the reason his devellopment has stalled in the KHL is actually because he's not a player tailor made for that league and that the smaller NA rink and style could be beneficial for him. |
|
|
|
Post by gy on May 26, 2009 11:39:27 GMT -5
Patient goes both ways in this case. Every year people rave with at the prospect-du-jour and put unachievable expectations on prospects. Some are pegging him as a sure shot NHLer, top 4 D as early as next year with Kronwall or Kasparytis upside, I'm thinking that the guy will most likely go through an adjustment period and a player's rough style in a Euro league might not translate so evidently in the NHL. Call it quibbling but in my book you're just searching for arguments where there isn't any. I In all honesty I've read that the reason his devellopment has stalled in the KHL is actually because he's not a player tailor made for that league and that the smaller NA rink and style could be beneficial for him. I agree with the second of your statements. Which one best expresses your thoughts? |
|
|
|
Post by Doc Holliday on May 26, 2009 12:34:26 GMT -5
Patient goes both ways in this case. Every year people rave with at the prospect-du-jour and put unachievable expectations on prospects. Some are pegging him as a sure shot NHLer, top 4 D as early as next year with Kronwall or Kasparytis upside, I'm thinking that the guy will most likely go through an adjustment period and a player's rough style in a Euro league might not translate so evidently in the NHL. Call it quibbling but in my book you're just searching for arguments where there isn't any. I In all honesty I've read that the reason his devellopment has stalled in the KHL is actually because he's not a player tailor made for that league and that the smaller NA rink and style could be beneficial for him. I agree with the second of your statements. Which one best expresses your thoughts? Both! In essence, most reports point towards this guy being more "NHL" style. I realize that. On the other hand, he remains a prospects that hasn't played a game in North America so I'm not setting him up to have an immediate impact as I remain convinced he'll go through an adjustment period at the end of which we'll have a much better idea of what he can or can't do. |
|
|
|
Post by CrocRob on May 26, 2009 13:08:01 GMT -5
I agree with the second of your statements. Which one best expresses your thoughts? Both! In essence, most reports point towards this guy being more "NHL" style. I realize that. On the other hand, he remains a prospects that hasn't played a game in North America so I'm not setting him up to have an immediate impact as I remain convinced he'll go through an adjustment period at the end of which we'll have a much better idea of what he can or can't do. Where as PK Subban has never played a hockey game against a man. How's he any closer? That's what I don't really understand. How people say that Subban is closer than anyone else, least of all a player who's competed against men and professionals for 4+ season in arguably the 2nd best league on the planet. |
|
|
|
Post by Habs_fan_in_LA on May 26, 2009 14:05:01 GMT -5
www.rds.ca/canadien/chroniques/275219.htmlEmelin/Yemelin confirms he is negotiating with the Habs. Personally im excited to see him come over to NA. No secret his game seems more tailored to the NA style. With some seasoning he could develop into a good partner for Andrei Markov. The Habs could use more players with his grit. And for the record i would welcome Perezhogin back as well, but apparently he already told the club he's not interested in coming back at this time. Can't really blame him, he's likely to make more over there than he will on whatever deal brings him back to the NHL. Can't wait to see whether they put Emelin or Yemelin on his jersey  It'd be great to get another left handed D in the system. He's said to be very aggressive, even over-aggressive which our goalies would love considering we got to be one of the softest defenses in the league playing in front of them. Emelin or Yemelin? The real answer is Nyet or Notyet. He has not shown a real desire to come to North America and learn the game, style and language. He has not shown any scoring prowess in Russia. He has taken a lot of penalties so that makes him tough the way the Hab's took penalties against the Bruins but lost the physical battles. He is a tough guy who got his lights punched out in a fight. We need a Subban or Weber /Streit who can move the puck, shoot from the point, clear the zone and make the first pass. We need a defenseman with speed and skill, not a mini-Komisarek who takes foolish penalties at inopportune times. Subban has played in NA, played against international competition, and looked good in the Hab's NHL training camp. Perezhoegin, Yemelin and Valentenko are just looking for money for lap dances. They have not negotiated in good faith and signed to play near their homeland Russia. Nothing wrong with that if you're a Russian, but that's not the way Ovechkin and Malkin played the game. If they were truly amazing players, accomodations can be made, but they are less than amazing. Much less! |
|
|
|
Post by CrocRob on May 26, 2009 14:15:41 GMT -5
When did Perezhogin not negotiate in good faith?
