xXx..CK..xXx
-
Posts
3738 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
63
Posts posted by xXx..CK..xXx
-
-
1 hour ago, TheDriveFor25 said:
I hope this is sarcasm because Nashville has outplayed Pitt in both games. You can't win with a leaky goalie.
Nashville still wins the cup, just a couple games longer than I expected.
Not sarcasm at all. Their offense isn't good enough. Especially with Johanssen out. And they don't have players who have crossed the finish line before like Pittsburgh and Anaheim.
-
Nashville's no match for Pittsburgh. Anaheim would have been a better final.
4-1 Pittsburgh in the 3rd
-
The proposed method doesn't work because two of the three years you keep it the way it's been. In this scenario, it's not fair to the teams who finished near the bottom on that third year since teams benefited the prior two seasons.
I would never support the idea of the Habs tanking but I don't really think there are teams out there who go into a year and plan this as a method. Tanking only becomes a thought three quarters of the way into the year when a team has been struggling. We should be happy that the Habs rarely have had to tank and that we do have a shot at the playoffs most years. Not think it's unfair that other teams are able to.
-
To Montreal
Alex Ovechkin
Niklas Backstrom
Braden Holtby
1st Round Pick
To Washington
Carey Price
Alex Galchenyuk
Max Pacioretty
2nd Round Pick
I wouldn't do it
-
I agreed with the development issue thing but Don brings up a good point in that the sample size is really small. Galchenyuk being
the way he is involves about 15 different factors and not all of those reasons have to do with management. In addition, I have personally been fine with his play in general. As long as Julien handles things well, I expect th negative thoughts towards Galchenyuk from this season to be an aberration.
Next, there seems to be a bit of a blurred line when people talk about drafting and our scouts like Timmons versus MB. How much should the picks that haven't worked out be blamed on our scouting, how much should be blamed on our general management and how much should be blamed on our AHL organization and Lefebvre. Of course many will say that all three have to do with our general manager but I don't necessarily agree. Other people have to be responsible for their jobs as well. It seems as though pretty much everyone agrees that Lefebvre is not doing his job but I sincerely wonder how much of that is blown out of proportion as well. I'm willing to be looked at like I'm crazy but I'd like to think if he really were that obviously terrible, something would happen.
-
5 minutes ago, habs rule said:
As what? Asst stick boy?
Exactly. He assists with the sticks and there's no shooting or scoring with them allowed.
-
On 5/10/2017 at 11:41 AM, xXx..CK..xXx said:
To Montreal
Henrik Sedin
Daniel Sedin
To Vancouver
Tomas Plekanec
Nathan Beaulieu
(additional prospect?) depends how over the hill they are
3rd Round Pick
That was my proposal for them from a few weeks ago.
-
4 hours ago, DON said:
Is one answer, but maybe not correct one. If he pumps in 30+ goals as a LWer instead of at centre, is that so bad.
It's not so bad but if the alternative is that we need to acquire two top 6 centers as a result of having not one, it's probably the more reasonable expectation.
I'm probably not the best person on this topic though because I actually see this as being somewhat similar to the Semin situation now that you said that and I was in the minority with my thought process there. I was frustrated when we let Semin walk not because I was in love with Semin but because we were void of a top 6 player with skill and had no one to replace him, but most people's response was that he didn't have the skill of a top 6 player anyway so my argument was moot. The coaching staff has approached this situation similarly, at least in the playoffs this year, in that they did not play him in a top 6 role even though we need more top 6 skill. The main difference is that more fans seem to believe in Galchenyuk as a player than Semin and think he can fill that top 6 center role.
It's one thing for some of us to say he should be slotted in as a top 6 center but I don't think it can be argued that the coaching staff seems to feel the way most fans did about Semin when he was let go and no one batted an eye. They have yet to act like they believe he belongs in the top 6, let alone at center. I personally haven't seen any glaring deficiency in his game when he plays center, but it looks like Julien has in his brief stint with us thus far. Not only that, he wasn't even in the top 6 as a winger. So while I would play him in a top 6 center role myself, especially since we have no top 6 centers, I've been through this before.
-
28 minutes ago, The Chicoutimi Cucumber said:
Yow! Was that a recent interview? If so, he's spouting off without actually being up to speed - one sign of a guy who is no longer current. It's a good point about fuddy-duddies. This organization seems to have a huge bias in favour of the 'safe': it manifests in its apparent discomfort with super-talented young players, and in MB's loyalty to trusted buddies despite their failure to deliver. Point taken.
