GAME THREAD: Habs v. Thrashers

[huzer]

I was unable to catch most of the game, but notice people keep bringing up shot totals. Aren't Atlanta (and Florida) home games notorious for inflated shot totals? Just sayin'

[bar]

I wish they would keep track of scoring chances as a stat.

[The Chicoutimi Cucumber]

I don't get this mystique like nonsense about a Jacque Martin coached team!! What exactly has this guy ever accomplished?? He had a stacked team in Ottawa in every position with the exception of goal and couldn't beat much inferior make belief teams. He had solid two way players in Alfredsson, Hossa and Havlat, had an offensive star in Yashin that was turned into Spezza and Chara. Yet coudn't win in the playoffs.

What exactly did he accomplish in Florida???? Bouwmeester was rumoured to not want to play for the guy. The team was worse with him then without him, so what excactly did people expect from Martin's great system - which I still am unsure exactly what it is?????

He was hired only becuase he was the most experienced French speaking coach available and after gainey and his predecessors had put green French coaches into head coaching positions since Demers was fired, he needed someone with a longer resume.

What both Florida and Ottawa had were hard-working teams with well-defined systems. My claim wasn't that he's some genius coach. It was that his teams have a track record of playing a very well-structured game. You can argue about his other merits and demerits, but I can't see how you can deny that. Hence my bafflement at his seeming inability to implement at least a reliable team structure here. That's all.

[Habsfan]

Let's remember that a coach can only do so much. If the players don't listen to the coach, there isn't much more he can do!

[JCPetit]

What both Florida and Ottawa had were hard-working teams with well-defined systems. My claim wasn't that he's some genius coach. It was that his teams have a track record of playing a very well-structured game. You can argue about his other merits and demerits, but I can't see how you can deny that. Hence my bafflement at his seeming inability to implement at least a reliable team structure here. That's all.

I had the same opinion about Martin's teams. I always saw them as well prepared, tough to play against. What is very puzzling about our current team is that the special units are doing very well lately. In fact, if the trend goes on, they will be among the best in the league. My question is: how can we do so well with our special units and so bad five against five?

[Chris]

I'm going to say it has to do with the D, generally speaking they are slow, they have no real puck carrying Dman, Markov is a better pure passer then puck rushing D.

The rest of the D aren't very good passers,

Hamrlik is solid in most areas but not spectacular. Same with Spacek. They just can't skate the puck out.

Gill is a bottom pair defensive guy.

Gorges on a good team is a 6 or 7.

Injuries and not alot of talent doesn't help either. They are basically a 3 line team.

One of there leading scorers (MAB) wasn't even playing hockey the first month or so.

[Wamsley01]

Trading Halak would be a big mistake. Potentially like the one (Chicago?) made in trading Hasek. Keep both I say and see how it eventually pans out.

You are kidding right?

[jackp]

You are kidding right?

No, I'm not. Notice the use of the word "potential" in the alluded-to post. Do you think (Chicago?) knew what they were trading away when they traded Hasek? Seems to me Hasek was under-regarded in Chicago also. As a matter of fact, his unusual style had some thinking he would never be anything more than a backup.

I'm not saying it will definitely pan out this way, but how will you feel if it does? If Halak turns out to be one of the best NHL goalies, and Price is so-so? You think I'm nuts. Okay, so be it. But I see a lot of potential in Halak and I don't see the same potential in Price. This is just one man's opinion after having seen *a lot* of hockey. And maybe now you realize why I get more and more upset when people talk about trading away Halak. I want to *wait* and see how things develop with him. I also want to see him get an *equal* opportunity with the Canadiens. Let the best man win. Is that so unreasonable?

[BCHabnut]

you don't see potential in Price?

[jackp]

you don't see potential in Price?

Some - not as possible as with Halak. I think he will be an NHL goalie who has to deal with inconsistency most of his career. (But when he's on a "good" streak, he will be very good.)

Look, Toe Blake said predicting is for gypsies, and I obviously could be completely wrong. As stated, this is just one man's opinion. But I do see more upside with Halak than Price.

[JoeLassister]

No, I'm not. Notice the use of the word "potential" in the alluded-to post. Do you think (Chicago?) knew what they were trading away when they traded Hasek? Seems to me Hasek was under-regarded in Chicago also. As a matter of fact, his unusual style had some thinking he would never be anything more than a backup.

I'm not saying it will definitely pan out this way, but how will you feel if it does? If Halak turns out to be one of the best NHL goalies, and Price is so-so? You think I'm nuts. Okay, so be it. But I see a lot of potential in Halak and I don't see the same potential in Price. This is just one man's opinion after having seen *a lot* of hockey. And maybe now you realize why I get more and more upset when people talk about trading away Halak. I want to *wait* and see how things develop with him. I also want to see him get an *equal* opportunity with the Canadiens. Let the best man win. Is that so unreasonable?