|
|
|
|
Post by Habs_fan_in_LA on May 26, 2009 14:43:03 GMT -5
When did Perezhogin not negotiate in good faith? I know I'm suffering from Alzheimers, but didn't Perezhoegin choose to go to Russia instead of a career with the Hab's. He was obviously hurt with the stick swinging incident in the AHL where he was unfairly penalized for retaliation. Instead of accepting a two way contract, Hab's/Dogs and getting a fair chance to prove himself as NHL ready and deserving, he chose the new KHL Oilfield hockey league. Plekanec stayed, fought for a spot and had a good year before it all came apart for him. All you can ask for and expect is a chance to prove yourself on a team with lots of holes to fill and precious little high quality pothole filler. Once upon a time a rookie had to fight Olmstead, Rocket, Tremblay, Moore, Geoffrion, and Provost to create an opening on the big team. Today we have free agents leaving and you have to beat out O'byrne or Stewart to get a spot on the team. Contracts only mean something if you signed in Russia. You can break a contract signed in North America to go to the KHL. I think the two P's Perezhoegin and Plekanec have speed and can skate. They are average or above average players. The Red Wings don't go looking for average or slightly above average. They go for drive, talent and team players. Time for the Hab's to raise the bar. |
|
|
|
Post by CrocRob on May 26, 2009 15:04:16 GMT -5
I know I'm suffering from Alzheimers, but didn't Perezhoegin choose to go to Russia instead of a career with the Hab's. He was obviously hurt with the stick swinging incident in the AHL where he was unfairly penalized for retaliation. Instead of accepting a two way contract, Hab's/Dogs and getting a fair chance to prove himself as NHL ready and deserving, he chose the new KHL Oilfield hockey league. Plekanec stayed, fought for a spot and had a good year before it all came apart for him. All you can ask for and expect is a chance to prove yourself on a team with lots of holes to fill and precious little high quality pothole filler. Once upon a time a rookie had to fight Olmstead, Rocket, Tremblay, Moore, Geoffrion, and Provost to create an opening on the big team. Today we have free agents leaving and you have to beat out O'byrne or Stewart to get a spot on the team. Contracts only mean something if you signed in Russia. You can break a contract signed in North America to go to the KHL. I think the two P's Perezhoegin and Plekanec have speed and can skate. They are average or above average players. The Red Wings don't go looking for average or slightly above average. They go for drive, talent and team players. Time for the Hab's to raise the bar. Perezhogin didn't have a contract at the time (he was a free agent), took the better offer from the KHL team and went to play there. He was never afforded an opportunity to prove himself in Montreal as a scorer. The few times he was used in a scoring role he succeeded, and subsequently relegated back to a line with Mike Johnson and Radek Bonk (where he was very impressive as well). An enormously different approach than when guys like Ryder and Higgins are handed spots in the top 6 immediately upon arrival in Montreal. It's hardly not in good faith to take a better offer from a team that wants you, as opposed to a lower offer from a team that doesn't seem willing to give you a chance to succeed. Now he's gone, and has been a top 10 goal scorer in the KHL the last 2 seasons. It's not the 70's. Players on both sides of the ocean have more options than the Habs or whatever NHL team drafts them and it's unrealistic to expect them to spurn those other options for less money and a more minor role on a hockey team. For what it's worth, you can't break a contract in North America. The contract still exists. Radulov, for instance, is still under contract and will forever be under contract so long as he never returns to the NHL. Much like Valentenko is still under contract to the Habs. |
|
|
|
Post by Doc Holliday on May 26, 2009 15:47:22 GMT -5
That's what I don't really understand. How people say that Subban is closer than anyone else, least of all a player who's competed against men and professionals for 4+ season in arguably the 2nd best league on the planet. If I understand the question, why do I feel a guy playing in a NA league, in our backyard, who already had 2 very good pro camps with us and keeps getting praise is probably further along than a guy playing in Europe that none of us have seen more than twice (if even) and that's been labelled has a deception since joining the elite league over there? |