May 23rd
I hadn't seen the article until Lovetts mentioned it.
http://www.gohabsgo.com/2017/05/23/larry-robinson-sounds-off-on-pk-subban/
Enjoyed Ott. My perception of him changed due to his brief stint with us and I believe he will do well in his new role with the Blues.
-
6 hours ago, The Chicoutimi Cucumber said:
That's a reasonable expectation. The kid can play. What's irksome is, first, the demotion during the playoffs - which was bizarre then, and remains bizarre in retrospect, given that the team could not score its way out of a paper bag - as well as the fact that the organization still has no idea if he should be a C or a W. If the team is going to fill holes, then it first needs to define what those holes are. If Galy is a C, then we need to add one top-6 C. If he's not, then we need to at two. All this prevaricating makes a major difference to what the FW configuration will look like and what needs to be done about it.
It also doesn't help that Galy looked completely lost under Julien. Yes, that may well have been injury-related. Or it may speak to a young man who is just lost, period.
I agree and I think as it stands, the answer is to play Galchenyuk as a top 6 center and to acquire another top 6 center. I feel as though Julien didn't really think he had a weak top 6 with Danault and Plekanec because of the past success he had with Plekanec as well as all the things he probably heard from his Bruins' players when they faced him. The fact is that while there can be an argument made that neither Plekanec nor Danault should have been in the top 6, I think there's no doubt that both of them should not have been in the top 6 simultaneously. I guess from the coach's perspective Galchenyuk-Danault or Galchenyuk-Plekanec was no better than Danault-Plekanec but I think it is. Galchenyuk scored the game winning goal in overtime in our last regular season game and had 3 points in his last 5 playoff games. He was still producing to an extent.
Your statement is the only reason I would ever consider trading him even though I think he'll have a good year. Although I used to think he could be used in a versatile way, he seems to need some consistency.
-
2
-
-
3 hours ago, BCHabnut said:
The Kadri comparison is a very good one. You have to wonder how much of the development is coaching and hope much is personality and general intelligence of the player. I am still hopeful with Galchenyuk. At the end of this season, he was 5th in career points among players 23 and under. And only a few points separated 2nd from 5th. Is to bad Montreal doesn't have a Hossa type winger who could insulate his defensive liabilities and mentor defensive play on ice.
If Plekanec could have been good for anything last year I'd assume it could have been this. At least the defensive mentor part.
I think the whole Galchenyuk thing is overblown. He's scored some big game winning goals for us and had an injury riddled season. I am a little troubled by how Julien handled Galchenyuk since being with us but I'm willing to see how a full season plays out.
I expect good things from Galchenyuk next season.
-
3 hours ago, Lovett's Magnatones said:
Maybe I'm listening to too much Tony Marinaro, but I'm kind of sick of the Carey Price Complex. Is the team worse without him? Hell yeah. Have they done much with him? No. He's played one game in the conference finals and that's as far as this team has gone with him. That has much more to do with the team and it's dizzying array of feckless general managers, but he's not a panacea for all hockey ailments. The run I envisioned him having, where he leads the Habs to the Cup like a Patrick Roy, Martin Brodeur, or Tim Thomas hasn't materialized and when you add in the injury history? Giving him a 8/USA GDP deal is going to be a massive mistake. Which is why I expect an announcement of a monster deal before July 4th.
I'm starting to think goaltending is more of an asset in the regular season. There are always a couple of goalies that play lights-out for a few series, and the .925 Price puts up like clockwork doesn't play out over a limited sample size. Teams can get by with very good goaltending in the playoffs instead of Vezina caliber play. Also, you can get a great goalie that turns into a tomato can for 3-5 games like Bobrovsky or Holtby.
I agree. I mentioned in another thread that he hasn't played as well in the playoffs as he has in the regular season in general although his numbers have improved since Waite. This year he played well, but faced another top goalie in my opinion.
I still don't question having Carey Price as our starting goalie. I understand the thought that we need our team to improve overall but I still stand by the fact he does give us a chance to win every year. In addition, having Price on another team and another decent goalie like Rinne or Halak on the Habs doesn't ensure that our offense magically becomes top tier. Right now, our goaltending is top tier. The only thing I question is how Price seems to control when he plays, when he gets pulled and all that. In addition, I like the Pittsburgh model of having two top goalies better than our model. I've always really liked Montoya but he's like a Bernier and we saw how that worked out for Anaheim. Having a goalie like Price leaves us little reason to have as solid a backup because it's not as necessary.
