Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
KoZed

WANTED: 4th D-man who can shoot on the PP

Recommended Posts

I reiterate my opinion that Komisarek could do well as the set-up man for Markov on the powerplay, he has underrated hockey sense and passing skills, not to mention that these two have proven chemistry together. With no one stepping up for the job at this point (defensemen or forwards), I don't see what we have to lose to try... besides perhaps a couple millions a year if K-Rex does well ^_^

I don't like when an organization typecasts a player into a specific role, and doesn't challenge him to be more complete. This seems to be the case for Komisarek and also Chipchura at this point. I doubt Timmins drafted Komisarek thinking he was a defensive-only type of player, after all Komisarek did very well offensively at both the NCAA and AHL levels, putting up strong numbers as a rookie in Hamilton on par with the older and offensive specialist M-A Bergeron (and better numbers than the older and more experienced Bouillon, Hainsey, and Beauchemin).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think it has to be a home run guy here. By that I mean that we should only look for d-men that are top PP guys, or fill the shooter's role.

I want a good d-man who can play in all situations, who is smart and efficient with the puck. To me, only two guys mentioned here fit that role: Bouwmeester and Ohlund. I wouldn't care that they didn't shoot like Streit or Souray. We're giving up too many shots against and I think one of those guys would really change a lot for us.

As for "they'd only be a 2nd pair guy"... geez. We have a first pair, yes. If we got a player of J-Bo or Ohlund's quality to put with Hamrlik there'd be little drop off between our top pair and our 2nd, just as there's little drop off from our first forward line to our second forward line, or our starting goalie to our backup.

Would we be able to keep everyone long term? No. That's not the point. There's a balance between going for it now and long term stability. I think we could pull of a Bouwmeester move and still put forward the team we envision beyond 2009.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
As for "they'd only be a 2nd pair guy"... geez. We have a first pair, yes. If we got a player of J-Bo or Ohlund's quality to put with Hamrlik there'd be little drop off between our top pair and our 2nd, just as there's little drop off from our first forward line to our second forward line, or our starting goalie to our backup.

Would we be able to keep everyone long term? No. That's not the point. There's a balance between going for it now and long term stability. I think we could pull of a Bouwmeester move and still put forward the team we envision beyond 2009.

1) Bouwmeester doesnt have the spine and character to play in Montreal

2) 5-6 millions for a 2nd pair guy is a bad bad allocation of resources.

3) Ohlund is often injured and not better than a 30-ish pts defenseman. He never met offensive expectations. At 3.5, it's also a bad allocation of resources.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1) Bouwmeester doesnt have the spine and character to play in Montreal

2) 5-6 millions for a 2nd pair guy is a bad bad allocation of resources.

3) Ohlund is often injured and not better than a 30-ish pts defenseman. He never met offensive expectations. At 3.5, it's also a bad allocation of resources.

He doesn't have the spine to work in Montreal? Just like how Hossa doesn't have the character to play in the playoffs? There's no good reason why Bouwmeester shouldn't do as well in Montreal as he has in Florida.

The money spent on the incoming D isn't all that important if he's only a rental. We might be pushed to the cap for the rest of the season but it'd have no bearing on our plans next season.

Ohlund gets 30 points but can net 10+ goals, which is pretty high for a defenceman. His numbers should also improve going from shutdown city to an offensive dynamo.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
He doesn't have the spine to work in Montreal? Just like how Hossa doesn't have the character to play in the playoffs? There's no good reason why Bouwmeester shouldn't do as well in Montreal as he has in Florida.

Yes there is, and it's that Bouwmeester is way too shy and reserved to endure the pressure that he'd have to deal with here. Its just a matter of character. He's a big guy but not nearly has physical as he could be. He'd leave a lot to be desired and would quickly get picked on for not being gritty enough or intense enough to deserve his salary. In Montreal, where every player's game is picked apart and over-analyzed game after game, a guy as reserved and easily rattled as Bouwmeester would just suffocate and fall apart.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ohlund gets 30 points but can net 10+ goals, which is pretty high for a defenceman. His numbers should also improve going from shutdown city to an offensive dynamo.

You forgot that back Vancouver was an offensive dynamo back in the Naslund-Morrison-Bertuzzi-Jovanovski years. And still, Ohlund was keeping everybody wanting for more.

Ohlund is Hamerlik with a better shot but more injury prone. Not saying he wouldnt do a decent job, just that there isnt much to look forward there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I still think that the solution has to be tried from Hamilton before any big trade.

Gorges is a 4th D men with no offensive upside.

