xXx..CK..xXx

I understand people saying we should not resign Plekanec but I’d like the Habs to do so. The problem I see is having Danault and Plekanec on the same team. It pretty much ensures at least one of them would be playing higher in the lineup than they should be.

Tavares doesn’t change a bottom dweller to a contender. Either we’re not a bottom dweller or we’re not winning a cup with him anyway. I’d love Tavares but he hasn’t proven to be a Crosby or Toews in the playoffs, and it’s also because he hasn’t had the supporting cast. He never pushed the Islanders over the top on his own, not should he have to. If the Habs can be a contender with Tavares, it will be because Price, Weber, Drouin, Galchenyuk, Pacioretty if he’s on the team, Gallagher, and perhaps even Zadina will have had solid seasons. That also leaves room for one of Hudon or Lehkonen to improve on their lackluster season this year or even Byron to maintain being the player he’s been. It’s not true that the chips are all in on Tavares. If we don’t land him, it’s a worse case scenario but we can still work on acquiring a more mediocre center (Stastny) or two for the same cost of Tavares, or a center and that additional left handed defenseman.

Yes, and if we didn’t have the cap space available, we wouldn’t be able to sign Tavares. And if Tavares does not sign with us, we are not cap restrained. Seems like there’s no problem here.

These trade proposals including our 3rd overall are terrible. Not only are we trading the 3rd overall, but we’re Adding Galchenyuks, Scherbaks and Paciorettys to sweeten the pot of our already sweet pot of 3rd overall. I’m not even huge into prospects but I want to keep the pick.

It’s not true that the top 2 are the only 2 in this draft. If that were the case, teams should also trade away their 4th, 5th, 6th picks, etc. Zadina could, and probably will end up a pretty darn good player. His release is a threat at all times.

We already knew heading into the draft that there wouldn’t be any top centers as high as we would be drafting. Let’s keep our pick, draft Svechnikov, Zadina or Tkachuk and then move on to free agency.

This is crazy. “Team x doesn’t score enough goals so they would be interested in Pacioretty”. What was the Habs problem again? I’m assuming our team won’t need to score goals until “the young kids are finally ready.” I’m actually even more against trading the top 3 pick because the returns listed there are not the likely return teams would offer. One of the reasons I’ve been constantly arguing against these trade proposals are because they are proposals that are either clearly better for us, or clearly better for the other team. I don’t believe Pacioretty, with one year left on his contract, would be of any enticement to the Oilers in a trade for Draisaitl. Some people argue that Montreal will not have even a chance at winning the cup next year. I see even a less of a chance for that Edmonton team, even with McDavid. They are not going to trade away Draisaitl for one year of Pacioretty, even if the 3rd overall is included. Edmonton also has the 10th overall pick so it’s not like they are drafting incredibly deep. In any case, a more likely trade between the teams would include a swap of draft picks along with a few less important pieces than Draisaitl and Pacioretty.

I’ll be surprised if we pick anywhere but where we landed and I expect the Habs to pick Zadina. Not very original, but it’s the way I see things playing out.

It’s a bit of semantics but he said “sign and trade”, not “trade and sign”. From my point of view that would mean that the Islanders would sign him prior to trading him to the Habs. It’s still too much and is part of my assumption that people totally devalue Pacioretty. Not that he wouldn’t be good to trade for Tavares, but to then throw in a Galchenyuk and Zadina. If Brooklyn signs him and then trades him, he doesn’t have a say in where he goes. Unless he has a no trade clause. Which a player of his caliber probably would.

Elite is a strong word but I think Mete can surprise people even more than he has already. There have been some claims that he is the best/quickest young skating defensemen in the league so in the future that will pay dividends. He didn’t do anything offensively this year but in 10 years, I could see him being one of the best defensemen in the league. I would agree that the Habs are slightly worse than some other teams in the recent past when it comes to what you’re talking about, but it doesn’t happen very often for any team, when one looks at it.

Victor Mete round 4 2016 Brendan Gallagher round 5 2010 They aren’t Kucherov but then again most 1st rounders are not Kucherov either.

I’m tired of hearing this and that player are better at wing but they can play center. I want my players to play the position they are best at. Versatility is good but more so when your team goes through unforeseen injuries. Not when it’s because there are no other options.

In that sense you’re right but I definitely agree that for whatever reason teams really were affected by the Vegas Flu this year. It’s a unique city, unlike any of the other previous expansion teams listed. I do think they are a good team who overachieved this year. Vegas also had that terrible tragedy prior to the season and while people don’t believe in intangibles, it gave them a strong sense of community, purpose and motivation for their inaugural season. I have San Jose going deep these playoffs so I can’t really change my perspective after game 1. In my view, Vegas continues to surprise.

Bubble teams can still make round 2 of the playoffs. They won game 1 of round 2 by a blowout but I’m still far from convinced that they’re actually a contender. In my personal opinion, the only reason they might be is Marc Andre Fleury, and we all know how he used to be ridiculed during the playoffs.

When you play a $10 poker game as a 16 year old, you get nervous. When you play a $100 poker game as an 18 year old, you get nervous. When you play a $1000 poker game as an adult, you get nervous. The stakes get higher. The opportunity Steven Stamkos gets as an 11 year old is not the same opportunity Steven Stamkos gets when he competes for the Stanley Cup at 27. There are players who play in the NHL for 10 years and never get a sniff at playoff action. As a result, they haven’t even faced a pressure situation in a minimum of 10 years. While it’s true that an NHL player will likely not get nervous during a regular season game, it’s a false premise to assume some players may not handle being in a Stanley Cup final for the first time differently than someone else. These are opportunities that do not come around very often. This is even if their skill level remains the same. You can say that professional players have trained themselves their entire lives to be good at handling pressure but there is no substitute for actually being in the moment. If you were to tell me that there aren’t players who all of a sudden aren’t able to take a pregame nap, for instance, that they take 82 times a year, I wouldn’t be able to agree. Then there are those who as you pointed out will have nothing changed from their routine. This demonstrates that players react differently mentally and this in turn can have an effect on their game.