Given that reality, we have a pretty good backup but we're still no Pittsburgh. Come to think of it, that was us in 2010 with Halak and Price and it was also Vancouver with Schneider and Luongo in Vancouver and neither of those teams were able to make it work in the long run. On the other hand, Pittsburgh decided to keep Fleury and he carried the load when Murray was injured. As I wrote that sentence, Schultz put the Pens up 2-1 with 8 minutes left so they are a few minutes away from cup final.
Edit: Dzingel just tied it up 2-2 with 5 mins left.
-
1 hour ago, Meller93 said:
Absolutely all negativity would get extremely old extremely fast. When I talk about the trade I never talk s**t about Weber for example, I think he's an awesome defence man. I generally try to be as positive about the players as possible.
But it honestly I think I'm just a realist, and though I'm not always right I try to speak objectively, and I think we objectively lost this trade.
I'll give credit where credit is due though.
But being a true fan involves emotion. We put so much time into this, it's honestly part of a lifestyle. How could we not get upset if we truly think a move could hurt the team for years down the road? A casual fan would say, ah screw it, a trade! Exciting.
I'm not a casual fan hahah. I look at things as if I were GM, as I think many on here do. It's why I like talking about it so much. So I wouldn't have it any other way, pissed-offness and all.
Yeah, I think there are small divides that can never be resolved because there are so many uncertainties surrounding the actual reasoning behind the trade. I'm not a blind follower of management but I would like to believe they know more than any of us in terms of what goes on behind the scenes. I will say that I do not believe that Therrien would have requested the player be gone. In addition, I would like to think that if there were indeed unrelated hockey reasons, we got a pretty good player in return. Nothing comparable to Bourque or Thibault (liked Rucinsky but not for Roy). All in all, I'm not even personally convinced that there even was a personal reason for the trade because it was Poile who approached Bergevin at the very last minute.
It's tough to separate emotion from reality because we had a relatively good season where most people predicted the Habs to beat an alright Rangers team. Those same people want the manager fired because those results didn't materialize. The stars don't align because we're all hockey minds here and I'm not sure how Bergevin was supposed to be the only one to know that we were in trouble prior to that series.
We are not Leafs fans. We have experienced some seasons with a comparatively weak offensive unit and we've still had a chance to make some noise. The Leafs never had Carey Price, who gives us a shot to win in any given year. The more we take that for granted, the more we're going to figure out how much we miss him once he retires and goaltending is no longer a strength of ours.
-
3 hours ago, Meller93 said:
I actually wholely engage and participate when other teams fans chirp me about the trade. I have zero desire to try to cover up what I think about it (always hated it). Chirping doesn't get to me when I agree.
That's fine but would you also spend your entire time with fellow Habs fans in the real world chirping our own team in front of those other teams' fans? Even without those other fans there? At least have some pride (not you personally). Not sure what to make of all of it. All I know is that I wouldn't enjoy watching Habs games with a friend or fan like that. That being said, sometimes people are also really hard on their team because they are passionate, but quite often that passion can lead to a tinted non-rose colored lense as well.
-
4 hours ago, Machine of Loving Grace said:
So when Houle and Corey traded Roy, we were supposed to just shut up and support the club?
When Gauthier traded Cammalleri mid game against the Bruins, just shut up and be happy?
Nah. My hockey fandom don't work that way. You want to still think the team has a future? You do you. I supported Bergevin quite a lot in the past.Maybe I eat crow next year but this year has gone almost exactly as I suspected. The only thing that surprised me was Therrien getting fired and Julien being worse at handling Galchenyuk. If this is the Habs I'm being given, I'll wait for the Habs I want.
I spend most of my time in the out of town thread and will continue until Bergevin is the one out of town.
What I didn't realize is how many people became Avalanche and Flames fans after those trades. There's something childish going on here with your mentality and in this case Bergevin is your father.
-
Saw about 20 seconds of Sergachev today before I had to run out for an appointment. Looking forward to him making the big club.
-
I've actually never enjoyed debating anything on here more than the Weber-Subban trade and I'm on the other side of the fence. I could talk about it all day. I just realized for he first time that this thread feels like a Nashville Predators forum though, not a Habs forum.
The more vocal people are those trying to debate how the Habs lost the deal. Call it a difference in personality, but even if it were true, that's something I'd try to keep on the down low. It's not something I would be constantly bragging about amongst Habs fans. Those are the types of fans that other fan bases take pleasure in chirping.
