|
Post by mikeg on Apr 26, 2017 10:59:09 GMT -5
Gonna have to say that on THIS version of the Canadiens, PK Subban would have been a more valuable asset. Nobody wants to hear it anymore, but given the talent makeup of the Habs, losing Subban's unique offensive skills was simply a luxury the Habs couldn't afford. Weber brings a different element to his game and he was arguably a better PP weapon with a more accurate shot, but even if you give Weber a slight edge in goal prevention and intangibles such as "leadership" (which I'm not even willing to concede, but whatever), that is far outweighed by what PK does at even strength on the offensive side of the equation. And for those who say "get over it", well the whole point of the trade was to facilitate a deep playoff run so it is ABSOLUTELY fair game to come right back to it in the context of a 1st round playoff exit where it was precisely a lack of offense (not toughness) that led to our downfall. Yup. GM went all in on character and he lost. You cannot let him gamble with any more of your assets. If Molson still gives him free reign after this... which he will... then we are doomed to a decade of mediocrity.
|
|
|
Post by Skilly on Apr 26, 2017 13:30:48 GMT -5
I love PK and was, and still am, against the trade. BUT having watched the Preds, it's comparing apples and oranges to compare PK's situation and stats in Nashville to that on the Habs. PK is not the Preds #1 dman. They have four solid, if not elite D who share all shut down responsibilities as well as PP and PK duties. PK is not there leading TOI Dman either. And he certainly is nowhere near logging the tough critical minutes Weber does. As well, unlike Weber, PK has been able to play with a solid partner and good forwards all year long. Weber has fluctuated between Emelin, Beau, and Ol' Man Markov. Shea Weber as a Canadien - post-season: 6GP 1G 2A 3PTS +1 PK Subban as a Canadien - post-season: 55GP 11G 27A 38PTS +31 Gonna have to say that on THIS version of the Canadiens, PK Subban would have been a more valuable asset. PK Subban's last 6 games as a Canadien - post season: 6GP 0G 4A E
|
|
|
Post by Skilly on Apr 26, 2017 13:43:08 GMT -5
Gonna have to say that on THIS version of the Canadiens, PK Subban would have been a more valuable asset. Nobody wants to hear it anymore, but given the talent makeup of the Habs, losing Subban's unique offensive skills was simply a luxury the Habs couldn't afford. Weber brings a different element to his game and he was arguably a better PP weapon with a more accurate shot, but even if you give Weber a slight edge in goal prevention and intangibles such as "leadership" (which I'm not even willing to concede, but whatever), that is far outweighed by what PK does at even strength on the offensive side of the equation. And for those who say "get over it", well the whole point of the trade was to facilitate a deep playoff run so it is ABSOLUTELY fair game to come right back to it in the context of a 1st round playoff exit where it was precisely a lack of offense (not toughness) that led to our downfall. I get that you can't just substitute PK for Weber and hold everything else constant, but in a series that turned on such a tiny margin of difference and our inability to generate consistent offense, particularly in Games 4 and 6, I am convinced that PK would have been significant offensive upgrade over Weber and probably enough to swing the series. The one thing you and I agree on is that the PK Subban trade had to be for an offensive first line forward. In other words it had to increase our goals. The Habs have been stagnate at about 220 goals for 4 years now. We had 215, 221, 221, and 226 goals the last 4 years. Three of those with PK Subban. I do not see how keeping PK increases our scoring, from the current team. Also, I can not agree with you that PK would have helped us win against the Rangers, simply because if you look into our recent playoff past, it has been goal scoring that has always prevented us from advancing. In 2015, we got eliminated by Tampa in the second round. In 5 of those 6 games we scored 2 goals or less. In the 12 playoff games that year we scored 2 goals or less in 9 of the 12 games. We had PK then ... it has never been our defense, nor our transition game. The philosophy that a good transition creates offense has never applied to the Canadiens, because we simply do not have the finishers to capitalize on it, and I don't see PK's presence changing that this year.
|
|
|
Post by seventeen on Apr 26, 2017 13:51:18 GMT -5
Nashville getting through is likely giving Bergevin nightmares right now. Nashville getting through with PK shutting down Toews adds a migraine. Too risky, too hard to coach, can't get along with his teammates. If the Preds win the Cup, yikes!
You really don't know what you've lost till it's gone. What a cluster.....
|
|
|
Post by seventeen on Apr 26, 2017 13:59:17 GMT -5
Also, I can not agree with you that PK would have helped us win against the Rangers, simply because if you look into our recent playoff past, it has been goal scoring that has always prevented us from advancing. In 2015, we got eliminated by Tampa in the second round. In 5 of those 6 games we scored 2 goals or less. In the 12 playoff games that year we scored 2 goals or less in 9 of the 12 games. We had PK then ... it has never been our defense, nor our transition game. The philosophy that a good transition creates offense has never applied to the Canadiens, because we simply do not have the finishers to capitalize on it, and I don't see PK's presence changing that this year. Undoubtedly you have to have guys who can finish, but PK helped create opportunities. You can generate a lot of offense from the transition game. Maybe one more breakaway where a guy mistakenly scored, might have made the difference. PK is going to provide more breakaways than Weber. Here's an interesting stat, Skilly. If you picked series winners based only on their winning percentage, you'd be right 55% of the time. If you picked them based on their score adjusted Corsi, you'd be right 60% of the time. Better possession teams are going to win more often. Not always, because goaltending and finishing play a role. I totally agree that the team needs better scorers. Bergevin has focused on skill sets other than natural scoring. I'd rather he took a flyer on Patrick Eaves or Tomas VAnek than King or Ott. They didn't even cost much. But Berg just doesn't think that way.
