Jump to content

Feb 21, Montreal @ Ottawa, 7PM EST


Recommended Posts

25 minutes ago, The Chicoutimi Cucumber said:

I think Tatar has looked better since he was scratched. That's a small sample size, though.

Thanks. Agree on the small sample size, this was just an eyeball impression.

 

I expect Julien will be feeling the pressure now, too. Will he stick with the current lines (and, maybe more importantly, defence pairings) for the next game or will he take a step towards the Therrien blender model?

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 89
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

OK, so let's look at the difference before/after (first 10 games vs last seven games):   Scoring for (per game): 4.4 vs 1.9 -- woah, Nelly, is that a cliff or what? Scoring against (per

Can we put Taffoli back with Suzuki and Anderson??? He’s being wasted on the Danault line.

I have been saying for awhile they need a left shot opposite of Weber/Petry as another one-timer.  Maybe KK with instructions of; if you get the pass, one-time it, don't look for a pass.  Take the foc

That was one boring game, two powerhouses battling to a draw.

 

I think the OT winner was the 3rd time in 2 games that an opposing player had time to smoke a joint while standing all alone in front of a Hab goalie deciding where to shoot.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, TurdBurglar said:

I think you guys are being too harsh for that game.  It’s was the second game of a back-to-back and as the game progressed, it showed.  Habs came out strong in the first and you saw the legs dwindle as the game went on, which was very evident in OT.  


The worse player on the ice last night was Mete, so I’m glad he didn’t play any OT.  Let’s face it, the first 2 Ottawa goals were flukey, odd bounces that floated over the Allen’s shoulder.  You see maybe 2 of those a year and Ottawa had 2 in a row.  Habs had some great chances and didn’t bury them.  


This goes far beyond last nights game. 
 

We have not played well enough to compete for some time. We can’t score and our defence looks really poor. They are seriously exposed and the lack of speed is trouble. 

 

Our PP is incredibly poor again. 
 

Adjustments can and should be made but let’s see if CJ does make any meaningful changes. His track record suggests that CJ will do nothing but let’s see. 
 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Prime Minister Koivu said:

This goes far beyond last nights game. 
 

We have not played well enough to compete for some time. We can’t score and our defence looks really poor. They are seriously exposed and the lack of speed is trouble. 

 

Our PP is incredibly poor again. 
 

Adjustments can and should be made but let’s see if CJ does make any meaningful changes. His track record suggests that CJ will do nothing but let’s see.

OK, so let's look at the difference before/after (first 10 games vs last seven games):

 

Scoring for (per game): 4.4 vs 1.9 -- woah, Nelly, is that a cliff or what?

Scoring against (per game): 2.7 vs 2.9 -- almost the same, given the small sample size

 

Shooting for (per game): 34 vs 33 -- the shots are down, but only barely

Shooting against (per game): 29 vs 29 -- no more shots being given up

 

Shooting percentage for: 12.8% vs 5.6% -- 12.8% was surely unsustainable. But surely 5.6% isn't normal, either?

Shooting percentage against: 9.3% vs 10.0% -- This explains the somewhat increased goals against

 

PP percentage: 23.7% vs 7.1% -- This is another drastic drop. What explains this?

PK percentage: 79.5% vs 75.0% -- Yes, it's down, but it's not a cliff

SHG percentage: 13.6% vs 4.2% -- It's true that we scored three on the Canucks, but there were three more, too

Net PK (opponent PPG less our SHG) percentage: 93.2% vs 79.2% -- Those SHG are very nice indeed

 

PP per game: 3.8 vs 2.0 -- Not only is our PP inept, we are only getting half the chances

PK per game: 4.4 vs 3.4 -- Fewer penalty kills so the number of penalties is not up recently

 

Corsi average: 55.1% vs 54.0%

Fenwick average: 54.0% vs 53.0%


 

 

So, possession (Corsi/Fenwick) is more or less the same, as is the number of shots. PK is not great but not much worse than the first 10 games. Opponent shooting percentage (our save percentage) is up a bit. But, really, the regression in the results comes down to three things:

 

3. We really miss those short-handed goals. Were we just lucky on those? I think Byron, Lehkonen and Toffoli are still capable of scoring those. What's holding them back?

 

2. The power play has completely collapsed. 7.1% is roughly half of some of our worst seasons. Yes, seven games is a small sample, but a single goal in 14 attempts is pretty pitiful. A still-miserable 14% PP might have at least won us one of the two Ottawa losses.

 

1. The shooting percentage is down by more than half. 12.8% surely wasn't sustainable, no team can keep scoring at that pace, not in today's NHL. But 5.6% is also super low, and outside the normal range -- and outside the normal percentage for our forwards. Are we experiencing some bad shooting luck (to make up for the good shooting luck in the first 10 games). in addition to our other problems?