-
48 minutes ago, The Chicoutimi Cucumber said:
The alternative to using the evidence of our eyes and of results on the ice, is to rely on total faith that management is always right; which in this case involves the mystical belief that the trade made the Habs better in 'secret' ways that are hugely important and yet somehow fail to translate into better play, solutions to demonstrable team weaknesses, or results on the ice. I'll stick to the first method, thanks
Last year we didn't make the playoffs. This season we did. Forget the argument that we are any better. How does the evidence show we're worse? That being said, three facts about last year are that Carey Price got injured, Brendan Gallagher got injured, and Subban had a terrible year by his standards.
Despite how it seems, Subban and Eberle were probably my favorite Canadian Junior players of all time. I don't know how Subban wasn't picked up in he first round. It's crazy. This doesn't change the fact that while I pride myself on trying to have an open mind in life, I was harder on Subban than any other player last year because he actually deserved it. A close second would be Eller in the type
of bonehead plays I am talking about. His fanboys are forgetting how he played last season, truly.
As long as those hockey reasons for the trade remain mystical in your mind, then those reasons that the trade hurt our team should remain mystical as well. You've created the thought that the move was lateral, and that seems like a silly reason to complain about a trade unless one is irrationally attached to P.K. Subban in an emotional way.
At least I register that other people have mentioned how the move potentially hurt our transition game but the main thing we actually lost is entertainment value. Rivers are being cried over that. We can continue to ignore that our team played more as a unit and improved on the power play, or we can criticize our coaches because their system doesn't revolve around P.K. Subban's style of play. Because that's all we continue to hear. And sure, let's keep thinking that this was as bad a trade as losing Patrick Roy even before Nashville lifts he cup. Trading Price and seeing him lift a cup (which I believe would happen) would be the equivalent. Not trading PK Subban for an equal but different and more renown player.
-
4 hours ago, hab29RETIRED said:
so you don't think the improvement in the PP had anything to do with adding Radulov???? And yes, i do think that Subban learned to play a more controlled game than he did with the habs. In Nashville he had a real coach worth listening to. not some boob who was hung up with trivial things like the low-five and had it in for Subban as an analyst. Even after Subban was moved the GM that moved him called the team a fragile team after losing to the rangers. So how exactly did he improve the situation bringing in the greatest leader since Julius Caesar?
While I didn't mind Therrien as much as others, I completely agree that It seems as though Laviolette has pushed the right buttons with Subban. I give him huge kuddos for that. Like you, I'm not sure that would have happened in Montreal. The Radulov argument has been counteracted with the fact that Weber helped his decision in coming here. I think Weber deserves credit for helping our power play. I knew people would bring up Muller, but that's too easy to say. It doesn't change the fact that Weber seems to get more shots through. It's similar to comparing Burns to Weber. Burns gets more shots through than anyone else and Weber gets more through than others.
4 hours ago, Commandant said:"What I don't understand is how people don't realize that Subban and Weber will have different impacts on their respective teams."
You don't understand it, because you keep thinking this is what people are arguing. They aren't arguing it at all.
They are arguing that all the reasons given for Subban needing to be traded just haven't shown themselves in Nashville. The three players that he checked in the playoffs.... Getzlaf, Tarasenko, and Toews, had 3 goals against Nashville in their series. He is not a defensive liability. Meanwhile he is trailing Ellis by what 2 points?
Nashville's lockeroom has been fine. He's not a liability there, even after they lost a "superior locker room guy" in Weber.
As for the PP improving... Muller and Radulov have to also be considered here. It wasn't all Weber.
I think it's obvious that most of the issues that were brought up about Subban would not show themselves in his first year after being traded. If being traded isn't enough for someone to introspect and make adjustments, then I don't know what is. He truly would have to be a legitimate narcissist to cause problems in the locker room of a new team right away after apparently having trouble with his previous team. I don't know if Subban actually was a problem in the room. At the very least though, it seems safe to conclude that he would have felt a lot more comfortable and "at home" in Montreal after years of being there. I can see how Nashville benefitted, thus the win for them as well, but it doesn't mean he would have been this way in Montreal without having dealt with being traded. It doesn't mean he wouldn't have been either, but the shock of being traded will have a blow to the ego and maybe he wants to prove everyone wrong more than ever. He was motivated and that's fine and to be respected.