|
|
|
Post by CrocRob on May 26, 2009 18:48:10 GMT -5
That's what I don't really understand. How people say that Subban is closer than anyone else, least of all a player who's competed against men and professionals for 4+ season in arguably the 2nd best league on the planet. If I understand the question, why do I feel a guy playing in a NA league, in our backyard, who already had 2 very good pro camps with us and keeps getting praise is probably further along than a guy playing in Europe that none of us have seen more than twice (if even) and that's been labelled has a deception since joining the elite league over there? Well I've seen Emelin play at least 15 times in the past 2 seasons (it's really not that hard to get a look if you want to), and a few more prior to that while with Lada. His last 2 seasons were disappointing for whatever reasons (I honestly don't know but it's been suggested it's a team issue as well as Emelin's issue) but his time in the RSL while on Lada were fantastic. This being his 5th season playing in the RSL/KHL. Subban's very good pro camps got him the first cut both times, which would indicate he wasn't terribly close to getting real consideration for the pro team. Neither are close. Proximity doesn't make you closer to being an NHL-caliber player. |
|
|
|
Post by Skilly on May 31, 2009 18:31:12 GMT -5
He was never afforded an opportunity to prove himself in Montreal as a scorer. The few times he was used in a scoring role he succeeded, and subsequently relegated back to a line with Mike Johnson and Radek Bonk (where he was very impressive as well). An enormously different approach than when guys like Ryder and Higgins are handed spots in the top 6 immediately upon arrival in Montreal. Immediately? Nope. They worked their way up to the top six. Yep. Ryder started on the THIRD line (with Perreault and Audette). Yes, its true. Then was dropped to the FOURTH line after less than a quarter of the year. Then worked his way up onto Ribeiro's line. Higgins also started on the THIRD line (with Bonk and Steve Begin). And didn't get into the top six until well into January of that year. Perezhogin also had some time in the top six in his Habs tenure..... Here is a nice trivia factoid: Perezhogin scored his first NHL goal in his first game in the same game that Higgins scored his first NHL goal (and Ryder scored the winner). Plekanec was on the ice for both their goals, but Perezhogin's line was Plekanec and Kovalev. SO, Perezhogin was in fact, the player of the three you mentioned who was IMMEDIATELY put in a top 6 spot. |
|
|
|
Post by seventeen on May 31, 2009 19:14:58 GMT -5
Jeeze, took you 5 days, Skilly, 5! to respond to this post. The minute I read it I thought, "perhaps I should point out that Ryder started out low on the totem pole", but then I slapped myself on the head, knowing you'd set the record straight. But Migod, 5 days!. Were you on vacation?
|
|
|
|
Post by Skilly on May 31, 2009 20:35:37 GMT -5
Jeeze, took you 5 days, Skilly, 5! to respond to this post. The minute I read it I thought, "perhaps I should point out that Ryder started out low on the totem pole", but then I slapped myself on the head, knowing you'd set the record straight. But Migod, 5 days!. Were you on vacation? Weekend getaway with the wife.  Plus I am not in the prospects section as much as the others. |
|
|
|
Post by CrocRob on Jun 1, 2009 16:25:06 GMT -5
He was never afforded an opportunity to prove himself in Montreal as a scorer. The few times he was used in a scoring role he succeeded, and subsequently relegated back to a line with Mike Johnson and Radek Bonk (where he was very impressive as well). An enormously different approach than when guys like Ryder and Higgins are handed spots in the top 6 immediately upon arrival in Montreal. Immediately? Nope. They worked their way up to the top six. Yep. Ryder started on the THIRD line (with Perreault and Audette). Yes, its true. Then was dropped to the FOURTH line after less than a quarter of the year. Then worked his way up onto Ribeiro's line. Higgins also started on the THIRD line (with Bonk and Steve Begin). And didn't get into the top six until well into January of that year. Perezhogin also