We’re all coming to slightly different conclusions here but the thing with Pacioretty is that he has had two decent playoff seasons and 2 bad ones. In 2015, he had 5 goals in 11 games which is similar to his regular 30-40 goal production over an entire season. I’m willing to be viewed as “not smart” but if I’m a team with Pacioretty on my squad, I’m still relying on him to be productive during my playoff run. Auston Matthews scored 1 goal and 1 assist these playoffs and I would still put smart money on him being productive should the Leafs make the playoffs next year. Although I didn’t have him in my playoff pool! If anything, I think Pacioretty’s two good playoffs and two bad playoffs would statistically go against this clutch premise either way, rather than prove that it exists. This doesn’t change the fact that I believe a player can be a clutch performer or quite the opposite, statistical evidence or not.

If anyone has ever played sports, there definitely is a clutch mindstate. Whether or not that mindstate can be reproduced statistically is a whole other argument. There are good players who get nervous and there are good players who thrive due to the added pressure. There are certain sports where a really gifted athlete will not want to take a penalty shot in a shootout due nerves. When Jonathan Toews scores 3 times in one shootout, that was also clutch. When Lebron James hit a 3 pointer at the buzzer yesterday, that was clutch. Again, the statistics can be argued but if you have a player who gets mentally foggy in the most important situations, they will never be clutch unless lucky. There are those who elevate their game when it matters most, whether it be because of higher focus, a boost or adrenaline or a passion that is deeper than others. Clutch can be defined a specific way in order to be deemed a myth, but it certainly exists and is extremely apparent in individual sports. As for sample sizes, anything I’ve ever heard would state that you most likely need a few hundred games (300+) if you would like to get a reliable confidence level that your statistics are even meaningful. I don’t know many players that ever play that many in the playoffs. I’m quoting a situation I severely disliked but when Radulov was on our team, Bergevin stated that it was too early to know if this was the real Radulov when asked whether they would sign an extension with him mid way through the year with us. I disagreed with his take, because I feel and felt as though Radulov is one of the 5-10 truly elite Russian players along with the Kovalchuks, Ovechkins, Datsyuks, etc. but in a sense he was right. Even 40 games in a row isn’t a very large sample size. There are quality players out there like Jerome Iginla and Henrik Zetterberg who are and were notorious for dominating the second half of a calendar year. Pacioretty also has 13 points in 16 international games for the USA and yet everyone thinks he sucks against better competition. That again, is not a large enough sample size to disprove those claims.

I think you answered your own question there. Half a season isn’t much of a sample size.

Didn’t you say that players aren’t clutch, they are just good? Pretty sure Matthews is good. Maybe Matthews isn’t clutch. On another note, I was at a Habs game in Phoenix a few years ago (6 now) and the crowd seemed pretty into it.

You guys are getting way ahead of yourselves with Nashville. They’re a good team but I think it’s going to be tough for them to win it all. I’m genuinely happy to see Markov celebrate a win with his team and although I don’t follow the league closely, I definitely would have thought CSKA Moscow would win. Good for him. And of course left out of all of this is how Sergachev could also be hoisting a cup at season’s end. That’s all premature though.

The west has tough picks next round. Nashville and San Jose winning would have the past two cup finalists facing off in the conference final.

I said last man back (checking), not the first man back. I get how it can be interpreted multiple ways though. In my opinion, there came a point where Subban stopped recovering as well after his turnovers. In his first few seasons and in junior, he’d be the first man back even after he was the one to turn the puck over because of his anticipation and blazing speed. I noticed even when he was on the Habs that this was starting to fade away a little. I was saying that in response to how he recovers well after making mistakes, although it seems that the comment was specific to how it’s a myth that he’s not good in his own zone. I agree that P.K. is solid in his own zone. It’s more the offensive blue line turnovers and neutral zone turnovers that can prove costly (for any player). I just found that P.K. used to recover better from those situations than he does now.

https://www.nhl.com/video/andrighettos-late-go-ahead-goal/t-297850294/c-60028603 Looks like Subban was the last man back on Colorado’s game winning goal today. PS: I don’t miss him but I liked Andrighetto. Everyone was fine with the trade but I think Andrighetto for Martinsen was one of MB’s lesser trades.

It’s not the biggest deal to me but last year we had the three highest offensive point totals by defensemen get nominated for the Norris. This year Burns was second highest in points and didn’t get nominated so I’m not sure it can be said that he was nominated for his defensive play last year, otherwise he’d be in the running year after year. The criteria seems to be different each year. Burns had a rough start this year and I wasn’t saying he should have been nominated, but the point was that since he wasn’t nominated this year, I don’t believe that he’s necessarily outstanding defensively and that being the reason he won last year. He won because of his offensive output with admittedly an outstanding 29 goals. Outside of the goals, he won last year after having won the scoring race with only 8 points more than Carlson had this year and only 4 more points than the second leading scorer amongst defensemen last year. He didn’t blow them away. I think Hedman wins as well but if I’m Carlson, I have to believe that I’ll never win the Norris in this league after not even having been nominated after a season like this. Some will say that’s fine and he shouldn’t. I think Washington’s defense is only slightly less porous than ours and he carried the load.

Yes, and we drafted Subban? My Norris votes would have gone to John Carlson, Victor Hedman and Seth Jones this season. Carlson isn’t as good defensively as many others but not many people would have picked him to be the best scoring defenseman. I thought Jones had a great year and Columbus’ success owes a lot to him as well.