Im sure Edmonton isn't complaining about the problems we had with Kassian either. So what?
Subban has no problem being a shut down defenseman. He can be physical and skates well and can shadow anyone as a result. I for one never thought he was as bad defensively as say, a Karlsson, although I think Karlsson is better offensively. The issue was his individualistic play and turnovers. Because of reasons which have been touched on, he seems to be playing more of a complete game now. With that being said, in game 5 against Nashville, he did a spin-o-rama behind the back pass as the last man back in his defensive zone which led to a breakaway for
Anaheim. Those are the types of plays that I don't personally miss even though yes you'll see someone like Emelin do a similar play and turn it over as the last man back from time to time so it's not only him who does it.
-
What I don't understand is how people don't realize that Subban and Weber will have different impacts on their respective teams.
When the trade happened, I hated it. As I learned more about the situation (still before last season) I saw how it could have been a win-win for both teams. I still support that notion and believe in it very much. Those who worry about Weber and Subban's respective futures to make a point, suffer from anxiety. Those who say it's a win now are only partially right. Weber played better than Subban for
much of the season. He was also our best player in the playoffs and Subban has been one of Nashville's better players as well, but I wouldn't say best. Make of that what you will.
Nashville genuinely has a deeper team than the Habs both on offense as well as defense. People thought this was the case even before the trade. At least I did. I've been watching and Subban has just been a piece of the puzzle. On the Habs, I couldn't envision him being just a piece of the puzzle because we need him more than Nashville does (we also need Weber more than Nashville does). There's no doubt that he tried to do much on our team. That's not a slight on Subban because he had to, but it's still true.
The same analysis can be used with Nashville. The best argument I can see is that perhaps it's true that Nashville relied too much on Weber similar to how the Habs relied too much on Subban. The trade changed the identity of our team for that reason. Seemingly, however, the Habs still rely heavily on Weber, but Nashville doesn't need to rely so heavily on Subban. Again, not a slight against him.
It's easy to look at Nashville in the final and say that they've won the trade but I can guarantee you that I personally would not have made the opposite claim if the Habs went further than Nashville because there's no I in team. I still would have thought of it as a win-win. I'm assuming if we made the cup final, players like Lehkonen, Pacioretty and Price would have also had to have stepped up
to the plate.
Subban does have a personality that rubbed some people the wrong way and people seem to dismiss that as being because of the coach. Similar to how Habs29 has argued that Boucher may have learned something after his first stint as coach and then getting fired, it would surprise me very little if Subban learned from getting traded. Subban has also said that Nashville has worked with him and supported him with his off ice endeavors, since he does have many interests off ice. Montreal could have done a better job of this with him but on the other hand, he's only been in Nashville for one season and let's see how things play out in that regard the longer their relationship lasts. If they do win this year, I'm sure that will
be much easier ?
As for Montreal, our power play sucked for years. We went from 25th in the league to 13th and Weber had the second most goals by a defenseman In the league. Does that answer the question as to one of the ways the trade made our team better now? Or was our power play better because of all the power play assists Price had now that Condon was out? If this isn't a positive from the trade, then some other people are in denial.
Finally, as for the comment that those who defend the trade, which is not even what I consider myself to be doing are only those who support management, this is not the case. Look who Bergevin acquired to help our power play two seasons ago: Semin and Kassian. Look how stupid those moves turned out to be and I called him out when he let his own two acquisitions(mistakes?) go before the new year. Either way you look at it, that turned out to be terrible GMing in my opinion.
This trade has its positive elements, including the fact that it helped our power play. No, I'm not arguing that it was the only reason we made the trade. Subban can be dangerous on the power play as well but it you watch Nashville, he's getting all the assists. On Montreal, we had him blasting from the point and it became ineffective because he would fire wide or other teams would swarm him. For whatever reason, I had more confidence in Weber getting the shot through to the net on our power play, although I would have liked a little
more shots from him on the PP in the playoffs. On Montreal, it would have been hard for Subban to be the assist man on the power play because we don't have a Ryan Ellis.
-
14 minutes ago, Stogey24 said:
You can't wait until they don't win a Cup just to spite Subban basically
You have it backwards. I don't give a damn about Subban, win or lose, but we're on a Habs website and people take joy in seeing another team succeed all the while actually criticizing our player and boasting about our team's misfortunes. I don't hate Subban but I dislike Nashville. I also do not like Ottawa, Pittsburgh or Anaheim and I live right on the border of Orange County and Long Beach in California. I've said nothing about Subban and I don't see why I would. He's been a piece of the puzzle. On the other hand people have been literally mocking Weber's leadership or trying to diminish its importance when that has nothing to do with Nashville's success this year.