had some time in the top six in his Habs tenure..... Here is a nice trivia factoid: Perezhogin scored his first NHL goal in his first game in the same game that Higgins scored his first NHL goal (and Ryder scored the winner). Plekanec was on the ice for both their goals, but Perezhogin's line was Plekanec and Kovalev. SO, Perezhogin was in fact, the player of the three you mentioned who was IMMEDIATELY put in a top 6 spot. Indeed, I was hasty posting that comment, because it's something I feel perturbed by. Perezhogin started off in the NHL on a scoring line, playing 15-17 minutes per game and in those first 7 games he scored 2G 5A on a line with Kovalev and Koivu, at which point he was demoted and his icetime reduced by between 8 and 10 minutes per game, riding the pine at that point with Higgins, spending much of November, December and January with somewhere between zero and 5 minutes of icetime when he's not a healthy scratch. Meanwhile, Higgins (who's also producing next to nothing during this first half of the season) progressively sees his icetime increase from the 6 or 7 minutes up to a regular 13 minutes. And onward it goes for the duration of Perezhogin's time in Montreal. You're right. Perezhogin was given top six time. In his first 7 games, and rarely thereafter. I think it is pretty remarkable that Ryder spent considerable time on the fourth line seeing as how he played less than 12 minutes only twice in his rookie season, and one of those times was in March. Fewer than 13 minutes 8 games, fewer than 14 minutes 16 games. And many of those games were in February/March/April. When was he on the fourth line, riding the 10-minutes-or-less pine with Darren Langdon and Chad Kilger? Ryder scored 3 points on Nov. 18 2003 (points 7, 8 and 9 of the season to total 3G 6A), and from then on he played more than 15 minutes 47 games out of 60, which on the Habs that season meant you were a 2nd liner if not a first. Perezhogin scored 7 (3G 4A) points in his first 7 games, then an additional 5 (3G 2A) over the next 20 games (getting as little icetime as 1:22 one game) including 2 points on Dec 10 all the while being a plus player, and was not given any additional icetime. |
|
|
|
Post by roke on Jun 1, 2009 16:36:02 GMT -5
Was Zednik not injured when Perezhogin made his debut? I believe the first line at the time was Zednik-Koivu-Kovalev, but then Zednik was hurt for a bit and Perzhogin was inserted to that spot.
I could be wrong though.
|
|
|
|
Post by Skilly on Jun 1, 2009 19:12:22 GMT -5
I think it is pretty remarkable that Ryder spent considerable time on the fourth line seeing as how he played less than 12 minutes only twice in his rookie season, and one of those times was in March. Fewer than 13 minutes 8 games, fewer than 14 minutes 16 games. And many of those games were in February/March/April. When was he on the fourth line, riding the 10-minutes-or-less pine with Darren Langdon and Chad Kilger? Ryder scored 3 points on Nov. 18 2003 (points 7, 8 and 9 of the season to total 3G 6A), and from then on he played more than 15 minutes 47 games out of 60, which on the Habs that season meant you were a 2nd liner if not a first. Perezhogin scored 7 (3G 4A) points in his first 7 games, then an additional 5 (3G 2A) over the next 20 games (getting as little icetime as 1:22 one game) including 2 points on Dec 10 all the while being a plus player, and was not given any additional icetime. You see the thing about the 2003-04 season, was that even though Ryder was getting his even strength time cut he was NOT getting his PP time cut. He had 9:12 even strength time per game in the 2003-04 season. One of the least amounts on the team. It's pretty easy to see how he was on the fourth line for some time when you see Jim Dowd averaged 10:10 even strength time per game. Another point that you may have missed is that Ryder was put with many linemates in his first two seasons to jump start people. He was one of the hardest workers and sometimes started on the third / fourth line ... but didn't end the game on it, and in some instances, didn't even end the period on it. I know what I saw during the games, I never said it was oodles of time ... just that he worked his way up, and wasn't immediately given top six time like you asserted. I totally agree with you that Perezhogin wasn't given a proper chance to show what he can do .... and he isn't the only player that suffered over the past 3-4 years in an effort to develop Chris Higgins into a 40 goal man ... |