All we need is a 6th with some offense to his play. I suggested Weber and i got the answer

from Tony that he is nowhere ready. Carle is back from his concussion and he is playing

good from what i read in the paper this morning. He had the first star in one of the 4 game he played.

Still 10 games to get back in shape and remember to always keep head up and he coul challenge

Brisebois spot.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I still think we need to be patient with O'Byrne, after all he's barely played 40 games in the NHL. O'Byrne gave us some strong hockey by the end of last season, playing like a legitimate top 4 alongside Hamrlik, and he just needs to gain his confidence back. With such as impressive mix of size, toughness, hitting habilties, speed, and agility, we need to give this kid every chance to succeed.

My guess is that right now he's afraid to make a mistake; he knows that Carbonneau can have a pretty short leash with some players, and that Brisebois can replace him any time. Thus O'Byrne is probably thinking more about avoiding mistakes and not becoming a healthy scratch than simply playing his game.

I think we need to do with O'Byrne what we did with Latendresse 2 years ago, tell him that he's going nowhere, and that he's with the team to stay. He needs to play regularly, but maybe a little less during critical situations when he's having a more difficult game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm glad there are alot of psychiatrists on this board to talk about everyone's personality and if they'll fit on the roster. How does anyone even know about Boumeester's personality?

I don't care if he is shy, i don't even care what he does off the ice.

On the ice he is very good and wouls solve the #4 problem very well. The habd D is slow as a group. Bowmeester would certainly take up alot of ice time nd would help all over the ice.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'm glad there are alot of psychiatrists on this board to talk about everyone's personality and if they'll fit on the roster. How does anyone even know about Boumeester's personality?

I don't care if he is shy, i don't even care what he does off the ice.

Besides, we have a few shy guys in Andrei Markov, Alex Tanguay, and Andrei Kostsitsyn who are showing that you can do quite well in Montreal despite this terrible flaw.

However I don't think we should pursue Big Jay as he will likely cost a lot to acquire, and defense is not a position of weakness for the Canadiens, neither on the short nor longer run. Of course if we can get him for a 1st rounder and a Ryan White-type prospect, he would be a good rental for this season (with the possibility that he would change our plans for the future if he does really wel) however I'm thinking the Panthers would ask for more established players (ex. AK46) and/or prospects (ex. Pacioretty).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'm glad there are alot of psychiatrists on this board to talk about everyone's personality and if they'll fit on the roster. How does anyone even know about Boumeester's personality?

I don't care if he is shy, i don't even care what he does off the ice.

On the ice he is very good and wouls solve the #4 problem very well. The habd D is slow as a group. Bowmeester would certainly take up alot of ice time nd would help all over the ice.

No need to be a psychiatrist to point out something that's basically common knowledge in hockey circles. Its goes back to J-Bo being traumatized and in tears when he wasnt picked 1st overall and after that spending two seasons looking like a deer caught in headlights in Florida. He's finally conquered his low confidence after the lockout, but still... Being good in the anonymity of a no-pressure environment like Florida doesnt mean it would transfer well in the fish tank of Montreal.

And even if it does, can we really have three 5M$ defensemen, possibly four if Komo signs a big long-term contract?

And even if we can, how many valuable assets do you think we'll need to give Florida to get him? A couple of D's plus some of our regular young forwards. For what? A D with no character and no grit.

You can drool over him all you want, I'll pass because it doesnt look like a good deal at all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This will be addressed at the trading deadline when non contending teams will look to trade their UFAs.. till then, we gotta see what the kids have to offer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This will be addressed at the trading deadline when non contending teams will look to trade their UFAs.. till then, we gotta see what the kids have to offer.

That's what I would think aswell.

We are what, 4th in goals against?

Okay 19th in shots against, but how many of those are quality?

Wish they had that stat.

Not seeing a "big" weakness in the second pairing myself.

I don't expect much to happen with this situation, even at trade deadline.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I still think we need to be patient with O'Byrne, after all he's barely played 40 games in the NHL. O'Byrne gave us some strong hockey by the end of last season, playing like a legitimate top 4 alongside Hamrlik, and he just needs to gain his confidence back. With such as impressive mix of size, toughness, hitting habilties, speed, and agility, we need to give this kid every chance to succeed.

My guess is that right now he's afraid to make a mistake; he knows that Carbonneau can have a pretty short leash with some players, and that Brisebois can replace him any time. Thus O'Byrne is probably thinking more about avoiding mistakes and not becoming a healthy scratch than simply playing his game.

I think we need to do with O'Byrne what we did with Latendresse 2 years ago, tell him that he's going nowhere, and that he's with the team to stay. He needs to play regularly, but maybe a little less during critical situations when he's having a more difficult game.

These are wise words. Look, it's very normal for players to struggle in a sophomore year, especially on D, which is the position that is hardest to learn and requires the most patience from coaches/managers/fans. It usually takes 4-5 years for a D-man to fully hit his stride.

Having said that, this is obviously a "go for it" year in Montreal. While, looking at what Gainey's done, we clearly have the tools to contend on an annual basis (a la New Jersey), this year's squad is probably significantly stronger than next year's, at least on paper (due to inevitable UFA losses and cap issues stemming from RFA raises). And the only remaining weakness on the team, as this thread correctly identifies, is the 4th-D slot.

What this suggests to me is that we should try to acquire a solid veteran defenceman with some offensive upside. But we shouldn't do it until the trading deadline, because otherwise O'Byrne will end up sitting for most of this season, which will hurt his development.

Whether it'll be possible to do this without sacrificing a young roster player or a good prospect is another question. Gainey might be willing to move somebody if he thinks that player will be too costly to re-sign, or else he might just be willing to sacrifice young depth for that elsuive Cup run. Hopefully, though, we can deal a draft pick. So we might want to think in terms of "possible 4th D who won't require roster players or serious prospects in return." That rules out Bouwmeester and probably Ohlund, anyway.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
No need to be a psychiatrist to point out something that's basically common knowledge in hockey circles. Its goes back to J-Bo being traumatized and in tears when he wasnt picked 1st overall and after that spending two seasons looking like a deer caught in headlights in Florida. He's finally conquered his low confidence after the lockout, but still... Being good in the anonymity of a no-pressure environment like Florida doesnt mean it would transfer well in the fish tank of Montreal.

And even if it does, can we really have three 5M$ defensemen, possibly four if Komo signs a big long-term contract?

And even if we can, how many valuable assets do you think we'll need to give Florida to get him? A couple of D's plus some of our regular young forwards. For what? A D with no character and no grit.

You can drool over him all you want, I'll pass because it doesnt look like a good deal at all.

You can just as easily argue that he started off slow because he was a developing 20 year old defenceman playing on a horrid team and that he's gotten better over the years just like every player that age does. I just don't think these arguments we hear so often about players not being able to cope in high-pressure cities or in the playoffs. They're almost always proven wrong eventually.

I also wouldn't go for Bouwmeester or Ohlund if it meant moving too much youth for him - but I would be interested in getting Bouwmeester in an O'Byrne + (whatever else it takes provided it's MAX a 1st round pick/equivalent) provided he showed some sort of interest in re-signing here. It would be tough to fit 4 5-6 million dollar d-men on the roster but it would be do-able (bah, let's get Brian to do the math). It's certainly more possible than bringing in one 8 million dollar forward, and even the Gaborik scenario was do-able.

I think it MAY be possible to bring in Bouwmeester and be able to keep all of Komisarek, Kovalev, Koivu and Tanguay. But - is it overkill? Chicoutimi argues that we don't need a star piece, only a decent PP specialist. To me, Bob already did that when he signed Brisebois and Carbo now has the choice to go offence (Brisby) or defensive (O'Byrne) in any one game. One would think that Bob would be done, but despite this, he's made attempts at Sundin, Gaborik and who knows how many other players. He seems like he's trying to put us over the top this season and I think he's willing to give away some youth if it means further ensuring a Cup. So though it may not be a necessary move, I don't think we can rule out Bob having Bouwmeester and Ohlund as options.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
He seems like he's trying to put us over the top this season and I think he's willing to give away some youth if it means further ensuring a Cup. So though it may not be a necessary move, I don't think we can rule out Bob having Bouwmeester and Ohlund as options.

There is one slight problem with that though. Nothing can ensure a Cup, nothing. Look at the majority of teams since the lockout who traded a lot away for players at the deadline. In most of these cases the players the teams got made no significant difference that year and most flew the coup as UFA's that summer. Bob must be well aware of this and wont give up lots to get anybody. All I can see him doing is picking up a decent aging veteran, no all star caliber players.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't agree at all with the scenario that has us moving a good young player for a 4th D-man to help us in the Cup run. Don't trade youth for rentals, period. (Look at Pittsburgh's lack of depth now). If the scenario is a vet who we believe we can re-sign, that *might* be different, but frankly we've got enough dough invested long-term on the blueline, especially once you factor in Komisarek's likely re-signing. No, we should trade draft picks, or veterans we don't think we can re-sign, or a prospect the organization has given up on (c.f. Grabovski). Or nothing. I'll take my chances with what we've got rather than compromise the future.

Also, I'm not ultimately too concerned with a "PP specialist." I agree that is Brisebois's role, one he can still perform adequately on most nights. What I think we need is a 4th defenceman, period - someone who can enhance our overall game and log serious minutes. I don't see Gorges as quite there. Personally, I like Ohlund there, he's a veteran guy who can quietly step in and fill that role. But there's no way Vancouver will deal him for a pick.

Edited by The Chicoutimi Cucumber

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Chicoutimi Cucumber is bang-on: we need a 4th d-man, and not just to shoot the puck. We need a solid all-around D-man BADLY.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Exactly. I could see Bob picking up a journeyman veteran Dman like Luke Richardson, Ken Klee, or even Chelios. I doubt its going to be any of those 3 but somebody similar thats been around a long time and has played in quite a few playoff series.

Gorges might not be there quite yet but he has 40+ games to get there before the trade deadline so there isnt any rush. I agree that demoting either Gorges or O Bryne could be determental to their progress so they should be given most of this season to improve before making any moves.

The only positive thing about making a move like this now is it would be cheaper now than at the trade deadline. Nobody wants to give another team what they desperately need at the deadline for cheap.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Chicoutimi Cucumber is bang-on: we need a 4th d-man, and not just to shoot the puck. We need a solid all-around D-man BADLY.

Thanks for agreeing, but let`s not overstate the gravity of the situation. We`re struggling in our own end because of overall TEAM play, not because we lack talent on the blue line. The problem has more to do with coaching and players`lack of commitment and focus, than personnel as such.

Nonetheless, Gorges is not YET a 4th defenceman, and I`d feel better launching a Cup run with a bona fide 4th D man back there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
There is one slight problem with that though. Nothing can ensure a Cup, nothing. Look at the majority of teams since the lockout who traded a lot away for players at the deadline. In most of these cases the players the teams got made no significant difference that year and most flew the coup as UFA's that summer. Bob must be well aware of this and wont give up lots to get anybody. All I can see him doing is picking up a decent aging veteran, no all star caliber players.

Well, no shit. I never said another defenceman will guarantee the Cup. But let's stop with the "Bob wouldn't be willing to do X." Yes, he is. He traded Iginla for Nieuwendyke in a similar situation, he set Chipchura back a year with Lang, he was considering a Higgins plus package for Gaborik and maybe still is, etc...

He might prefer to do something else but he is willing to start trading away decent assets if it puts us over the top.

I also don't think Ken Klee and Luke Richardson are any better than Gorges, Bouillon or even Brisebois and Dandenault. They'd bring some leadership but I bet we could find a better player with some leadership - Mike Commodore, for example, if he didn't have that contract.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think yannick weber needs more time in AHL but could he be a short term solution swapping him and OByrne from Hamilton?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think yannick weber needs more time in AHL but could he be a short term solution swapping him and OByrne from Hamilton?

I can't see how he'd be any worse defensively than O'Byrne...and he just might help the PP. Worth a shot.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Well, no shit. I never said another defenceman will guarantee the Cup. But let's stop with the "Bob wouldn't be willing to do X." Yes, he is. He traded Iginla for Nieuwendyke in a similar situation, he set Chipchura back a year with Lang, he was considering a Higgins plus package for Gaborik and maybe still is, etc...

He might prefer to do something else but he is willing to start trading away decent assets if it puts us over the top.

I also don't think Ken Klee and Luke Richardson are any better than Gorges, Bouillon or even Brisebois and Dandenault. They'd bring some leadership but I bet we could find a better player with some leadership - Mike Commodore, for example, if he didn't have that contract.

You did say give up "some youth" but the cost will be more than just 1 player and more like at least 1 current prospect + high picks or 2 prospect + med picks. The cost will be high to pick up a top Dman and the new NHL is a helluva lot different now than it was in 99. Saying what Bob did pre-prelockout for Dallas doesnt mean much now. Besides Dallas was trying to win the Cup once and that lone Cup win made their franchise. I highly doubt Bob would risk the Habs being able to be a perenial contender over the next 5 years to win the Cup just this year.

Well even slightly better is better. I think a veteran journeyman Dman would be better than Gorges or OBryne because they would have more experience. Like somebody suggested in another thread if they were an opposing teams forward they would dump the puck behind OBryne everytime because he rarely comes up with the puck. A veteran Dman would have a lot more confidence with the puck and experience in situations like that so it would take that possible strategy away which in itself could be really big improvement even if Gorges/OByrne = Klee/Richardson type. I think Dandy should be given a few games to see how he does because I beleive with his experience he would be better at being targetted than OByrne.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...