Well, for my part, I'm seeing the EXACT opposite. Everytime a guy bigger than 6'1'' is in front of Halak, I'm very affraid of what's coming. Not with Price, he is able to move his head and see the play.

[Wamsley01]

No, I'm not. Notice the use of the word "potential" in the alluded-to post. Do you think (Chicago?) knew what they were trading away when they traded Hasek? Seems to me Hasek was under-regarded in Chicago also. As a matter of fact, his unusual style had some thinking he would never be anything more than a backup.

I'm not saying it will definitely pan out this way, but how will you feel if it does? If Halak turns out to be one of the best NHL goalies, and Price is so-so? You think I'm nuts. Okay, so be it. But I see a lot of potential in Halak and I don't see the same potential in Price. This is just one man's opinion after having seen *a lot* of hockey. And maybe now you realize why I get more and more upset when people talk about trading away Halak. I want to *wait* and see how things develop with him. I also want to see him get an *equal* opportunity with the Canadiens. Let the best man win. Is that so unreasonable?

That is great that you want to wait and see, but it is not reality. The cap world does not allow you

to wait until one emerges. Halak's agent is causing all types of press and has asked for a trade.

This is coming to a head, and Gainey will need to make a decision with both coming up as RFAs

and the Habs coming up on a cap crunch because of Pleks career year. Halak is not going to cost

800k next season.

Plus, using Hasek as an example implies that you feel he has that type of potential. It is leading your audience, without making the actual statement. It is the equivalent to me saying, they better not trade Price, look what happened when the Canadiens made that deal with Colorado. It is implying they will regret trading the next Roy, without actually saying I think Price is the next Roy.

Saying you have seen *a lot* of hockey implies what exactly?

I know people who have watched 50 years of hockey and don't know a god damn thing about it. I know people who are in their mid-20s and breakdown the game for simpletons to understand. Are you implying I should trust your assessment based on longevity?

I see potential in Halak, not in Price. That's great, what does that mean to me? It tells me nothing.

I should trust your opinion because you have watched *a lot* of hockey?

Why is Halak going to be better than Price? What does he do that is infinitely superior to Price?

What in Price's game lends you to believe that two years from now he will not have improved to Halak's

level right now? What flaws do you see in Price's game that do not exist in Halak's? How are those flaws

going to ###### his progress and nullify everything that have made him a success at 22?

Yawn. It NEVER ends.

[Wamsley01]

Some - not as possible as with Halak. I think he will be an NHL goalie who has to deal with inconsistency most of his career. (But when he's on a "good" streak, he will be very good.)

Look, Toe Blake said predicting is for gypsies, and I obviously could be completely wrong. As stated, this is just one man's opinion. But I do see more upside with Halak than Price.

You are saying nothing.

Why will he deal with inconsistency in his career? Because he is inconsistent @ 22?

What fundamental flaw in his game will limit his potential, please enlighten all of us.

[BTH]

What was the biggest complaint we had about the Habs over the past couple of seasons??

Lack of SIZE down the middle! With all the changes Bob made, he did not correct that issue. Not only did he not correct iot, but we are smaller up front then we've ever been!

Like it or not, size does help, especially in a long and grueling season!

Size in general helps. Lots of size in any given position means nothing. We could use big and tough offensive forwards. Whether they play centre or wing is of no importance.

[jackp]

You are saying nothing.

Why will he deal with inconsistency in his career? Because he is inconsistent @ 22?

What fundamental flaw in his game will limit his potential, please enlighten all of us.

Okay, your analysis of goaltending styles is not valid to me because you are biased in your assessments (even though you claim you are not). As a result, you report on Halak's faults and extol Price's virtues. This seems scientific but is actually not. If you were to give an account of *both goalie's* strengths and weaknesses, I'd be more likely to credit what you say. You do not present a balanced account. I can see a guy like you tearing Hasek's style apart before he became the best goalie in the world in the late 90's. I'm not into the "expert analysis of what makes a good goalie." However, I'll play your game...

1. Price has an astonishingly poor glove hand for an elite goalie. This is not evident when he's playing well but becomes very obvious when he's in one of his inconsistent phases. (Shots *over the net* being mishandled into the net for example - twice recently).

2. Price often over-compensates on a play. (You know, sliding way too much to one side when dealing with an attack). This often leads him to be out of position.

3. When losing confidence, Price will stay too far into his net. That is the reason for all the top-shelf goals when he's in a down phase.

4. He is often *not good* in a pressure situation. Nothing scares me more than having a one goal lead late in a game with Price in nets. (This is not the case when he's in a "good" phase - his whole attitude and demeanour are different then.)

