|
Post by folatre on Dec 6, 2022 14:34:33 GMT -5
That is bold, Skilly. I doubt the playoffs will be close. The defense is too inexperienced to apply the tried and trusted methods of game management. But I do think the Habs have the makings of a good second line (Monahan with Slafkovsky and Anderson). Size and forechecking, some puck carrying prowess, ability to go heavy with the cycle and grind, and last but not least three guys who can shoot the puck.
In general one of the positives last night was the secondary scoring from various sources. It is a shame the boys managed to lose a big lead in a game where that element that had been lacking most of the season finally came together.
|
|
|
Post by Boston_Habs on Dec 6, 2022 17:05:00 GMT -5
We are 8th worst in goal differential at -14. If that pace keeps up we'll be -46 by the end of the year. By contrast, we finished last year at -96, 2nd worst after Arizona.
The closest team from last year in terms of goal differential was San Jose at -50, who had the 11th pick (owned by Ottawa). That's probably where we end up?
|
|
|
Post by CentreHice on Dec 6, 2022 18:29:27 GMT -5
Damn....we got a point. Rebuilds are tough to watch at times. Lots of Ls coming up this month, I expect...and accept I’ll be the first to say it. If this team can cure Josh Anderson’s tunnel vision, and this pass happy attitude they all have, then they will make the playoffs Always up for a bold prediction!
|
|
|
Post by Skilly on Dec 6, 2022 18:41:04 GMT -5
I’m not sure how much stock I put into goal differential. It’s one of those stats like plus-minus that can be made to look however you want.
For instance, a team wins 4 games all by one goal and loses the fifth by 6 goals. They have an 0.800 winning percentage but are -2 in goal differential. Are they the team that wins 4 out of every five games, or the team that apparently struggles to score? They’d be on pace for 131 points but also on pace for -30 in goal differential.
The Carolina Hurricanes currently have 33 points, 4th in the conference and are only +5.
The positives are we have two players on pace for 46 goals, and we are only 3 points out of a playoff position EVEN WITH all the trouble to find secondary scoring and defense miscues. We stop passing when there is a scoring chance, and stop passing back into the zone blindly, and get Josh Anderson to realize there are 4 other teammates on the ice … and we’d be in a playoff position now.
|
|
|
Post by seventeen on Dec 6, 2022 20:11:12 GMT -5
We are 8th worst in goal differential at -14. If that pace keeps up we'll be -46 by the end of the year. By contrast, we finished last year at -96, 2nd worst after Arizona. The closest team from last year in terms of goal differential was San Jose at -50, who had the 11th pick (owned by Ottawa). That's probably where we end up? Yeah, I'm hoping for bottom 10 at worst, which gives us a shot at the #1 pick. Also, while the vets haven't been great, some of them will be traded by the TDL, which should allow for a few more losses. Edmundson, Anderson, Dvorak are all prime candidates. The most valuable guy is Monahan, but Mgmt may be having some doubts about moving him. If he can stay healthy (which is the $64MM question), he compares favourably to a guy like Joe Pavelski. I thought he was done 3 years ago, but here he is at age 38, centering 2 of Dallas' top wingers, who happen to be 23 and 25. Monahan provides the same skill, character and leadership that Pavelski brings with him. A young team needs a guy like that, so even if Monahan doesn't fit the age parameters that we want from players to be in their prime in 2-3 years, he still has a lot of value to a young team. It's no wonder Gorton and Hughes are having second thoughts.
|
|
|
Post by seventeen on Dec 6, 2022 20:13:53 GMT -5
Damn....we got a point. Rebuilds are tough to watch at times. Lots of Ls coming up this month, I expect...and accept. I’ll be the first to say it. If this team can cure Josh Anderson’s tunnel vision, and this pass happy attitude they all have, then they will make the playoffs Is it his tunnel 'vision' or tunnel 'synapses'?
|
|