|
|
|
Post by CrocRob on Jun 1, 2009 22:19:37 GMT -5
He had 9:12 even strength time per game in the 2003-04 season. One of the least amounts on the team. It's pretty easy to see how he was on the fourth line for some time when you see Jim Dowd averaged 10:10 even strength time per game. I don't really feel like arguing about this but it's inaccurate enough that it's worthwhile pointing out the correction. That's just not true. I actually went and verified this because it would be a pretty remarkable feat to have played so many 15+ minute games and only average 9:12 at even strength. Ryder averaged over 12 minutes (12:35 to be exact) per game of even-strength icetime (16:00 total icetime) which was 5th among forwards (6th in total icetime).. behind only Zednik, Koivu, Ribeiro and Kovalev (and Bulis for overall icetime), and Kovalev only played 12 games with the Habs that season. Either your stat source is wrong, or you have some of your stats mixed up, but that was way off and horribly misleading. Ryder may have worked his way up, but don't make out like he was given the druthers in terms of icetime at any point in his rookie season. |
|
|
|
Post by Skilly on Jun 2, 2009 8:16:27 GMT -5
He had 9:12 even strength time per game in the 2003-04 season. One of the least amounts on the team. It's pretty easy to see how he was on the fourth line for some time when you see Jim Dowd averaged 10:10 even strength time per game. I don't really feel like arguing about this but it's inaccurate enough that it's worthwhile pointing out the correction. That's just not true. I actually went and verified this because it would be a pretty remarkable feat to have played so many 15+ minute games and only average 9:12 at even strength. Ryder averaged over 12 minutes (12:35 to be exact) per game of even-strength icetime (16:00 total icetime) which was 5th among forwards (6th in total icetime).. behind only Zednik, Koivu, Ribeiro and Kovalev (and Bulis for overall icetime), and Kovalev only played 12 games with the Habs that season. Either your stat source is wrong, or you have some of your stats mixed up, but that was way off and horribly misleading. Ryder may have worked his way up, but don't make out like he was given the druthers in terms of icetime at any point in his rookie season. Sorry ... I didn't mean to look like I was making anything up. It was actually an honest mistake. I subtracted his PP time 3:23, from his ES time 12:35 ..... sorry again. |
|
|
|
Post by BadCompany on Jun 8, 2009 19:49:25 GMT -5
Well they ain't talking to Emelin anymore, he's staying in Russia. www.rds.ca/canadien/chroniques/276162.htmlDoes this put an end to all that nonsense about how "my agent screwed me, I really wanted to sign with Montreal?" |
|
|
|
Post by Doc Holliday on Jun 8, 2009 20:11:32 GMT -5
Well they ain't talking to Emelin anymore, he's staying in Russia. www.rds.ca/canadien/chroniques/276162.htmlDoes this put an end to all that nonsense about how "my agent screwed me, I really wanted to sign with Montreal?" New agent, same decision. Case closed. Can't say I'm too broken hearted as I wasn't really buying the hype to begin with. |
|
|
|
Post by duster on Jun 8, 2009 23:10:40 GMT -5
I suspect he didn't like the idea of a two way contract and it's probably for this same reason he turned the Habs down before. It tells me he's probably not NHL caliber and he knows it. I wish him luck. Time to move on to better things. Meanwhile, here's hoping the team has better luck with Trunev.
|
|
|
|
Post by HabSolute on Jun 9, 2009 7:39:40 GMT -5
I suspect he didn't like the idea of a two way contract and it's probably for this same reason he turned the Habs down before. It tells me he's probably not NHL caliber and he knows it. I wish him luck. Time to move on to better things. Meanwhile, here's hoping the team has better luck with Trunev. And hopefully the Russians aren't too high anymore on the Habs draft list..... |
|
|
|
Post by HFTO on Jun 9, 2009 8:29:38 GMT -5
Hype or not it puts a little more pressure on the Habs to get better on the back end in a hurry.
Emelin most likely wouldn't have stepped in but his development willonce again be delayed,he obviously didn't sign because I'm sure the Habs insisted on a two way contract.
Nyey nyet soviet is going to be the wave of the future for alot of teams.