5. Price depends *a lot* on being a big goalie. He depends on most shots hitting him. This is good when he's confident and is not too deep into his net, but is deadly otherwise.

6. (And this is admittedly subjective), Price is like a California surfer boy to me. He is too laissez-faire. I originally thought this would be an advantage when he first came up, to deal with the pressure of playing in Montreal. But now I see that it sometimes causes him not to have his "head in the game." It's almost as if he's stoned out there. (Not that I think he is). I find Halak is much more competitive by nature. He seems more "into the game" to me.

7. (And this is so subjective that I admit, it's borderline stupid, so flame away) I don't think he's happy playing in Montreal. I think if he had his "druthers," he'd rather be anywhere else but here. I teach "behaviour-challenged" kids, so I have to be somewhat adroit in reading body-language, and this is what I get from his body language. (Before you have a good belly laugh about this one, I had the exact same feeling about Souray for most of the time he was here, and I was right about that one. Also the same feeling I had about Mark Recchi and again, I was correct.)

So there you have it... my "scientific/unscientific" reasons why I am not completely enamored with Carey Price. But after saying all this, I do not think these analyses are very useful. Great goalies have come and gone, all with different styles. (Who would have thought the flopping Hasek or Worsley would have been great goalies?) There's an intangible at work (beyond my understanding) that makes one a Dryden and the other an Esposito.

[Zowpeb]

Okay, your analysis of goaltending styles is not valid to me because you are biased in your assessments (even though you claim you are not). As a result, you report on Halak's faults and extol Price's virtues. This seems scientific but is actually not. If you were to give an account of *both goalie's* strengths and weaknesses, I'd be more likely to credit what you say.

1. Price has an astonishingly poor glove hand for an elite goalie.

2. Price often over-compensates on a play. (You know, sliding way too much to one side when dealing with an attack). This often leads him to be out of position.

3. When losing confidence, Price will stay too far into his net. That is the reason for all the top-shelf goals when he's in a down phase.

4. He is often *not good* in a pressure situation. Nothing scares me more than having a one goal lead late in a game with Price in nets. (This is not the case when he's in a "good" phase - his whole attitude and demeanour are different then.)

5. Price depends *a lot* on being a big goalie. He depends on most shots hitting him. This is good when he's confident and is not too deep into his net, but is deadly otherwise.

6. (And this is admittedly subjective), Price is like a California surfer boy to me. He is too laissez-faire. I originally thought this would be an advantage when he first came up, to deal with the pressure of playing in Montreal. But now I see that it sometimes causes him not to have his "head in the game." It's almost as if he's stoned out there. (Not that I think he is). I find Halak is much more competitive by nature. He seems more "into the game" to me.

7. (And this is so subjective that I admit, it's borderline stupid, so flame away) I don't think he's happy playing in Montreal. I think if he had his "druthers," he'd rather be anywhere else but here. I teach "behaviour-challenged" kids, so I have to be somewhat adroit in reading body-language, and this is what I get from his body language. (Before you have a good belly laugh about this one, I had the exact same feeling about Souray for most of the time he was here, and I was right about that one. Also the same feeling I had about Mark Recchi and again, I was correct.)

I erased a couple things from your post to shorten it a bit...

Why would you go and point out only the flaws of one goalie instead of pointing out the strengths and weaknesses of each...like you said in your first sentence? It seems clear to me that you have a bias and you are trying to present a one sided argument.

Many of the things you point out are purely anecdotal and for anyone with a bias as evident as yours that is a dangerous thing when evaluating a player. It is human nature to remember the negative and ignore/forget the positive. Points 1 through 5 are examples of this...I flat out don't agree with number 1, 2 and 3...you read his emotion into point 3 and you simply don't have the knowledge to state that as you have. Number 4 is a bit of a joke considering the "pressure" situations Price was in leading up to the NHL. Number 5 is what a well positioned goalie does...his rebound control is, at times, fantastic so I think there is more to it then just letting a puck "hit him". Your 6th and 7th points are opinion based on limited knowledge and feedback...while they may be of value to your opinion they are pointless in this context.

The only way around such anecdotal evidence is to keep meticulous notes on the good and bad from game to game. Then a good coach will take those scouting reports and try to close those "gaps" in a players game.

I think everyone needs to remember that Halak is a few years older. This team needs to commit to Price for another 4 years...barring some clear evidence that he will not pan out. I think anything to the contrary is a mistake. He needs as much opportunity to develop as possible...and that means playing time. He won't get that with Halak, or at least, Halak won't stick around to see it happen. Therefore you have to trade Halak. If he turns out to be the next coming of Hasek (which is extremely improbable) then so be it.

Edited December 24, 2009 by Zowpeb

[jackp]

I erased a couple things from your post to shorten it a bit...