Those are are the trolls, not me.
By the way, I wasn't the one who gave you a down vote the other day when you responded to something I said. I actually agreed with you for the most part.
-
I'll say it out loud because I can't wait until they don't win the cup. You guys can then be happy about their final appearance and think about it for years because it will always be a fact that they got further with Subban than Weber. It's true that we'll never be able to take that away from you. That is, until the Habs win the cup with Weber.
If Nashville does win the cup, however, they will have deserved all the credit in the world. Especially if they play Pittsburgh and manage to win. There were a couple of sequences in Round 1 against Chicago where they had incredible spurts of dominance and during those spurts, they looked better than any team I've seen these playoffs. I still am hard pressed to envision them beating Malkin and Crosby though and while I believe they would handle Ottawa in a final, I see Pittsburgh taking Nashville in 6 if that's the matchup that occurs.
-
1
-
-
33 minutes ago, illWill said:
Every single coach, trainer, GM, water boy, teammate, administrator and girlfriend screw him over. If only everybody didn't handle him the way they did, he would be a solidified #1 center by now. He deserves zero blame for where he is.
I think the fact we're talking about it isn't really his fault. This whole thing has been played out to make it seem as though the center position is some sort of higher achievement than playing wing.
I don't know if it's the organization, the media, or the fan base who have created this narrative but it sure as hell ain't him. Galchenyuk should have either been given an extended look at center or when he was moved to wing, it should have been stated that the plan moving forward is to have him play wing. Not only that, but they better mean it when they say that and they didn't need to make it out as bough it's because he's not capable of playing center.
Galchenyuk has been a fine player in general and I personally don't give a damn where he plays. He's actually produced wherever he plays anyway. The problem is that the organization has a clear need at the center position and they still didn't put him there. I understand what you are saying and I guess the argument from your end would be that it's because he hasn't himself proven that he can play center effectively, but as far as I'm concerned, he better not be a center at the beginning of next year because if he is, my only conclusion will have to be that the coach made a mistake these last playoffs by sticking him on 4th line wing. Heck, even if he starts the year at wing and moves to center at some point during the season, I won't really be able to understand how he could "improve" so much at the position in a few months after having been see-sawing back for 4 years.
Regardless of his play, there has definitely been a mishandling of the situation as well because there is a clear confusion as to where he belongs. Even playing well, which he has over these past 4-5 years it has happened and Galchenyuk has no control over that.
-
Where I differ from many is that I think Lundqvist is one of the other elite goalies in the league so New York is definitely another team who's team is built from the net out. Losing to the Rangers therefore doesn't really allow us to
conclude that our team has the wrong model. We're not talking about Ben Bishop or Steve Mason. Lundqvist is the starting goalie for Sweden and while he had a rough start to the year, I think he deserves more credit than he gets. He had a rough series against the Senators as well but then again Price has never played particularly well against them
either.
Price's .933 this season during the playoffs was great. It doesn't change the fact that his career .914 playoff save percentage is lower than his career .920 during the regular season. I would argue that the best player in the world
is supposed to raise his level in the crunch. It also doesn't compete with Price's .972 with team Canada. Canada's international team is a beast but Price is part of that beast. I think if Price plays up to his potential, we have a cup winner. Similar to Ovechkin, it hasn't happened yet. This year, in my opinion, he faced another team with a goalie who at the very least has the potential to be elite on any given night and came out on the losing end.
Put him up against 25 other teams in the league and he is supposed to outgoaltend the opponent's net in a 7 game series. The only reason this model is obsolete is if he is unable to do that.
Everyone agrees we need more offense but after all this my point is that I want Price on my team more than any other player in the league. There are plenty of other goalies who are capable of winning a cup but there are also plenty of offensive powerhouses who fail to
win the cup as well.
In sum, I think we have the perfect model but need more offense. With that being said, while goaltending is not the issue, Price himself has not played up to standard during a playoff run to the extent that other teams could even claim that the Habs are only winning because of their goaltender. It's happened in the regular season but not he playoffs. It last happened with Halak.
2016-17 NHL Season Thread
in Habs & Hockey Talk
Posted
Agree to disagree. I'm sure Crosby and Malkin would be able to figure "Lord Murray" out.