HFTO
|
|
|
|
Post by CrocRob on Jun 9, 2009 9:53:12 GMT -5
Well there's nothing the Habs could have done. The collective bargaining agreement forces them to offer a two-way contract.
|
|
|
|
Post by jkr on Jun 9, 2009 10:08:41 GMT -5
I suspect he didn't like the idea of a two way contract and it's probably for this same reason he turned the Habs down before. It tells me he's probably not NHL caliber and he knows it. I wish him luck. Time to move on to better things. Meanwhile, here's hoping the team has better luck with Trunev. And hopefully the Russians aren't too high anymore on the Habs draft list..... Or anybody else's draft list. |
|
|
|
Post by CrocRob on Jun 9, 2009 10:36:45 GMT -5
Okay let's not exaggerate here. Russians will (and should) still get drafted. Even by the Montreal Canadiens. They'll just get drafted farther down the board, which is what's happened since the transfer agreement expired. Look at where Cherepanov ended up. He was arguably a top 10 or even top 5 talent that draft year and even stated he would come over, but ended up in the 20s with the Rangers, reportedly due to everyone's reluctance about the lack of a transfer agreement with Russia. Now we know there will never be another transfer agreement with the Russian Hockey Federation.
Emelin was drafted in the third round while there still was a transfer agreement. He didn't come over. I'm disappointed, but mostly because it was an asset that didn't pan out. It's no different than any Canadian draft pick that doesn't pan out, but nobody bemoans those bust 3rd round Canadians (especially the WHL guys.. they were too tough for the NHL I'm sure).
I would imagine that the value has changed over the past three years. These guys will likely get knocked down a round or two in effect. So come round 3 you can either select the projected NA/European player or a more talented Russian with a caveat that he may never arrive. The end result, IMO, will be teams taking fliers on Russians with late picks, but expending few save for the most talented ones in early rounds.
A perfect example is Trunev, who again was reportedly a much higher talent (2nd/3rd rounder I recall), being picked up in the 5th round due to transfer concerns.
|
|
|
|
Post by Doc Holliday on Jun 9, 2009 11:19:24 GMT -5
Hype or not it puts a little more pressure on the Habs to get better on the back end in a hurry. That was my original concern. You can't count on a prospect to make you instantly better (unless that prospect is an Oveshkin, Lecavalier, Crosby, type of player). Emelin coming and doing instantly better than Komisarek, Gorges or even O'Byrne was wishful thinking. |
|
|
|
Post by gy on Jun 11, 2009 21:23:48 GMT -5
Hype or not it puts a little more pressure on the Habs to get better on the back end in a hurry. That was my original concern. You can't count on a prospect to make you instantly better (unless that prospect is an Oveshkin, Lecavalier, Crosby, type of player). Emelin coming and doing instantly better than Komisarek, Gorges or even O'Byrne was wishful thinking. Leave O'Byrne out of it. At his present level he's not exactly a benchmark a rookie would find especially difficult to meet or excel. |
|
|
|
Post by Doc Holliday on Jun 13, 2009 10:01:41 GMT -5
That was my original concern. You can't count on a prospect to make you instantly better (unless that prospect is an Oveshkin, Lecavalier, Crosby, type of player). Emelin coming and doing instantly better than Komisarek, Gorges or even O'Byrne was wishful thinking. Leave O'Byrne out of it. At his present level he's not exactly a benchmark a rookie would find especially difficult to meet or excel. I think it's early to give up on O'Byrne. He's got good sakting, can play physical and can carry the puck... He's obviously one more youngster that got caught in the loose do-anything-you-want atmosphere around the team last year. We have a coach that will provide structure and guidance and who's notoriously good at develloping dmen. We could have a nice surprise there. |
|
|
|
Post by Lord Bebop on Jun 13, 2009 10:38:21 GMT -5
Leave O'Byrne out of it. At his present level he's not exactly a benchmark a rookie would find especially difficult to meet or excel. I think it's early to give up on O'Byrne. He's got good sakting, can play physical and can carry the puck... He's obviously one more youngster that got caught in the loose do-anything-you-want atmosphere around the team last year. We have a coach that will provide structure and guidance and who's notoriously good at develloping dmen. We could have a nice surprise there. Took the words right out of my mouth. And this is from a Carbo apologist who stood behind the coach right to the end. I think guys like O'Bryne and Gorges will benefit the most out of a structured system that Martin will provide.Markov and Hamrlik should look more like their dependable selfs again and make a smoother transition for guys like Suddan and McDonagh aswell. |
|