|
|
|
Post by Skilly on Apr 26, 2017 14:02:40 GMT -5
Also, I can not agree with you that PK would have helped us win against the Rangers, simply because if you look into our recent playoff past, it has been goal scoring that has always prevented us from advancing. In 2015, we got eliminated by Tampa in the second round. In 5 of those 6 games we scored 2 goals or less. In the 12 playoff games that year we scored 2 goals or less in 9 of the 12 games. We had PK then ... it has never been our defense, nor our transition game. The philosophy that a good transition creates offense has never applied to the Canadiens, because we simply do not have the finishers to capitalize on it, and I don't see PK's presence changing that this year. Undoubtedly you have to have guys who can finish, but PK helped create opportunities. You can generate a lot of offense from the transition game. Maybe one more breakaway where a guy mistakenly scored, might have made the difference. PK is going to provide more breakaways than Weber. This is the thing ... we greatly outchanced the Rangers. We had breakaways, 2 on 1s, goal mouth scrambles, posts, up our ying-yang ... all that without PK. Yes PK may or may not have added a few chances, but we missed on numerous cant miss chances.
|
|
|
Post by seventeen on Apr 26, 2017 14:13:57 GMT -5
Eaves or Vanek might have potted one. I'd certainly rank their chances better than Dwight King's.
|
|
|
Post by Skilly on Apr 26, 2017 19:30:46 GMT -5
Eaves or Vanek might have potted one. I'd certainly rank their chances better than Dwight King's. No arguement there, but that has nothing to do with Subban
|
|
|
Post by jkr on Apr 26, 2017 19:49:39 GMT -5
Nobody wants to hear it anymore, but given the talent makeup of the Habs, losing Subban's unique offensive skills was simply a luxury the Habs couldn't afford. Weber brings a different element to his game and he was arguably a better PP weapon with a more accurate shot, but even if you give Weber a slight edge in goal prevention and intangibles such as "leadership" (which I'm not even willing to concede, but whatever), that is far outweighed by what PK does at even strength on the offensive side of the equation. And for those who say "get over it", well the whole point of the trade was to facilitate a deep playoff run so it is ABSOLUTELY fair game to come right back to it in the context of a 1st round playoff exit where it was precisely a lack of offense (not toughness) that led to our downfall. Yup. GM went all in on character and he lost. You cannot let him gamble with any more of your assets. If Molson still gives him free reign after this... which he will... then we are doomed to a decade of mediocrity. MB managed his team into a position where he had to consider trading his best skater (Subban) to increase the offense. Instead he trades him for another D man. Does not makes the team better, just different, and it doesn't solve the goal scoring problem. I agree, that it's time to go.
|
|
|
Post by Disgruntled70sHab on Apr 27, 2017 6:28:05 GMT -5
We could have been in the second round too if we played Boston who were missing two of their top 4 d. Boucher didn't do anything special. Bobby Ryan finally showed up for a playoff series and Karlsson was Karlsson. Aside from that, Boucher utilized his trap whenever they had a lead - and they nearly blew games doing it. Well see how Bobby 'made of glass' Ryan fairs when the rags start hacking and crosschecking It will be interesting to see if the level of officiating changes in the Ottawa/NY series ... will they allow the 'tomahawk' approach, or will they call the game the way it should ... if they do allow the hatchet game, I wonder how long it will take the press to flog the first "micro fracture" (deep bone bruise) on Ottawa ... I have no way of knowing buds, just having some fun with it ... #PKfortheCup
|
|
|
Post by mikeg on Apr 27, 2017 7:12:46 GMT -5
RUH ROH
|
|
|
Post by clear observer on Apr 27, 2017 9:43:54 GMT -5
Yes PK may or may not have added a few chances, but we missed on numerous cant miss chances. May or may not? I'd assert that he absolutely would...that he absolutely always has done...carry-the-mail...push opponents back...open-up the ice...dish the puck...create CHANCES. Isn't that PRECISELY what goals are borne of? Chances? One of his primary duties was to create scoring chances...he did, and he did it ALOT as a Hab...if forwards couldn't finish often enough on those PK-Subban-related-chances, then it's on the forwards. I maintain that PK would have undoubtedly created MUCH-MORE scoring opportunities against the Rangers had he been in the lineup rather than Weber. I also maintain that it may have yielded just enough scoring to have been the difference in the series with the Habs as victors. Weber, on many nights, is a fine dman...some nights he can be a dominant presence for a period or two...but there's no way in hell is he a better fit on the Canadiens than Subban. Ask yourself this. Do you think Nashville would ever consider a do-over? Bergevin's ego aside, Would Geoff Molson want to?