 

And, really, it's the PP and the shooting percentage. Can Julien address those?

  • Upvote 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

Great post, tom.

 

As I've said in the game threads, I didn't think we played badly either against TO or Ottawa.

 

The PP drop might be sufficient in itself to explain the recent losses, really. Like they always say, it's a "fine line" between winning and losing.

 

Weber has not been getting his shot off, and when he does it hasn't looked as terrifying as in the past, IMHO. That may be a significant part of the PP collapse. The very low team shooting % during this skid also tends to confirm my impression that we're getting chances, just not burying them.

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, TurdBurglar said:

... The worse player on the ice last night was Mete, so I’m glad he didn’t play any OT ...

Actually, because go his skating, IMO Mete may be a better choice in O/T than Chiarot ... and I ma no fan of Mete

Link to post
Share on other sites

Amazing post tom 

 

I remember that we used to hit opponents blue line with speed and that doesn’t happen near as much. 
 

Against Ottawa, with 5 mins left in the second, the Habs did 2 man forecheck and we caused havoc. Went back to trap in the third. We did 2 man forecheck the first few games.  
 

Danault is being overplayed compared to his output. He might have tripped on Gomez cause he’s fallen of a cliff. 
 

Our centres have what? A combined total of 4 goals? That’s not good enough. However I don’t think CJ has them in a position to succeed. 
 

I agree with Cucumber that the slow D need to be paired with mobile D. I hope CJ does something 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, GHT120 said:

Actually, because go his skating, IMO Mete may be a better choice in O/T than Chiarot ... and I ma no fan of Mete

Mete showed in last night's game he was a defensive liability.  He was directly responsible for the first goal against, his airhead decision to try to out muscle someone bigger than him lead to the 2-on-1 fluky goal.  Yes it was fluky but Romanov wouldn't have had to sprawl to cut the 2-on-1 pass off if Mete just played his man so Romanov could play his own man.  He also gave up another 2-on-1 just after that by trying to join the rush.  I would rather have another forward instead of Mete in OT, at least another forward would have an offensive punch. 

 

Mete's speed in OT should prove lethal, but his execution in either zone last night was not good at all.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Wait, I forgot a key variable: the reverse retro sweaters. So, here it is, classic sweaters vs reverse retro sweaters:

 

Scoring for (per game): 3.8 vs 1.3 -- need I say more?

Scoring against (per game): 2.7 vs 3.0

 

Shooting percentage for: 11.3% vs 3.7% -- can it really get worse than this?

Shooting percentage against: 9.5% vs 9.8%

 

PP percentage: 22.7% vs 0.0% -- this parrot wouldn't go voom if I put four thousand volts through it!

 

On a more serious note, the blue sweater games account for three of the five losses during the current slump, so the correlation is definitely going to be there. But ... ugh.

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, tomh009 said:

OK, so let's look at the difference before/after (first 10 games vs last seven games):

 

Scoring for (per game): 4.4 vs 1.9 -- woah, Nelly, is that a cliff or what?

Scoring against (per game): 2.7 vs 2.9 -- almost the same, given the small sample size

 

Shooting for (per game): 34 vs 33 -- the shots are down, but only barely

Shooting against (per game): 29 vs 29 -- no more shots being given up

 

Shooting percentage for: 12.8% vs 5.6% -- 12.8% was surely unsustainable. But surely 5.6% isn't normal, either?

Shooting percentage against: 9.3% vs 10.0% -- This explains the somewhat increased goals against

 

PP percentage: 23.7% vs 7.1% -- This is another drastic drop. What explains this?

PK percentage: 79.5% vs 75.0% -- Yes, it's down, but it's not a cliff

SHG percentage: 13.6% vs 4.2% -- It's true that we scored three on the Canucks, but there were three more, too

Net PK (opponent PPG less our SHG) percentage: 93.2% vs 79.2% -- Those SHG are very nice indeed

 

PP per game: 3.8 vs 2.0 -- Not only is our PP inept, we are only getting half the chances

PK per game: 4.4 vs 3.4 -- Fewer penalty kills so the number of penalties is not up recently

 

Corsi average: 55.1% vs 54.0%

Fenwick average: 54.0% vs 53.0%


 

 

So, possession (Corsi/Fenwick) is more or less the same, as is the number of shots. PK is not great but not much worse than the first 10 games. Opponent shooting percentage (our save percentage) is up a bit. But, really, the regression in the results comes down to three things:

 

3. We really miss those short-handed goals. Were we just lucky on those? I think Byron, Lehkonen and Toffoli are still capable of scoring those. What's holding them back?

