Lovett's Magnatones Posted December 12, 2013 Share Posted December 12, 2013 Teams would definitely want him. Consistent shot blocker, reliable defender, smart positioning. I'm fine with no thrills Gorges. He has a terrible deal for a borderline number 4. 3.9 million with term is a lot of dough for what he brings to the table. He was carried imo by Gill and Subban, and since last year, whenever he's on a pairing without PK, he's toast against the cycle, which, I think explains his shot blocking style. With Tinordi/Beaulieu/Pateryn on the horizon as #5 and #6, we're running out of room for middling defensemen. Eventually this logjam of mediocrity is going to cause issues in the room. Should White, a good fourth line center sit because of a logjam? Should Prust get bumped down to the fourth line because of Briere? Should Tinordi or Beaulieu stay I'm the minors because of Francis Bouillon? How about Pateryn? Is he going to sit in the minors forever? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DON Posted December 12, 2013 Share Posted December 12, 2013 Personally, I think it's nuts to expect Tinordi or Beaulieu to become top-4 NHL defencemen next season, let alone this one. Most of the time young players really do need time to find their feet and grow into their potential. As for this year, I'm inclined to agree that a FW with both size and skill (we can dream, can't we?) would be a bigger priority than another defenceman. You can kind of imagine us going deep with this defence corps provided everyone stays healthy - which is itself a long shot - but I remain pretty skeptical that a forward core that includes Desharnais and Bourque as key contributors is Cup-worthy. Add another top-4 FW and another top-4 defenceman, then maybe we're in the mix. A 235lb version of a Tinordi, with 130-140 pro games under his belt by next fall, could possibly be a 20+ minute NHL d-man. I don't mind the roster as is and should be able to do fine in the playoffs The first round seems to have almost 50% upsets, so just get into playoffs and hope Price stands on his head, have 1 or 2 bottom six or rookie players tear it up for a series or 2 and who knows how far a team can go. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dlbalr Posted December 12, 2013 Share Posted December 12, 2013 Should Prust get bumped down to the fourth line because of Briere? No, Prust should be a 4th liner because he struggles when he's put in a scoring role (so regardless of Briere). It's no fluke that he has been at his best since being put back on the 4th playing a role that best fits his game. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Chicoutimi Cucumber Posted December 12, 2013 Share Posted December 12, 2013 A 235lb version of a Tinordi, with 130-140 pro games under his belt by next fall, could possibly be a 20+ minute NHL d-man. I don't mind the roster as is and should be able to do fine in the playoffs The first round seems to have almost 50% upsets, so just get into playoffs and hope Price stands on his head, have 1 or 2 bottom six or rookie players tear it up for a series or 2 and who knows how far a team can go. Tinordi could be that guy - I'm not saying it can't happen. But this summer, I was saying that it would be foolhardy to expect him to be a reliable contributor and was told similar things about how I'm too pessimistic etc. You simply can't pencil in a rookie to make a big contribution. It happens (see Gallagher and Subban) but not often, especially on D. As for the other part of your post, you're not describing a contender. You're describing a team that might manage to reach the finals if all goes right on a miracle run. That's fine and all, and an OK objective for what remains a rebuilding year, but I sure don't want to be hearing such things one or two seasons from now. Enough's enough; at some point you have to insist on the genuine article. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DON Posted December 12, 2013 Share Posted December 12, 2013 Tinordi could be that guy - I'm not saying it can't happen. But this summer, I was saying that it would be foolhardy to expect him to be a reliable contributor and was told similar things about how I'm too pessimistic etc. You simply can't pencil in a rookie to make a big contribution. It happens (see Gallagher and Subban) but not often, especially on D. As for the other part of your post, you're not describing a contender. You're describing a team that might manage to reach the finals if all goes right on a miracle run. That's fine and all, and an OK objective for what remains a rebuilding year, but I sure don't want to be hearing such things one or two seasons from now. Enough's enough; at some point you have to insist on the genuine article. But, I think Tinordi will be playing in Montreal this March and may be a big addition for playoffs? And you know, with a good defense, top PP unit and a hot goalie you can win any series. But yes they are different than maybe Chicago, Pittsburgh, LA, Canucks, or Boston with loads of veteran all-stars and why Vegas has Habs as relative long shots for cup win. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dlbalr Posted December 12, 2013 Share Posted December 12, 2013 But, I think Tinordi will be playing in Montreal this March and may be a big addition for playoffs? And you know, with a good defense, top PP unit and a hot goalie you can win any series. But yes they are different than maybe Chicago, Pittsburgh, LA, Canucks, or Boston with loads of veteran all-stars and why Vegas has Habs as relative long shots for cup win. Anything's possible but this team shouldn't be counting on Tinordi - or any other Hamilton defenceman - to be a big addition for the playoffs (a depth guy, sure, but not a big addition). If one is in the lineup, it will be in the #6 role barring injuries, similar to what it was back in October. Nothing Tinordi has done since going back to Hamilton suggests that in a few months he'll be a key guy playing an important role for the Habs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lovett's Magnatones Posted December 12, 2013 Share Posted December 12, 2013 No, Prust should be a 4th liner because he struggles when he's put in a scoring role (so regardless of Briere). It's no fluke that he has been at his best since being put back on the 4th playing a role that best fits his game.That's true, but in the traditional sense of a third line, Prust and Chris Neil are the best of the best. I like that model better than rolling out three lines of second liners.Two scoring lines, a checking line, and a fourth line full of cement heads. Was hockey ever better? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hab29RETIRED Posted December 12, 2013 Share Posted December 12, 2013 I don't see why Bouillon NEEDS to stay fresh. Frankly if he needs conditioning send him to Hamilton. If someone claims him on waivers, big whoop ti do, and good riddance. Let me try to guess the logic. Murray played the last game against Buffalo and with Philly on the horizon, he'll likely get that game. If faced with the decision of whether to play Murray against a big non-conference opponent or a big conference opponent, I'd choose the latter. As much as some want Bouillon to never play again, he needs to stay fresh; the defence corps won't stay healthy forever which means he'll be a regular again soon enough. In hindsight, the more prudent decision may have been to play Bouillon against Buffalo and give Murray the Kings and Flyers but with Parros being a late scratch against the Sabres (a divisional opponent), they may have wanted to keep a bit of size in there. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DON Posted December 12, 2013 Share Posted December 12, 2013 Anything's possible but this team shouldn't be counting on Tinordi - or any other Hamilton defenceman - to be a big addition for the playoffs (a depth guy, sure, but not a big addition). If one is in the lineup, it will be in the #6 role barring injuries, similar to what it was back in October. Nothing Tinordi has done since going back to Hamilton suggests that in a few months he'll be a key guy playing an important role for the Habs. Sure cant realistically disagree at all, but with my overly optimistic rose-coloured glasses, the Habs simply need at least 1 rookie d-man to gain experience this year (with 2-3 d-men moving on by deadlines/next fall). I would peg Tinordi, with another batch of AHL games playing role he is, as best call-up and I keep hating to say injuries will come, but I think is a given over the next few months and choice will be either Tinordi/Pateryn for 1st call-up. And simply have a feeling that Tinordi will then show that he is an upgrade on Boullion and Murray and will play an important "depth" and PK role. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DON Posted December 12, 2013 Share Posted December 12, 2013 Many talk about Plekanec being underrated, which he is, but watching Dustin Brown in font of net, getting cross checked over and over by every Hab near him and he just takes the punishment, smiles and skates away, seems to just exemplify what is needed to be a winner. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Chicoutimi Cucumber Posted December 12, 2013 Share Posted December 12, 2013 DON, Habs29 has been banging the drum to have a rookie called up to replace Bouillon as the "Murray alternate." While one can argue that this is insufficient ice time for a developing young player, the flip-side is that a half-season in that role will pay off next year, when the kid in question will be fully acclimated to the NHL environment. I tend to agree with Habs29 on this and I'd give that model serious consideration myself. A team looking to become a contender within two years needs to be breaking in young players who have a chance of becoming the guys who can fill its holes. As for Dustin Brown - well, yes. And I had the same reaction watching David Backes literally toss around our defenders like rag dolls. Problem is, of course, those kind of guys are impossible to get, and when one comes on the market, such as David Clarkson, you have to blow the bank to sign them. This is where the McCarron pick was a calculated risk. If he can evolve into a top-9 NHL forward, we'll have something approaching "that guy." Of course, that almost certainly will not be within the "Markov window." But it's something, I guess. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DON Posted December 12, 2013 Share Posted December 12, 2013 DON, Habs29 has been banging the drum to have a rookie called up to replace Bouillon as the "Murray alternate." While one can argue that this is insufficient ice time for a developing young player, the flip-side is that a half-season in that role will pay off next year, when the kid in question will be fully acclimated to the NHL environment. I tend to agree with Habs29 on this and I'd give that model serious consideration myself. A team looking to become a contender within two years needs to be breaking in young players who have a chance of becoming the guys who can fill its holes. As for Dustin Brown - well, yes. And I had the same reaction watching David Backes literally toss around our defenders like rag dolls. Problem is, of course, those kind of guys are impossible to get, and when one comes on the market, such as David Clarkson, you have to blow the bank to sign them. This is where the McCarron pick was a calculated risk. If he can evolve into a top-9 NHL forward, we'll have something approaching "that guy." Of course, that almost certainly will not be within the "Markov window." But it's something, I guess. And others also seems to push that a rookie d-man needs to dress, as next year trying to break in 2 rookie d-men at once is a bit much to ask for. But, I think Hamilton experience is perfect for all currently there and would only look to bring one up no earlier than late-Jan, barring injury or team going totally off the rails. And try and insert rookie in for last 20-30 games and playoffs, would seem to be fine by me, Habs play 15 games in March and will likely need extra bodies by that time of year. And I see Brown as a superior player to a Clarkson, but may be a bit of Anti-Leaf bias there. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Machine of Loving Grace Posted December 12, 2013 Share Posted December 12, 2013 No, Brown is unquestionably superior to Clarkson. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.