|
|
|
Post by Disgruntled70sHab on Apr 27, 2017 9:56:16 GMT -5
Yes PK may or may not have added a few chances, but we missed on numerous cant miss chances. May or may not? I'd assert that he absolutely would...that he absolutely always has done...carry-the-mail...push opponents back...open-up the ice...dish the puck...create CHANCES. Isn't that PRECISELY what goals are borne of? Chances? One of his primary duties was to create scoring chances...he did, and he did it ALOT as a Hab...if forwards couldn't finish often enough on those PK-Subban-related-chances, then it's on the forwards. I maintain that PK would have undoubtedly created MUCH-MORE scoring opportunities against the Rangers had he been in the lineup rather than Weber. I also maintain that it may have yielded just enough scoring to have been the difference in the series with the Habs as victors. Weber, on many nights, is a fine dman...some nights he can be a dominant presence for a period or two...but there's no way in hell is he a better fit on the Canadiens than Subban. Ask yourself this. Do you think Nashville would ever consider a do-over? Bergevin's ego aside, Would Geoff Molson want to? Heard on the broadcast last night that what Nashville likes about PK Subban is the way he plays defence ... I can't remember what else they said, but it sort of reaffirms to me that hockey wasn't the reason he was moved out of Montreal ... I thought it was mainly because of his contract, but his 'larger-than-life' persona was just too much for Michel Therrien the organization to take ... now don't get me wrong, CO, there was a lot of conflict in the dressing room last year and the organization made their decision ... in hindsight,I'm just not sure if they made the right decision ... Cheers.
|
|
|
Post by CentreHice on Apr 27, 2017 10:11:39 GMT -5
We were trying to keep all of the Subban talk in the dedicated thread in Non-Habs hockey. Considering recent events, his name is popping up in many threads.....understandable. If we can TRY to relegate it to the dedicated thread, that would be great....as the argument is basically the same in the various threads. Thanks. If not....then have at it where it stands.
|
|
|
Post by CentreHice on Apr 27, 2017 10:22:41 GMT -5
May or may not? I'd assert that he absolutely would...that he absolutely always has done...carry-the-mail...push opponents back...open-up the ice...dish the puck...create CHANCES. Isn't that PRECISELY what goals are borne of? Chances? One of his primary duties was to create scoring chances...he did, and he did it ALOT as a Hab...if forwards couldn't finish often enough on those PK-Subban-related-chances, then it's on the forwards. I maintain that PK would have undoubtedly created MUCH-MORE scoring opportunities against the Rangers had he been in the lineup rather than Weber. I also maintain that it may have yielded just enough scoring to have been the difference in the series with the Habs as victors. Weber, on many nights, is a fine dman...some nights he can be a dominant presence for a period or two...but there's no way in hell is he a better fit on the Canadiens than Subban. Ask yourself this. Do you think Nashville would ever consider a do-over? Bergevin's ego aside, Would Geoff Molson want to? Heard on the broadcast last night that what Nashville likes about PK Subban is the way he plays defence ... I can't remember what else they said, but it sort of reaffirms to me that hockey wasn't the reason he was moved out of Montreal ... I thought it was mainly because of his contract, but his 'larger-than-life' persona was just too much for Michel Therrien the organization to take ... now don't get me wrong, CO, there was a lot of conflict in the dressing room last year and the organization made their decision ... in hindsight,I'm just not sure if they made the right decision ... Cheers. IMO...... I think a lot of conflict left the room in Therrien's briefcase. It was a year that was beginning to swirl the bowl WITH Price in net. Price with the GLARE earlier in the year. Therrien hasn't appeared too eager to assume personal accountability for any hockey shortcoming. Even when he was fired from Pittsburgh, it came as a complete surprise to him. He thought they were playing better. Ergo, criticism is deflected; the finger is pointed at others; scapegoats are chosen..... That's a tough atmosphere in which to play.
|
|
|
Post by Skilly on Apr 27, 2017 11:12:20 GMT -5
Yeah, even as I typed it I was thinking he would have created more chances ... I agree he would have created more chancesNo. Goals are borne of the puck crossing the red line. The act of finishing the chance ... PK does not solve that 100% agree. And that's my point. We out chanced the Rangers by a wide margin. The forwards were to blame. My own opinion is that whether we had Weber or Subban, it would not be because of them we lost. We had Subban the last time we were in the playoffs, and while I can't recall how many chances we had compared to this year, we STILL struggled to score. Our scoring percentage on shots that hit the net was 5%. We missed the net on 80 more shots (which when we combine them all, would account for all possible chances) ... so we had a 3.8% chance of scoring He wasn't the difference maker in previous playoffs where we struggled to score, with very similar numbers goal wise, shot wise, (I can not confirm chance wise, but we would have had to have more chances back then with PK to follow your logic ..) No argument from me ... I keep asking myself what could have been if we got a first line forward in return ... it's the only way I trade Subban
|
|