Why would you go and point out only the flaws of one goalie instead of pointing out the strengths and weaknesses of each...like you said in your first sentence? It seems clear to me that you have a bias and you are trying to present a one sided argument.

Seems to me I was answering a post where I was asked to point out why I thought so little of Price. I was not asked to present a balanced report on both of them.

If you've been here for awhile, you'll note that I have criticized Halak when he's merited it. For example, his rebound control is not as good as Price's. But, to be honest, aside from that, I find him a better goalie than Price in most other areas. (Oh, I just thought of another one... Price is a better puck handler than Halak.)

Did you know that they have an equal number of victories, even though Price has played more games? Of course, I've already heard the argument: the team plays better when Halak is in nets. That's the argument. Convenient. But that's the argument just the same.

[jackp]

I think everyone needs to remember that Halak is a few years older. This team needs to commit to Price for another 4 years...barring some clear evidence that he will not pan out. I think anything to the contrary is a mistake. He needs as much opportunity to develop as possible...and that means playing time. He won't get that with Halak, or at least, Halak won't stick around to see it happen. Therefore you have to trade Halak. If he turns out to be the next coming of Hasek (which is extremely improbable) then so be it.

Yes, I've heard this argument before. The Habs should become a Carey Price developmental team. What the hell! What's another 4 years, if we can eventually develop Price, right?

[bar]

Did you know that they have an equal number of victories, even though Price has played more games? Of course, I've already heard the argument: the team plays better when Halak is in nets. That's the argument. Convenient. But that's the argument just the same

Ok..I've listened to a lot of what you're saying Jack...and I find you just as bias as the Price supporters. You cannot argue with the 1.5 more Goals For when Halak is in nets. You also have to look at strength of schedule (Halak has played the Isles 3 times).

We are missing one obvious thing. Markov, last three games, 3 wins, Markov has been back for all three. Halak has been given chances and chances to steal the job from Price and hasn't. We should be happy with the two goalies, each has stuff to work on...Price his glove hand, Halak his terrible rebound control, which I believe stems from bad positioning. Let them platoon, it's not often you can feel comfortable with your back up in nets.

[jackp]

Ok..I've listened to a lot of what you're saying Jack...and I find you just as bias as the Price supporters. You cannot argue with the 1.5 more Goals For when Halak is in nets. You also have to look at strength of schedule (Halak has played the Isles 3 times).

We are missing one obvious thing. Markov, last three games, 3 wins, Markov has been back for all three. Halak has been given chances and chances to steal the job from Price and hasn't. We should be happy with the two goalies, each has stuff to work on...Price his glove hand, Halak his terrible rebound control, which I believe stems from bad positioning. Let them platoon, it's not often you can feel comfortable with your back up in nets.

40+ shots in all the games Markov played in - Halak was 1st star in 2 of the games.

Price has also played poor teams like Toronto at a time when they couldn't buy a game.

Having said this, I *am* biased toward Halak, but only because he appears to be the better goalie to me. If this should ever change, believe me, I would be biased towards Price. Halak is not related to me. He's not my friend. I have no other reason for preferring him other than I think he's best for the team.

Your last point, platooning, is what I've been advocating all along... until the better goalie surfaces. I don't think either of them should sit for 10 games like they made Halak do earlier.

You see, a lot of my posts have been *reactive* to some who seem bound and determined for Price, regardless of what it may cost the team. I like to think I keep my eye on what's best for the team. I'll repeat, if Price starts to outplay Halak and if this is obvious by the end of the year, then I'm all for letting Halak go.

Another reason I'm against trading Halak now, is that he'd probably be traded to Philly and I really fear this guy is gonna be a very good goalie. I don't want to give Philly a very good goalie, thank you very much. I like them just where they are.

Edited December 24, 2009 by jackp

[BCHabnut]

Trading Halak is a tough call. To be fair, Halak HAS played the weaker teams, so the results are skewed. I don't wasnt to see him go though. he is a very good goalie. Price is not consistent right now. But, this team has been outshot in 12 of their last 13 games, and it's easier to face poor shots from basement dwelling teams than high quality scoring chances from the best teams in the NHL. Price lets in softies and then it gets in his head. I think Gainey should keep Halak. Martin should play them both and at the end of the year, make a move on one of them. I am not a huge Price is the savior guy. I do think that in 5 years we will say that Price is the better goalie. He just needs to mature some more. Right now, they need to play both goalies. First off because Halak's contract is too low and we are against the cap. Today it's so important to trade contracts too. So who are you going to get back that is a 750,000 guy?

I need to see Halak play a few top NHL teams before I jump on the bandwagon. Beating NYI 3 times. Atlanta. Carolina and stuff is nice, but I need to see him do the same thing against Pitts, Wash, Buff, Bos, NJ ...

Edited December 24, 2009 by BCHabnut