Jump to content

Retool or rebuild. That is the question?


titanfan

Recommended Posts

After yesterday's pathetic game, I am about to jump into the rebuild bandwagon

 

I like most of the individual players, including depth players like D-lo and Morrow because I am a fan first (like the father of Ann ugly kid, I can find something to like)

 

But it is time to  stop living in the past of "the most histories sports franchise..." and face the fact that we need to save the team from drinking its own marketing and actually fixing it top-down

 

may the forum ghosts grant us some lucky bounces in the future (I do not think they ever moved to the Bell center)

 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Fall For Dahl is having a good night..

 

Buffalo gets a loser point and Ottawa gets two. Ottawa is now 2 pts back and Buffalo 6.

 

Arizona looks like they’ll pick up two more. With a regulation win, the Coyotes would be 9 points back.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, TheDriveFor25 said:

The Fall For Dahl is having a good night..

 

Buffalo gets a loser point and Ottawa gets two. Ottawa is now 2 pts back and Buffalo 6.

 

Arizona looks like they’ll pick up two more. With a regulation win, the Coyotes would be 9 points back.

We need Edmonton and Vancouver to pass us so we could get 4th and end up with a but shoot at 1.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

57 minutes ago, Metallica said:

We need Edmonton and Vancouver to pass us so we could get 4th and end up with a but shoot at 1.

 

Was hoping they both won.. both trailing. Cmon Oilers and Nucks

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is why its a retool and not a rebuild. 

 

The team is not near as bad as it appears.... 

The further below the centre line, the more unlucky your team has been this season... the further above, the more luck you have had. 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Commandant said:

This is why its a retool and not a rebuild. 

 

The team is not near as bad as it appears.... 

The further below the centre line, the more unlucky your team has been this season... the further above, the more luck you have had. 

 

 

Its our Dcore that's bad. To old and slow. Built for the 90's not today's Nhl. If we retool the Dcore to a more faster puck moving dcore this will be a better team.

Also we need to do a better job wining faceoffs, we play without the puck too much.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Faceoffs mean almost nothing.... the tampa bay lightning are the 30th placed team in the NHL in faceoffs. 

 

I'd rather a team that wins battles in the corners, that gets the puck and maintains possession, that creates turnovers, then worry about faceoffs.  There are 1000s of puckbattles every game, only a small percentage are faceoffs. 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If my centres have a sub 50% faceoff rating they better have a PPG of 0.75 or higher.

 

Also it's getting to be a yawn to see analytic praise for a team that plays like Lars Eller: they carry the puck well and shoot the puck a lot but none of the shots are good and none of the puck carrying is actually creating chaos or scoring opportunities. They go limp when they get near the net. I was shocked to find out the Canadiens have a better PP without Weber than with. Why? Because they have the most predictable PP with him. They don't move with purpose. They only move because the coach tells them to. It creates a chasm between what's really happening and what the stats show on surface.

 

Upon closer inspection this is a team that has no ability for the defence to support the offence, is terrible in their own zone, gives up high danger scoring chances like Oprah giving cars, and an offence built on streaky wingers and middle sixers doing their best. People can yap until the cows come home about how this team is better than it looks but they've been saying it since pre-season. This is not a good team. This is not a team a couple players away from a Stanley Cup run. This is the 2012 Vancouver Canucks with no Stanley Cup final appearance to show for it.

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Commandant said:

Faceoffs mean almost nothing.... the tampa bay lightning are the 30th placed team in the NHL in faceoffs. 

 

I'd rather a team that wins battles in the corners, that gets the puck and maintains possession, that creates turnovers, then worry about faceoffs.  There are 1000s of puckbattles every game, only a small percentage are faceoffs. 

And Tampa has won what exactly and imagine if they had a capable faceoff man how good would they be, good enough to not lose to Sabres? Foolish to say they mean dick all, is important on every special team faceoff. Unless you think a PP/PK of 1:40 (at most) is equal to that of a 2:00 one, after having to chase puck to other end.

 

4 hours ago, Metallica said:

Its our Dcore that's bad. To old and slow. Built for the 90's not today's Nhl. If we retool the Dcore to a more faster puck moving dcore this will be a better team.

