Chris Posted January 8, 2007 Share Posted January 8, 2007 I was going to do an individual report card but i would say Rivet is brutal in his own end, can't skate, etc. Then some one would say he is a great leader. That would be the same old posts that are always on this board. So all do it by groups since it's a team game. Coaching staff: B PP and Pk are outstanding and they have brought credibility and structure to the team. The one complaint i would have is that it is the coaches reponsibility to have the team ready to play and they Always lay an egg in the first period. Goaltending: A Probably the main reason the team has the points it has, both goalies play well almost nightly. Only minor complaint, a soft goal here and there. But i am not complaining about there performance at all. Forwards: D No offensive ability 5 on 5, too many holding and hooking penalties. Everyone underachieving besides the third line. Defense: D The numbers look better then they are do to goaltending. The group is soft, slow and unable to pass and get out of the zone effectively. Lose way too many 1 on 1 battles. Special Teams: A Outstanding special teams, the other reason the Habs have the points they do. Character / grit / physical play: D No one (rarely) stands up for eachother. With the exception of Komi, Begin, Lats, Lapierre they is NO physical play on this team. They are pushed around and beaten 1 on 1 way too often. Uninspired efforts many nights. Leadership: A (Koivu) C- everyone else. When Koivu is out, they lose. Enough said about him. The rest i don't see any leadership or people standing up and making a difference. So overall I am very happy with the points the team has acquired, However other then goaltending this team really should not be where they are at with the play and effort they give most nights. I still think they need to move some players to even get into the playoffs. I really like the young talent coming up, i think it's time to get rid of the vets and turn to a younger team. Top priority would be getting Gomez, Datsyk (spelling) Briere this summer. My line up next year would be younger so they can afford those guys. Higgins Koivu Kovalev Samsonov (don't think they can trade him) #2 center Lats Perez Chipchura Johnson Begin Pleks Lapierre / Real tough guy Kosty will make the team or be a trade sweetener Markov Komi Dandy New D like Vishnevski (LA) someone like that Younger D man Bouillon I would try to resign Aebi if he wants to stay Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoeLassister Posted January 8, 2007 Share Posted January 8, 2007 Good for coaching staff, special teams, goaltending, but i dont agree with your D for offense and defense. Dude if Habs get a D what about the Flyers ?!?! They would get a H ?!?! I would give a good C for the offense : i really enjoyed many games this season so far, we scored nice goals (opposing to Hurricanes...) Markov at 0.4 second left, Kovalev last week, some of Tender's goals from nowhere, etc. They deserve a D only for the 8 last games. Also the 3rd line deserve a B+ for shutting down Crosby and Ovechkin game after game. Defense, a C- : Streit, Markov and Souray deserve more but Rivest, Dandenault and Niinimaa less than C- I think Carbo and Muller are nice so far. I can't wait for a winning streak for the :hlogo: !!! GO HABS GO Get out &$&$ing flu !!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Posted January 8, 2007 Author Share Posted January 8, 2007 My point for low grades (D) on the D and forwards are because all the good work happens when they have more players on the ice then the other team. That's why the special teams got A's. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoeLassister Posted January 8, 2007 Share Posted January 8, 2007 My point for low grades (D) on the D and forwards are because all the good work happens when they have more players on the ice then the other team. That's why the special teams got A's. yeah maybe. we need more speed on 5 on 5. Did you see how the Rangers were skating fast in our zone this week. Only Grabovski was at their level of speed. Remains that D looks "severe". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ShortHanded Posted January 8, 2007 Share Posted January 8, 2007 I love the coaches, but my other problem would be that they refused to change the lines earlier to tinker for more goals / chemistry from the forwards. As I've said (and others have said) in other threads, even when we were winning, we weren't getting enough goals and some of the lines were doing HORRIBLY (2nd line obviously). I think that it would have been good to switch them up earlier, instead of waiting until we were mired in a slump, and see if we could have found suitable combinations with better chemistry before. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Easy Ryder Posted January 8, 2007 Share Posted January 8, 2007 Coaching staff is getting a C minus for me. I think that they are still adjusting, they are all rookies at their position as coaches. For the coaches i would say the strenght is leadership and the weakness is player positionning on the ice. They are getting a lot of penalties because they are out of position. The forwards are not making themselves easy aiming to pass. There is no transition plan everybody seems to panic in the D Zone. And Chris there is one group not mentionned yet. Management (General Manager) C- Three good decisions have been made that needed to be taken. Latendresse from Junior to NHL, Zednik out of town and Streit for ywo more years. Except that there is the trade of Ribeiro-Ninimaa, acquisition of Mike Johnson, acquisition of free agent Samsonov, long term contract to Bouillon and a center against Théodore last year. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Posted January 8, 2007 Author Share Posted January 8, 2007 On management, i would actually give the grade a B+. The reason is they have held onto and drafted many gifted players who will be in the NHL soon. What i think many fans forget to realize is that this team has been so bad for so long it can't be fixed overnight. Like i said earlier i think next year will be a transition year to a younger team. Then you will see all the hard work paying off. The current roster of vets has been here a while and are just not that good. It is hard to make trades because all you'll get back is the same underachieving players just different names. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JMMR Posted January 8, 2007 Share Posted January 8, 2007 I enjoyed the report card. You backed up all of your grades which is nice to see. Good job Chris. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Chicoutimi Cucumber Posted January 8, 2007 Share Posted January 8, 2007 (edited) Nice work, although I think the report card is distorted by pessimism flowing from our recent slump. E.g., I don't agree that the Habs aren't physical. They've consistently dealt out as much punishment as they've received this season (Komisarek alone delivers at leats one crushing hit per game), and I've seen players standing up for each other on several occasions. This is the biggest, 'toughest' team we've had in a loooong time. (Not to say they're the Broad Street Bullies, merely that they're not intimidated by anyone anymore). Similarly, giving the forwards a 'D" ignores that 2 of 3 players on the first line have had great half-seasons (Koivu + Higgins), the third line has been stellar, and Latendresse has slowly emerged as an effective force. And how the D can get a 'D' when Souray is THE LEAGUE-LEADING offensive defenceman and Markov has superb numbers beats the heck out of me. And EasyRider's (apparent) inclusion of the Johnson acquisition as an ERROR by management makes no sense to me. A final thought on all the hand-wringing over our even-strength play: if the Habs were effective 5 on 5 and useless on the PP - thus nearly guaranteeing a terrible win-loss record in today's NHL - would you give the forwards A+? More likely we'd all be in despair, because we'd be out of the playoffs. So I agree that we should be concerned about the even-strength thing, but not that we should be evaluating our forwards PRIMARILY on that basis. Specialty teams are absolutely pivotal nowadays. Edited January 8, 2007 by The Chicoutimi Cucumber Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ShortHanded Posted January 8, 2007 Share Posted January 8, 2007 Except that there is the trade of Ribeiro-Ninimaa, acquisition of Mike Johnson, acquisition of free agent Samsonov, long term contract to Bouillon and a center against Théodore last year. Sorry, how's Johnson a bad decision????? Isn't he the guy who's part of that incredible third line we have? Is this a different Johnson?? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nesquik Posted January 8, 2007 Share Posted January 8, 2007 I wouldn't say the they lost Saturdays game because Koivu wasn't there, I don't like it when people put the pressure of the team on one player, when they lose it's defense fault, when they win, it's because of Koivu... They won't say anything bad about that captain, but I find people are depending too much on Koivu, or Kovalev. It's team work, not individual, you don't win if the team doesn't work together, from what I see is that you rated the offence and defense from the 3 last games... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Easy Ryder Posted January 8, 2007 Share Posted January 8, 2007 It's not a bad decision it's just a fill in at a high price 1.9 million. I use to like Johnson play but now he reminds me too much of Sundtrom/Bulis kind of player. He got 5 pts in the last 23 games and does not burry the chances he has. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smon Posted January 8, 2007 Share Posted January 8, 2007 He's a good player for the role he's playing. If he scores 30 pts, it'll be more than enough production for a guy who only plays on the third line and has zero PP time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prime Minister Koivu Posted January 8, 2007 Share Posted January 8, 2007 I really don't want Abby back. Huet is proven himself as a #1 goalie. I fear that Danis is spoiling down in the minors and he needs to make the jump to the NHL next season or traded. Not to mention the miracles that Halek is working. That should carry us through until Price is ready. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fromage Posted January 9, 2007 Share Posted January 9, 2007 Except that there is the trade of Ribeiro-Ninimaa, acquisition of Mike Johnson, acquisition of free agent Samsonov, long term contract to Bouillon and a center against Théodore last year. Bouillon's a bad decision?????? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nilan25 Posted January 9, 2007 Share Posted January 9, 2007 Bouillon's a bad decision?????? What is wrong wih Boullion besides size? He is mobile and moves the puck, plays tough and is all heart. Only criticism I have is his weak point shot. He can be on my team anyday. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nesquik Posted January 9, 2007 Share Posted January 9, 2007 I really don't want Abby back. Huet is proven himself as a #1 goalie. I fear that Danis is spoiling down in the minors and he needs to make the jump to the NHL next season or traded. Not to mention the miracles that Halek is working. That should carry us through until Price is ready. Danis, i'm sure could be a second goalie, he has proven himself a number of times and some teams would take Abby as their first goalie, Danis can do the job as second goalie the time Price comes to the NHL, he is the Montreal Canadians future goalie, unless something happens to him. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Easy Ryder Posted January 9, 2007 Share Posted January 9, 2007 What is wrong wih Boullion besides size? He is mobile and moves the puck, plays tough and is all heart. Only criticism I have is his weak point shot. He can be on my team anyday. My problem with Bouillon contract is that they knew his knee needed operation, or if they didn't knew then Bouillon cheap shot the organization. Knowing that they gave him three years. It is the kind Since he is back i don't see in him what we saw in the past, there was rumors that he needed a second ioperation on the knee before he came back. His skating is less than explosive than it was. And for big hits i didn't see that from him since 15 games or so, he's maybe hurt or he plays not to make mistake like others. Not what i expect from him at all. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ShortHanded Posted January 12, 2007 Share Posted January 12, 2007 Check out this Habs Midseason Report that was linked to by Habsinsideout.com fom McKeen's Hockey. http://mckeenshockey.rivals.com/content.asp?CID=627300 It's very good actually, very balanced, and I think the ratings are based on comparing our players to the rest of the league... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gohabsgo252006 Posted January 12, 2007 Share Posted January 12, 2007 Are you saying that not getting a center for Theo was a bad decision? I think what they did was awesome, getting rid of him alone was amazing. If he held out any longer he wouldn't be able to give the guy away the way Colorado is trying to now. I say Kudos BG on the Johnson acquisition, getting rid of Theo and re-signing CUBE. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Easy Ryder Posted January 12, 2007 Share Posted January 12, 2007 They held on Theo too long before trading him, they never would have waited longer. And with no broken ankle we could have got way more than Aebisher for a MVP player. I would have take Tanguay in a heartbeat even if he is not a center. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Posted January 12, 2007 Author Share Posted January 12, 2007 That guy must be grading on a curve if the Bonk Johnson Perez line got a B, that line deserves an A period. The D is overrated in my books, but i think people only look at offensive stats and not the whole package. Good read though. 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.