 

2. The power play has completely collapsed. 7.1% is roughly half of some of our worst seasons. Yes, seven games is a small sample, but a single goal in 14 attempts is pretty pitiful. A still-miserable 14% PP might have at least won us one of the two Ottawa losses.

 

1. The shooting percentage is down by more than half. 12.8% surely wasn't sustainable, no team can keep scoring at that pace, not in today's NHL. But 5.6% is also super low, and outside the normal range -- and outside the normal percentage for our forwards. Are we experiencing some bad shooting luck (to make up for the good shooting luck in the first 10 games). in addition to our other problems?

 

And, really, it's the PP and the shooting percentage. Can Julien address those?

Good analysis. Shooting percentage and SG for are the big outliers - we knew that neither were sustainable.  The last game against the Sens was an example of just piss poor finishing and against the leafs game while Anderson was really good, there were a lot of times were it was poor finish. The Drouin being alone and passing it off, is an example of the confidence just not being there.

 

I also thought that the Danault line which while not scoring at the start of the deal, was doing their defensive role. They have been giving up too many chances - part of it comes down to the average to below average D.

 

Shooting percentage should come back up, but I’ve been saying since the off-season moves, MB has added balance to the offense, but the D is still composed of largely bottom pairing and at best 2nd pairing dmen.  The quality of the scoring chances the defensive play is giving up is ridiculous.  Part of it is coaching, but most of it is not having the horses needed for today’s game.  We don’t have that dominant puck mover - Petry is having probably his best year - offensively and defensively (been much better defensively than I thought he was capable of).  But for the most part we added big bruising Dmen that a lot of people wanted and they’d be pretty good if this was still 2001 instead of 2021.


The D is just too slow and our captain is showing his age and there is no young dman that can let him to play the kind of role that Chara did with Boston the last few years. Romanov may become that guy, but he clearly is not capable of playing that role now.

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Prime Minister Koivu said:

Amazing post tom 

 

I remember that we used to hit opponents blue line with speed and that doesn’t happen near as much. 
 

Against Ottawa, with 5 mins left in the second, the Habs did 2 man forecheck and we caused havoc. Went back to trap in the third. We did 2 man forecheck the first few games.  
 

Danault is being overplayed compared to his output. He might have tripped on Gomez cause he’s fallen of a cliff. 
 

Our centres have what? A combined total of 4 goals? That’s not good enough. However I don’t think CJ has them in a position to succeed. 
 

I agree with Cucumber that the slow D need to be paired with mobile D. I hope CJ does something 


id put Armia with Danault and Tatar. Keep Anderson and Taffoli for Suzuki, and Gallagher and Perry with KK.

 

Keep Byron on the friggin 4th line.

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, tomh009 said:

Wait, I forgot a key variable: the reverse retro sweaters. So, here it is, classic sweaters vs reverse retro sweaters:

 

Scoring for (per game): 3.8 vs 1.3 -- need I say more?

Scoring against (per game): 2.7 vs 3.0

 

Shooting percentage for: 11.3% vs 3.7% -- can it really get worse than this?

Shooting percentage against: 9.5% vs 9.8%

 

PP percentage: 22.7% vs 0.0% -- this parrot wouldn't go voom if I put four thousand volts through it!

 

On a more serious note, the blue sweater games account for three of the five losses during the current slump, so the correlation is definitely going to be there. But ... ugh.

Montreal should not have a 3rd jersey. Period. Great classic red road jersey that is now the home jersey. And great white jersey. Tell Bettman and his marketing department to go screw themselves and leave the third jerseys for the marginal NHL markets.

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, hab29RETIRED said:

Montreal should not have a 3rd jersey. Period. Great classic red road jersey that is now the home jersey. And great white jersey. Tell Bettman and his marketing department to go screw themselves and leave the third jerseys for the marginal NHL markets.

I am OK if 3rd jersey is simply smaller tweek(s), not full colour or barberpole versions.

 

But, still sounds like bunch of folks purchased the blue versions and was exactly what owners wanted, some extra $$.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The third jersey is really nice looking.  If we win our next three wearing them, there will be less complaints. 

It will never replace the other two, but an extra look is nice. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Commandant said:

The third jersey is really nice looking.  If we win our next three wearing them, there will be less complaints. 

It will never replace the other two, but an extra look is nice. 

 

Sure, but they attained perfection with this one. Anything else would be uncivilized.

 

http://www.smilepronto.com/i.php?https://robertptome.files.wordpress.com/2013/08/montreal-canadiens-replica-centennial-jersey-194546-white-n4041_xl.jpg

  • Upvote 1
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...