Jump to content

The Tank poll


The Tank poll  

31 members have voted

  1. 1. Should we Tank?

    • yes
      12
    • no
      19


Recommended Posts

Over the past couple of years Bob has systematically removed every player/coach/scout associated with the "old culture" of the team, and yet continues to produce the same results. Sooner or later the constant will be hard to ignore.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Over the past couple of years Bob has systematically removed every player/coach/scout associated with the "old culture" of the team, and yet continues to produce the same results. Sooner or later the constant will be hard to ignore.

To be fair, it was only over the past year that he started to do dismantle the culture he had helped create.

Link to post
Share on other sites
To be fair, it was only over the past year that he started to do dismantle the culture he had helped create.

Further to this, I'm not sure the original comment really stands up. What we saw in 2008 was a team play catastrophically below what its talent level seemed to dictate and to wilt rather than rise to the occasion. The 2009 team, generally speaking, plays with a lot more gumption, stands up for itself, and shows some character. (Consider the difference between the Markov injury last season and this season. Last year, the team simply folded. This season, they hung in). And all things (including injuries) considered, I'm not sure we can really say this team is playing below its talent level. I don't see too many position players this season who we can point to as disappointments. Maybe Spacek and Lapierre. Last year practically everybody was a disappointment.

So character-wise this group is a huge advance. Coaching-wise, whatever we think of Martin's system, he has instituted a clear and logical expectations structure. If you don't listen, you sit. That's also a huge advance on Carbo's seeming refusal to instil any discipline.

The similarities are indeed eerie in other respects: dubious zone defence, crappy transition play. But I don't see this as a 'character' issue per se.

As for player development - way too soon to tell, but the early reports on Boucher in Hamilton seem very promising.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Further to this, I'm not sure the original comment really stands up. What we saw in 2008 was a team play catastrophically below what its talent level seemed to dictate and to wilt rather than rise to the occasion. The 2009 team, generally speaking, plays with a lot more gumption, stands up for itself, and shows some character. (Consider the difference between the Markov injury last season and this season. Last year, the team simply folded. This season, they hung in). And all things (including injuries) considered, I'm not sure we can really say this team is playing below its talent level. I don't see too many position players this season who we can point to as disappointments. Maybe Spacek and Lapierre. Last year practically everybody was a disappointment.

So character-wise this group is a huge advance. Coaching-wise, whatever we think of Martin's system, he has instituted a clear and logical expectations structure. If you don't listen, you sit. That's also a huge advance on Carbo's seeming refusal to instil any discipline.

The similarities are indeed eerie in other respects: dubious zone defence, crappy transition play. But I don't see this as a 'character' issue per se.

As for player development - way too soon to tell, but the early reports on Boucher in Hamilton seem very promising.

Always great Mr. Cuke.

The bold is what baffles me. Why are we having the exact same issues as before. Everything you said is true...In the face of that we still fail where we always have failed.

I really wonder if we have the same problems because Bob made the same type of team (upgrades to talent/heart aside).

Link to post
Share on other sites
Having important pieces not be injured would also give us a better gauge of the team as a whole.... I know I know not allowed to use excuses as a reason.

That's what happens when your team's better players are mostly under 6' tall. Smaller players have a harder time coping with the rough play at this time of the year.

Think about it, who will fare better in the long run, a 5'9" player who weighs 190pds or a 6'3" player who weighs 220pds? Over a long 82 game season, battling in the corners, bodychecks, crosschecks etc.etc.etc.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The problems is the habs injuries have been of the weird type...Markovs, Cammys, Giontas, A kosts..not really anything to do with physical play...maybe Cammys.

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.

×
×
  • Create New...