Also we need to do a better job wining faceoffs, we play without the puck too much.

You don't think having ZERO all star forwards is a big deal? Habs top forward is tied for 105th in NHL scoring, which should be glaring weakness to all isn't it?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think focusing on faceoffs is a fools errand. 

Focus on players who maintain possession of the puck and create chances when they have it, and who can get possession of the puck back when they don't have it. 

 

Give me those attributes and I could care less what a faceoff percentage is.  Evgeni Malkin, Logan Couture, Jack Eichel, Connor McDavid, Mat Barzal, Nathan MacKinnon, Evgeni Kuznetsov, Jonathan Marchessault, Evgeni Kuznetsov, all under 45% on faceoffs.  My answer, I'd take each and every one of them on my team, and not give a rats ass about their faceoff percentage. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

May as well have Mete take our defensive zone face offs since they mean nothing. He’s got skill, doesn’t matter if he wins ‘em.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, xXx..CK..xXx said:

May as well have Mete take our defensive zone face offs since they mean nothing. He’s got skill, doesn’t matter if he wins ‘em.

 

You miss the point.

 

A centre's has huge responsibility on the ice.  Huge. No doubt about that. 

 

Faceoffs aren't close to the biggest part of it. 

 

Find me a centre who controls play like the guys i listed, I don't care if he wins faceoffs or not, if he can do what those do in the next 40 seconds after the faceoff is over.  That is so much more important.  

 

Arguing that a defenceman could do the same job, just shows you don't understand what the job is after the faceoff is over.

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Commandant said:

 

You miss the point.

 

A centre's has huge responsibility on the ice.  Huge. No doubt about that. 

 

Faceoffs aren't close to the biggest part of it. 

 

Find me a centre who controls play like the guys i listed, I don't care if he wins faceoffs or not, if he can do what those do in the next 40 seconds after the faceoff is over.  That is so much more important.  

 

Arguing that a defenceman could do the same job, just shows you don't understand what the job is after the faceoff is over.

I was a center in hockey, but I digress....

 

You’re the one who started a discussion about the other important elements of being a centerman when it wasn’t much the point. 

 

The same arguments were made early in the season about Drouin and why it doesn’t matter whether or not he is good at faceoffs.

 

We would all take Malkin, Eichel, Kuznetsov, McDavid, etc... Unfortunately the discussion was about the Habs, and since we don’t have any of those centermen, it would be nice if we could at least win some draws.

 

As for the Mete *joke*, the centerman could always get back into position after the draw and assume his normal responsibilities, since the draw itself isn’t all that important. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Everytime i made the argument about Drouin, i said that face-offs don't matter IF HE DOES THE OTHER JOBS A CENTRE NEEDS TO DO, INCLUDING DEFENSIVE ZONE WORK.

 

Go look up my previous posts if you want.  I always said there were aspects he has to prove himself in.

 

I stand by those statements.  I don't care about his faceoffs.  He is struggling as a centre because he's not dangerous enough in the middle offensively, and not good enough without the puck defensively.  The faceoffs aren't close to his biggest issue in why he hasn't succeeded as a centre this season.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It’s fine. I agree that faceoffs aren’t necessarily the most important aspect of a centerman. I’m not sure why it matters how important they are though. 

 

I certainly don’t miss Torrey Mitchell and he would probably be our best center at the dot. 

 

As for Drouin, it could be said either way. His face off percentage may not matter as much if he is being productive in at center in other ways and defensively responsible, but it’s also likely that he would still be a center if he had a 55% percentage at the dot, despite the rest of his flaws. 

 

It’s the same reason Matt Duchene is a center on Ottawa, and would have stuck there with us. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quite Frankly, it’s the only legitimate knock I can see about Galchenyuk as a center and I’m someone who wants him there.

 

It’s also the reason we see Plekanec on the ice in so many questioned situations. His face off percentage is far higher than Galchenyuk’s, Drouin’s, Hudon’s, Byron’s, etc. Of course he’s defensively responsible, but he’s also thrown out there for offensive faceoffs in the crunch. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Commandant said:

It matters cause someone earlier said our two issues were a puck moving dcore and winning faceoffs.  I disagree stromgly that faceoffs are in the top 5 issues of this team... never mind top 2.

