beliveau1 Posted June 4, 2007 Share Posted June 4, 2007 (edited) I agree, as long as his contract isn't silly. 4 million is acceptable. Though, he's already 2nd pairing on the team. Markov and Komi is the clear first pairing. He was on the ice in far too many crucial situations for my liking - he definitely verged on a #1 role last year far too often! The Habs need to be in a position where they don't have to bump him to the top unit unless things are drastic..... Edited June 4, 2007 by beliveau1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
saskhab Posted June 4, 2007 Share Posted June 4, 2007 He was on the ice in far too many crucial situations for my liking - he definitely verged on a #1 role last year far too often! The Habs need to be in a position where they don't have to bump him to the top unit unless things are drastic..... In all honesty, I think the best we can hope for is that someone from within bumps him from that situation. Komisarek bumped Rivet last year, but we'll need one more guy to bump Souray from that role. O'Byrne, Emelin, and Streit are our best hopes. We HAVE to move one of Bouillon or Dandenault, though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ShortHanded Posted June 4, 2007 Share Posted June 4, 2007 Souray certainly suffers from a number of brain cramps, as well as having had the misfortune for being saddled with the blame for some of Rivet's gaffes on occasion. However an 'F' in his own zone is questionable - anyone being graded in that extreme would simply not have an NHL job. Souray is at best a 'D' in his own zone and overall that makes him probably a 'C+' overall when you factor in his offence. The problem is he's being asked to carry the role of a number one pairing in Montreal, and that he is definitely not. Realistically he is at best a #4 defenceman who should garner top time on the powerplay, or ice time when a goal is needed - but not when the game is absolutely on the line! That said it is still feasible to upgrade the defence without having to eliminate him from the lineup. However he has to be relegated to the second pairing at best. The problem in doing so though lies with what salary he commands on the open market. In other words, can Gainey afford to sign him and still get a top pairing thoroughbred defenceman. Losing his offencive production will be a factor no doubt, but the cost has to be reasonable to keep him. As for Souray, personally I think we need his offence or something similar, but I have seen far worse behind the blueline..... so I have mixed feelings when it comes to signing him or not? In my opinion(humble as it is) the Canadiens have to upgrade on guys like Bouillon and Dandenault if they hope make this team better behind the blueline..... Komisarek & Markov are a good basis to work from, but leaving Souray aside for the moment, one has to say that from the #3/4 spot down this roster is soft and it's small! I agree with most of what you say, but the fact is, it depends what the baseline is for the grading. If the baseline is NHL Caliber defense, then F at that is still in the NHL, it's just the worst of what's in the NHL. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beliveau1 Posted June 4, 2007 Share Posted June 4, 2007 I agree with most of what you say, but the fact is, it depends what the baseline is for the grading. If the baseline is NHL Caliber defense, then F at that is still in the NHL, it's just the worst of what's in the NHL. I won't get into a semantics based argument over an 'F' or an 'E', but any defenceman who ranks an 'F' is only going to be around long enough for a coffee break in the NHL. 'F' denotes a total failure mark and is the ultimate liability in the NHL. Souray is not the worst defenceman there is in the NHL when it comes to patrolling his blueline. If so then you'd have to rank him down there with the real slugs - guys like Hal Gill and a few other notable ones out there...... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Athlétique.Canadien Posted June 4, 2007 Share Posted June 4, 2007 I still want him signed. 5 million would be nice. A 2 or 3 year deal. If this doesn't work out I'm sure some "western based team" will be willing to take him by this deadline or even the 2009 trade deadline. With the cap going the direction it is and knowing how (LA for sure) some California teams have been known to behave, Souray will be totally moveable. At the end of the day we got an asset back (The asset that many were complaining about not acquiring at this deadline) and Souray could help us in the meantime. The UFA D pool is weak after all. Everyone wants Timonen but Kevin Lowe is going to win that war I predict...etc. I don't see how losing Souray and moving Dandenault and/or Bouillon is going to help. The only thing I can figure that makes sense is a Dandy-Bouillon package for 1 better D. But, that makes no sense either. We have a shortage of D in that scenario again. With the cap potentially going to 52 million and Souray being moveable, why wouldn't we, shouldn't we sign him :?- Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Posted June 4, 2007 Share Posted June 4, 2007 AC, the reason moving and Souray and Bouillon or whoever makes the team better is because they were really bad defensively last year. Probably bottom 5 in the league. Keeping the same players will NOT change that. They need to turnover and get some players on the back end. Signing Souray for 4 mill max and moving a few others i could live with. Souray could then be on the bottom pairing with Gorges or something only playing 8-10 minutes of even strength hockey. He can pick up the minutes on the PP. O'byrne moving up paired with Markov then getting A hannon type player to play with Komi as the shut down pair. Streit is a quality fill in. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dark_faerie87 Posted June 4, 2007 Share Posted June 4, 2007 AC, the reason moving and Souray and Bouillon or whoever makes the team better is because they were really bad defensively last year. Probably bottom 5 in the league. Keeping the same players will NOT change that. They need to turnover and get some players on the back end. Signing Souray for 4 mill max and moving a few others i could live with. Souray could then be on the bottom pairing with Gorges or something only playing 8-10 minutes of even strength hockey. He can pick up the minutes on the PP. O'byrne moving up paired with Markov then getting A hannon type player to play with Komi as the shut down pair. Streit is a quality fill in. You're going to play O'byrne on the first pairing? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CoRvInA Posted June 4, 2007 Share Posted June 4, 2007 Lol Didn't we talk about the Defensive qualities of Souray in prior posts? With facts in hand his failures have been highlighted and skewed in our memories when he was skated past and put on highlight goals... Crosby Spezza etc.. and perhaps one no name. the thing is precisely that!!! he is used versus the top lines... and the highlight blunders were not versus (add top six forward that makes under 2 Million) so of course his D play is not great I can understand a C or C- but "F"? then u are not seeing the big picture and that makes you candidate for biassed, non objective remarks My point on grading his D play and more importantly if you read the rest of the post is that I dont think we will miss his D play and it would be easier to replace... and the breaking down to the points in question no one is willing to share comments? In my opinion like I stated if we get a PP specialist then thats goodbye for Souray if not then who are we getting when start sucking at 5 on 4's as well as 5 on 5? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Posted June 4, 2007 Share Posted June 4, 2007 For the record i said his D zone coverage was an F. He gets an A for the PP so i would give him a total grade of D+ or C-. Yes i would pair O'Byrne with Markov, might as well play him with the best so he can learn. Then you get another quality D to pair with Komi. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ShortHanded Posted June 4, 2007 Share Posted June 4, 2007 For the record i said his D zone coverage was an F. He gets an A for the PP so i would give him a total grade of D+ or C-. Yes i would pair O'Byrne with Markov, might as well play him with the best so he can learn. Then you get another quality D to pair with Komi. That's a heck of a lot of minutes for a rookie D, and against the other teams' best players... I'd rather play him on the second or third pairing and ease him in. Have Markov mentor him, fine, but not at the expense of throwing him to the wolves (because you're not going to stop playing Markov against the other team's top lines...) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CoRvInA Posted June 4, 2007 Share Posted June 4, 2007 For the record i said his D zone coverage was an F. He gets an A for the PP so i would give him a total grade of D+ or C-. Yes i would pair O'Byrne with Markov, might as well play him with the best so he can learn. Then you get another quality D to pair with Komi. How can he get an F for Defensive coverage and still be in the team? maybe this is what you mean: Defensive coverage break up= vs Top lines: F vs Secondary lines: C vs Third and Fourth level lines: B Score= C- Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dark_faerie87 Posted June 4, 2007 Share Posted June 4, 2007 That's a heck of a lot of minutes for a rookie D, and against the other teams' best players... I'd rather play him on the second or third pairing and ease him in. Have Markov mentor him, fine, but not at the expense of throwing him to the wolves (because you're not going to stop playing Markov against the other team's top lines...) Agreed. It would be like tossing A-Cup on the first line with Koivu (providing we don't sign a top centre), although I think there would be a lot more pressure on a defensemen than a forward. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Athlétique.Canadien Posted June 4, 2007 Share Posted June 4, 2007 Imagine reading this next February or March: The Montreal Canadiens have traded defenceman Sheldon Souray to the Los Angeles Kings in exchange for defenceman Jack Johnson... It wouldn't surprise me. Then of course everyone would be calling Gainey a deity. You never know. Do any of us ever know? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ShortHanded Posted June 4, 2007 Share Posted June 4, 2007 Agreed. It would be like tossing A-Cup on the first line with Koivu (providing we don't sign a top centre), although I think there would be a lot more pressure on a defensemen than a forward. It's always worse for the D. Kosty could actually survive on the top line because the worst that would happen is he wouldn't score, vs. being scored against all the time... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dark_faerie87 Posted June 4, 2007 Share Posted June 4, 2007 It's always worse for the D. Kosty could actually survive on the top line because the worst that would happen is he wouldn't score, vs. being scored against all the time... Yeah, that's why I said a lot more pressure. At least as a forward, you can have other players feed you and help you score, but as a defenseman, it's pretty tough to help you defend. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ShortHanded Posted June 4, 2007 Share Posted June 4, 2007 Imagine reading this next February or March: The Montreal Canadiens have traded defenceman Sheldon Souray to the Los Angeles Kings in exchange for defenceman Jack Johnson... It wouldn't surprise me. Then of course everyone would be calling Gainey a deity. You never know. Do any of us ever know? I can't believe LA could be THAT stupid: trade their future blue chipper who's still cheap for a guy whose D is suspect at best and whose getting paid a ton! Yeah, that's why I said a lot more pressure. At least as a forward, you can have other players feed you and help you score, but as a defenseman, it's pretty tough to help you defend. yup... pretty much... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alexstream Posted June 4, 2007 Share Posted June 4, 2007 Play Souray with a RD version of Cube and we have ABSOLUTLY no problem. Totally offsets Souray's flaws. Souray was at his defensive "best" when he was paired with a "good" Rivet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Athlétique.Canadien Posted June 4, 2007 Share Posted June 4, 2007 I can't believe LA could be THAT stupid: trade their future blue chipper who's still cheap for a guy whose D is suspect at best and whose getting paid a ton! yup... pretty much... Yeah, but I overexagerated on purpose to truly hit home the idea of someone picking Souray up and maybe giving us a "Jack Johnson" - 2 years earlier in development but just as rich a prospect. I use this as a reason that we should sign Souray (like Theo) for less of a risk. Carolina did give Johnson up. NHL teams can be stupid. Maybe we can get a "Coburn". Who knows. Sign Sheldon! All the people who want a UFA, if the cap is going 52 mill and George is willing, our pessimistic wiggle room on a UFA factoring in a Souray signing at 6 million (hope it's 5) works out to be 7 million Sign Sheldon! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alexstream Posted June 4, 2007 Share Posted June 4, 2007 If we can't sign him... who should we sign? Rafalski? Preissing? BHannan? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IN THE HEARTS OF MEN Posted June 4, 2007 Share Posted June 4, 2007 All this o'bryne talk on the 1st line makes me laugh. I bet you have yet to watch him play a single AHL playoff game. Because if you did you would know that price has faced close to 80 shots in the last 2 games alone and is not getting much help from his D this whole run . Dan Jancevski his on my shortlist to make the team. He is their best overall defender right now in these playoffs. He was also voted by his peers as their best d-man 4 the year. Anyone who is high on O' bryne will be sadly mistaken when you realize that he will be in fact on the Doggs next year for the entire season. He just isnt a top four pairing yet. And if he was we would be in for one bad season. on a anothwer note, Souray really isn't that bad....So Crosby and Speazza danced around him like a pilon but they have done that to probably everyone. Thing is we habs fans dont let it go. His offense alone is worth 5 million and if you think that his point play is easily replaced you will see the void in the future if he is not resigned. ASSETS like souray must be signed in order to forge ahead. When you lose them for nothing its not good......trust me Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alexstream Posted June 4, 2007 Share Posted June 4, 2007 All this o'bryne talk on the 1st line makes me laugh. I bet you have yet to watch him play a single AHL playoff game. Because if you did you would know that price has faced close to 80 shots in the last 2 games alone and is not getting much help from his D this whole run . Dan Jancevski his on my shortlist to make the team. He is their best overall defender right now in these playoffs. He was also voted by his peers as their best d-man 4 the year. Anyone who is high on O' bryne will be sadly mistaken when you realize that he will be in fact on the Doggs next year for the entire season. He just isnt a top four pairing yet. And if he was we would be in for one bad season. on a anothwer note, Souray really isn't that bad....So Crosby and Speazza danced around him like a pilon but they have done that to probably everyone. Thing is we habs fans dont let it go. His offense alone is worth 5 million and if you think that his point play is easily replaced you will see the void in the future if he is not resigned. ASSETS like souray must be signed in order to forge ahead. When you lose them for nothing its not good......trust me he'll barely be able to cut it as #7... It takes 5-6 years to develop a hulking dman... (e.g. Komo was drafted in 2001 and only became a force in the 06-07 season) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Chicoutimi Cucumber Posted June 5, 2007 Share Posted June 5, 2007 (edited) Anyone proposing to throw a rookie defenceman on the #1 defensive pairing is insane and their opinion about Souray should be instantly discounted as a result. And oh yeah - Bouillon will be better this year. Edited June 5, 2007 by The Chicoutimi Cucumber Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Athlétique.Canadien Posted June 5, 2007 Share Posted June 5, 2007 Anyone proposing to throw a rookie defenceman on the #1 defensive pairing is insane and their opinion about Souray should be instantly discounted as a result. And oh yeah - Bouillon will be better this year. Are you referring to Jack Johnson? I hope not. It was an example of a possible deal that we may have the potential to make in the future if we sign Sheldon. Tough room I guess Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Chicoutimi Cucumber Posted June 5, 2007 Share Posted June 5, 2007 Are you referring to Jack Johnson? I hope not. It was an example of a possible deal that we may have the potential to make in the future if we sign Sheldon. Tough room I guess No, I meant the O'Byrne suggestion, Souray for Johnson, I do that in a second!!! (but I still don't put him on the first pairing ) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OneSharpMarble Posted June 5, 2007 Share Posted June 5, 2007 Imagine reading this next February or March: The Montreal Canadiens have traded defenceman Sheldon Souray to the Los Angeles Kings in exchange for defenceman Jack Johnson... It wouldn't surprise me. Then of course everyone would be calling Gainey a deity. You never know. Do any of us ever know? I would have rather read that last February or March. Or how about traded for anything? If Gainey signs and then moves Souray immediatly I will rant and rave about him, otherwise we are screwed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts