Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
The Chicoutimi Cucumber

What is going on?

Recommended Posts

I have seen plenty of big teams fail, I don't obsess about

the size of a player or the perception of a player. Perception is rarely reality.

I was trying to suggest that anything around 200 lbs was not considered by me anyway a small player. It is not overly big as well. You make a good point about Detroit. What makes Gomez small in my opinion is that he doesn't have elite skills such as Datsyuk and Crosby and plays along side smalls such as Gionta and Cammy. As far as Detroit is concerned, winning the SCup with smallish forwards is more of an anomoly than a rule. The Montreal Canadiens as presently constitued will not survive a run like last year, if they make the playoffs at all. They are too small.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I always pull for small players because I think that they are irrationally discriminated against by scouts and GMs and coaches, and I hate the way people fetishize size. So I tend to share Wamsley's view - but within limits. One need only look at the Philly series last playoff to realize that size does count. Our players were unable to establish any sort of presence in the Philly zone, and I think that's partly due to sheer size. No one can accuse Cammy or Gio of not being battlers. It's just that when a 5'8 pit bull comes up against a 6'4 put bull, the latter usually wins.

You can have a very good team of 'smurfs.' Combine the speed, skill and character of our core guys with a disciplined team game commited to D and strong goaltending, I still believe that's a recipe for excellence, slump notwithstanding. The question is whether you can go all the way with one. I'd say that it's possible...but we'd really improve the odds if, say, MaxPac became a top-6 forward and we had one or two physically punishing players we could throw out there. I doubt that I'm saying anything too controversial if I propose that a serious top-6 power forward would make a huge difference for this team, or that we might not contend until we get one. (Then again, imagine both a healthy Markov AND the Wiz on the blueline. A man can dream).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OUR WORST FEAR!!!

the reality that the HAbs are not a "player developing" organization!?!?!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What's going on. Look at Points, players do not produce offensively.

Top points D (Hammer) is at 34th, exclude Wiz points with Isles.

Top scoring center(Plek) is 23th scoring center in the league.

Top scoring LW (Cammalleri) is 16th in the league.

Top scoring RW (Gionta) is 35th in the league.

And i didn't mention Gomez and Kostitsyn production.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Everybodys talking about size, and I agree that we need it more. BUT, if players don't use it, like Puoliot don't, where do we need size. I believe we need more gritty players, more players who play like they are 6'5" and 300 lbs. :lol:

I think trading MaxLap away was a huge mistake. But what can you do, you just need to believe JM's vision....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Again , referring to the gospel of Montreal habs hockey; Antichambre

Martin Lemay, commented on how Jm "destroys more than he builds"

He stated and I quote "Name me a player that has improved or developped in the Canadiens under JM"

the only person they named (jokingly) Halpern

I will call that and raise the following... name me a player he developed in Florida?

I dont know much about his senators regime... but wasnt he criticized for blocking J Spezza's progress?

And just for the sake of arguing... If JM is the kind of coach that best coaches developed players and less so non develop players. Then are the present day habs a team fit for JM? or are we killing the next generation of up and coming players.

Time after time we have agreed that the best way to build a team is to do it the Detroit red wings way... develop within and then complete the roster with trades and pick ups. Are we not headed in the wrong direction?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
So is Tomas Plekanec a poor example of small?

He is 5'11" and 197 lbs. Does he have the skill set?

How about Datsyuk? Also 5'11" and 197 lbs.

The Wings won a Stanley Cup with a small skilled team. Holmstrom has a reputation as one of those

guys who goes to the net hard and does the dirty work. He is barely bigger than Datsyuk and Plekanec.

http://www.hockey-reference.com/teams/DET/2008.html

Is that a big team?

It is about work ethic and desire for the puck. I have seen plenty of big teams fail, I don't obsess about

the size of a player or the perception of a player. Perception is rarely reality.

With all due respect, you do realise that the Habs are notorious for inflating the height and weight of their players. Every reporter who follows the habs on a regular basis know that Gionta is NOT 5'7". He's closer to 5'5", maybe 5'6". I also seriously doubt that Plex weighs close to 200 pds. I wouldn't be surprised if he weighed in below 190.

I had the chance of running into Camms in the suburbs this spring and I was much taller than him, yet I'm only 5'10" tall. If I were playing for the Habs, I'd probably be listed at 6' ;);)

Also, I don't think we have anyone on our team that can even come close to the talent level that guys like Datsyuk, Zetterberg or Lidstrom have.

Edited by Habsfan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Again , referring to the gospel of Montreal habs hockey; Antichambre

Martin Lemay, commented on how Jm "destroys more than he builds"

He stated and I quote "Name me a player that has improved or developped in the Canadiens under JM"

the only person they named (jokingly) Halpern

I will call that and raise the following... name me a player he developed in Florida?

I dont know much about his senators regime... but wasnt he criticized for blocking J Spezza's progress?And just for the sake of arguing... If JM is the kind of coach that best coaches developed players and less so non develop players. Then are the present day habs a team fit for JM? or are we killing the next generation of up and coming players.

Time after time we have agreed that the best way to build a team is to do it the Detroit red wings way... develop within and then complete the roster with trades and pick ups. Are we not headed in the wrong direction?

Nathan Horton went from 22 points to 47 the season JM appeared, and then to 62 points, a level he's maintained since.

Olli Jokinen went from 58 to 89 points the season JM took over. And after leaving Martin's tutelage he has never again registered as an elite NHler.

Jay Bouwmeester went from 20 to 46 points after JM took over. And a year after leaving Martin's tutelage his totals dropped to 29.

Furthermore, the whole analysis requires us to overlook the players he developed in Ottawa. One of these - Wade Redden - began to struggle one year after Martin left, just like the aforementioned.

That's three high profile Panthers Martin developed, and three high-profile NHlers who had by far their best production under his coaching.

The rest of those Sens stars - Hossa, Havlat, Alfreddson, Phillips, etc. - all were developed under Martin.

Spezza struggled under Martin because Martin insisted that he be defensively responsible and respond to instruction. Many hockey people remain convinced that Spezza to this day is a soft, unreliable player who will never win anything because he is not defensively responsible and does not respond to instruction.

The above evidence suggests that had Spezza remained under Martin he might have evolved into a truly elite NHLer. Instead he remains pigeonholed as a soft talent.

In short: Martin's track record in player development is extremely strong . It is ridiculous to claim otherwise.

Edited by The Chicoutimi Cucumber

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
With all due respect, you do realise that the Habs are notorious for inflating the height and weight of their players. Every reporter who follows the habs on a regular basis know that Gionta is NOT 5'7". He's closer to 5'5", maybe 5'6". I also seriously doubt that Plex weighs close to 200 pds. I wouldn't be surprised if he weighed in below 190.

I had the chance of running into Camms in the suburbs this spring and I was much taller than him, yet I'm only 5'10" tall. If I were playing for the Habs, I'd probably be listed at 6' ;);)

Also, I don't think we have anyone on our team that can even come close to the talent level that guys like Datsyuk, Zetterberg or Lidstrom have.

We can all negate any argument by claiming that "Team A" inflates weight totals. I can tell you that the Penguins

have done so because I saw Crosby at an autograph signing once.

We can only go by the listed totals, anything else is pure speculation.

The point was that big is not necessarily better. It is about perception. One perceives that Draper is a physical

grinding forward essential to success. He is 5'10" 188 lbs. Holmstrom, a physical net presence. He is 6'0" 200 lbs.

Is anybody going to put Dino Ciccarelli at the top of the physical player list? Dude made a living going hard to the net

and scored 600+ goals getting smacked around by defensemen, he was 5'10" and 185 lbs.

It is not the size of the dog in the fight, it is the size of the fight in the dog. Everybody is the same height when they

are lying on their back etc etc.

It is an easy mark and hence the easiest thing to complain about.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To develop talent there has to be some talent to develop.

The core doesn't score.

The youth, are average prospects. Pouliot, Weber, MaxPac, Eller are low end average prospects.

Best the coaches could do is bringing them to the average NHL'er level. Except PK.

JM can't score key goals, neither Price.

I do not like JM but it's time to blame the players more than anything. Do your job, shoot, score.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This whole size thing is a red herring. Any of the bigger guys we have are dismissed as "playing small". Any big guy on another team is automatically considered as physical. Sure, we would all like to have a team of quick, fast skating, skilled, huge players with good hands and great hockey sense. The fact is, every player lacks something. We happen to have a number of forwards who are not overly big. Should we trade Plex or Gionta for Ponikarovsky?

Edited by Peter Puck

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
We can all negate any argument by claiming that "Team A" inflates weight totals. I can tell you that the Penguins

have done so because I saw Crosby at an autograph signing once.

We can only go by the listed totals, anything else is pure speculation.

The point was that big is not necessarily better. It is about perception. One perceives that Draper is a physical

grinding forward essential to success. He is 5'10" 188 lbs. Holmstrom, a physical net presence. He is 6'0" 200 lbs.

Is anybody going to put Dino Ciccarelli at the top of the physical player list? Dude made a living going hard to the net

and scored 600+ goals getting smacked around by defensemen, he was 5'10" and 185 lbs.

It is not the size of the dog in the fight, it is the size of the fight in the dog. Everybody is the same height when they

are lying on their back etc etc.

It is an easy mark and hence the easiest thing to complain about.

Yes I agree about all that. What I think a fewe of us are saying is that when you have a few smaller guys surrounded by bigger guys, the smaller guys will perform very well, but when you have mostly smaller guys on your team, they might find it harder as the season goes into Jan-Feb to perform constantly against bigger bodies.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In short: Martin's track record in player development is extremely strong . It is ridiculous to claim otherwise.

That is reassuring Chicoutimi!

Yet, the worries for this organization in lieu of present statistics and former player development (blossoming) abroad, still make this question arguably legitimate...

Perhaps it boils down to coaching assistants?

Furthermore, any concerns of this type should still be dealt with pro-actively, and not reactively. I work in resource management, and with a precautionary principle in mind, can we not hire more development coaches to take the rookies and younger players under their wing. Maybe there is I don't know.. But we cannot risk this anymore. The rumor is that the vets are not that supportive as they should be because of JM reign of benching terror.

Regardless if the recruits don't fit the team, we cannot keep this tendency of trading assets for nothing when they don't fit our needs, we are depleting our recruiting structure... For those Biologically inclined you can say this is Recruitment over-harvesting like... or better yet Recruit/juvenile wasting.

The fact that D'agostini, Latendresse Lapierre chipchura etc.. play better in other teams isn't my concern... the fact that we often don't get much in return, because we're FORCED or pressured to get rid of them is my concern

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...