Montreal is certainly one of the worst teams in the league at faceoffs so it would be nice to improve in that area. Once Plekanec is traded, it will be all Danault and Shaw in terms of decent faceoff percentage.

 

It’s true that there doesn’t seem to be much of a correlation between team faceoff percentage and success in the standings though.

 

I think most teams in the league are at least 47% so in that sense, it isn’t a huge deal. Some individual players in the 30s or low 40s however, and that starts causing some issues, in terms of trusting their usage.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, Commandant said:

It matters cause someone earlier said our two issues were a puck moving dcore and winning faceoffs.  I disagree stromgly that faceoffs are in the top 5 issues of this team... never mind top 2.

If your  team is built around puck position you need to win faceoffs, other wise you're chasing the other team instead of the other team chasing  you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Commandant said:

I think focusing on faceoffs is a fools errand. 

Focus on players who maintain possession of the puck and create chances when they have it, and who can get possession of the puck back when they don't have it. 

 

Give me those attributes and I could care less what a faceoff percentage is.  Evgeni Malkin, Logan Couture, Jack Eichel, Connor McDavid, Mat Barzal, Nathan MacKinnon, Evgeni Kuznetsov, Jonathan Marchessault, Evgeni Kuznetsov, all under 45% on faceoffs.  My answer, I'd take each and every one of them on my team, and not give a rats ass about their faceoff percentage. 

Faceoffs is a skill, like shooting a puck or skating. If you are good on faceoffs like Crosby, that is better than being like Malkin (who doesn't take a lot of faceoffs, because he sucks, especially no PK and rare PP one).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Metallica said:

If your  team is built around puck position you need to win faceoffs, other wise you're chasing the other team instead of the other team chasing  you.

 

Analytics will show you that the effect of a faceoff on possession is very small... only being a small difference and only in the firs 5-8 seconds post faceoff.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, DON said:

Faceoffs is a skill, like shooting a puck or skating. If you are good on faceoffs like Crosby, that is better than being like Malkin (who doesn't take a lot of faceoffs, because he sucks, especially no PK and rare PP one).

 

It is a skill

 

It doesn correlate strongly to winning though.

 

Fighting is a skill too but less and less teams care abput that skill

 

 

I want my team to be good in the skills that win games

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, Machine of Loving Grace said:

If my centres have a sub 50% faceoff rating they better have a PPG of 0.75 or higher.

 

Also it's getting to be a yawn to see analytic praise for a team that plays like Lars Eller: they carry the puck well and shoot the puck a lot but none of the shots are good and none of the puck carrying is actually creating chaos or scoring opportunities. They go limp when they get near the net. I was shocked to find out the Canadiens have a better PP without Weber than with. Why? Because they have the most predictable PP with him. They don't move with purpose. They only move because the coach tells them to. It creates a chasm between what's really happening and what the stats show on surface.

 

Upon closer inspection this is a team that has no ability for the defence to support the offence, is terrible in their own zone, gives up high danger scoring chances like Oprah giving cars, and an offence built on streaky wingers and middle sixers doing their best. People can yap until the cows come home about how this team is better than it looks but they've been saying it since pre-season. This is not a good team. This is not a team a couple players away from a Stanley Cup run. This is the 2012 Vancouver Canucks with no Stanley Cup final appearance to show for it.

 

Great post right here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'll concede on faceoff percentage as there's only 26 centres with 35 points or more with a faceoff of 50% or better. Looking in the past it's usually about 30 or so centres with 45 points or more at a 50% faceoff percentage. I think if anything we got spoiled by Perreault, Koivu, and Gomez.

 

That said, it's not like we have guys who are good at getting pucks from the opposing team if they don't have it, so it's not like they are good at something that negates the need for good faceoffs. So until we got a McDavid or a Malkin or a Kuznetsov with a 43% faceoff but it doesn't matter they are good anyway, it's a silly point all around.

Link to comment
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...