BlueKross Posted October 26, 2011 Share Posted October 26, 2011 Weber or Diaz makes the most sense to me, so you can have a big body on the backend, and with Markov playing you've replaced one of the puck movers anyway. I prefer the big body in front of net. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JMMR Posted October 26, 2011 Share Posted October 26, 2011 When Markov is ready to come back and if there are no more injuries Weber will be traded. I would be shocked if he was not. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Commandant Posted October 26, 2011 Share Posted October 26, 2011 I prefer the big body in front of net. In theory, okay, but Emelin has never played forward before, whereas Weber has shown the ability to play forward.Secondly we have Moen, Blunden, Cole, Pacioretty, Eller, at forward... not enough, I agree, but at least its something. On D it will be Hal gill, and uh... uh... Hal Gill. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlueKross Posted October 27, 2011 Share Posted October 27, 2011 In theory, okay, but Emelin has never played forward before, whereas Weber has shown the ability to play forward.Secondly we have Moen, Blunden, Cole, Pacioretty, Eller, at forward... not enough, I agree, but at least its something. On D it will be Hal gill, and uh... uh... Hal Gill. Do you want Emelin to go back to Russia? Well you better find a spot for him. Can any of those boys mentioned play defense? Only Gill, who is the right size but can't skate. I'm looking for a Byfuglian clone, someone who can cause all kinds of grief in front of net if he isn't playing defense. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Commandant Posted October 27, 2011 Share Posted October 27, 2011 Do you want Emelin to go back to Russia? Well you better find a spot for him. Can any of those boys mentioned play defense? Only Gill, who is the right size but can't skate. I'm looking for a Byfuglian clone, someone who can cause all kinds of grief in front of net if he isn't playing defense. I thought I made clear that I would play Emelin on defence because we have no big bodies on the back end. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bbp Posted October 27, 2011 Share Posted October 27, 2011 Do you want Emelin to go back to Russia? Well you better find a spot for him. Can any of those boys mentioned play defense? Only Gill, who is the right size but can't skate. I'm looking for a Byfuglian clone, someone who can cause all kinds of grief in front of net if he isn't playing defense. Why is it important to have a big d man who can play offensively? Most our d are offensive and if we have like 3 or 4 guys up front that can sit in front of the net... why move a d man up there? Especially Emelin who hasn't been all that great and needs more seasoning as a defencemen? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlueKross Posted October 27, 2011 Share Posted October 27, 2011 Why is it important to have a big d man who can play offensively? Most our d are offensive and if we have like 3 or 4 guys up front that can sit in front of the net... why move a d man up there? Especially Emelin who hasn't been all that great and needs more seasoning as a defencemen? I am looking for a Byfuglien type, who can fall back and play defense when you need him and can cause all kinds of grief in front of net. We got all kinds of little guys up there. You can put a dozen of those guys up there. We are only talking here about, the seventh /eighth defenseman. I agree to disagree with Commandant. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoeLassister Posted October 28, 2011 Share Posted October 28, 2011 When Markov is ready to come back and if there are no more injuries Weber will be traded. I would be shocked if he was not. While I like Weber, I'm 100% with you on that. He is expandable and could bring a nice return, be it a pick or even a player. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bbp Posted November 7, 2011 Share Posted November 7, 2011 I just saw the hit Blunden laid on Dubby... That was huge! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ARZl9n3qDvE Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dlbalr Posted November 12, 2011 Share Posted November 12, 2011 Not official yet but I'm hearing Blunden is on his way back to Hamilton. His waiver situation (I tweeted it earlier this morning) likely has a bit of a role in that decision. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trizzak Posted November 12, 2011 Share Posted November 12, 2011 Not official yet but I'm hearing Blunden is on his way back to Hamilton. His waiver situation (I tweeted it earlier this morning) likely has a bit of a role in that decision. Ugh. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lazy26 Posted November 12, 2011 Share Posted November 12, 2011 Ugh. I see no point in keeping him in MTL if he's going to clock under 2 minutes a game. Factor in the waiver situation, and it makes sense to send him down. Bring him up when we have a true 4th line again, and not one with a defenceman and Gomez on it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dlbalr Posted November 12, 2011 Share Posted November 12, 2011 Found a link that also has Blunden going down: http://www.985sports.ca/hockey/nouvelles/blunden-retourne-a-hamilton-cammalleri-patine...-106977.html It may not be until after the game as he may very well dress tonight, it depends on the status of Cammalleri most likely. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trizzak Posted November 13, 2011 Share Posted November 13, 2011 I see no point in keeping him in MTL if he's going to clock under 2 minutes a game. I agree... but I want him in Montreal and playing more than 2 minutes a game. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colin Posted November 13, 2011 Share Posted November 13, 2011 I agree... but I want him in Montreal and playing more than 2 minutes a game. He made a mistake six games ago. He must pay. Eternally. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lazy26 Posted November 13, 2011 Share Posted November 13, 2011 I agree... but I want him in Montreal and playing more than 2 minutes a game. Yep, I love the idea of a true 4th line that will wear down other teams and give the boys some energy. Ideally, that line should get about 6-7 minutes a game and allow the top 9 a breather now and then. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bbp Posted November 13, 2011 Share Posted November 13, 2011 Yep, I love the idea of a true 4th line that will wear down other teams and give the boys some energy. Ideally, that line should get about 6-7 minutes a game and allow the top 9 a breather now and then. When White comes back we will have a mean one. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlueKross Posted November 14, 2011 Share Posted November 14, 2011 Brian: In your state of the union address for this week I would like to add that moving Palushaj back and forth is not only disruptive to player but also to the bulldogs, who need to find some consistency on their top lines. I believe that if Maxwell had been given the room to develop as Plekanec got, we would be seeing a different story. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Willey101 Posted November 14, 2011 Share Posted November 14, 2011 I am really hoping that Gauthier puts his foot down and prevents JM from going with such a small line-up. We are struggling on nthe PP and Weber has been pathetic. Time to send him packing to anywhere. Time to insert emelin and it's time to forget the Gomez on the 4th line LWer because he is brutal there. We need an NHL-esque 4th line with big bodies who hit and need to put our offensive guys together. Given the really horrible start for Stewart and trading history between the Habs and Blues I would like to see gauthier go out and try to nab Chris Stewart. Obviously the package would have to be pretty large and worthwhile but Stewart is the type of toughness I want on this team. Brian: In your state of the union address for this week I would like to add that moving Palushaj back and forth is not only disruptive to player but also to the bulldogs, who need to find some consistency on their top lines. I believe that if Maxwell had been given the room to develop as Plekanec got, we would be seeing a different story. I think Maxwell had time to develop he just wasn't and NHL player. Some guys are and some are not and there is nothing wrong with that. As for Palushaj I actually liked what I saw from him in that Nashville game. he showed his speed, was hard on the forecheck. I still think he is goig to be a good one. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
saskhab Posted November 14, 2011 Share Posted November 14, 2011 The problem is if players offer nothing but physical play they really aren't earning a spot, even on an 8-10 minute 4th line. Blunden really doesn't do anything other than hit, it's why he hasn't stuck in Chicago or Columbus previously. White is missed for sure. It's important to have that physical element, but it's not so important as to blatantly put players who can't play at this level in the lineup. I don't know if we'll ever have the issue of who to sit with a fully healthy team anyways, but I'd like to see White in the lineup even if that situation unfolds. Palushaj has done way more in his limited time than Blunden has. I felt in the first round of callups that Engqvist was holding him back a bit, nice to see him get another chance now that we have that 4th line C spot filled. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trizzak Posted November 14, 2011 Share Posted November 14, 2011 Palushaj has done way more in his limited time than Blunden has. Really? Blunden is performing the role he's been asked to. Palushaj is putting up 0's across the board. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
saskhab Posted November 14, 2011 Share Posted November 14, 2011 Really? Blunden is performing the role he's been asked to. Palushaj is putting up 0's across the board. I shouldn't say way more. Palushaj was burdened a bit by Engqvist who couldn't play at this level, either. I trust Palushaj more in a road game where the other team can get better players on the ice against him than either Engqvist or Blunden, though. Blunden is also putting up zeroes across the board, though. And he's a -2 in 40 minutes while barely touching the puck (he doesn't have a recorded giveaway or takeaway). Palushaj generates more offence and is an even in 46 minutes so far. Small samples, and I apologize for exaggerating the difference, but there is a difference and Palushaj comes out a bit better. I think Palushaj is legitimately our 14th forward, a guy that has the potential to stick with the regular lineup within a year. Blunden is simply a placeholder. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Willey101 Posted November 14, 2011 Share Posted November 14, 2011 The problem is if players offer nothing but physical play they really aren't earning a spot, even on an 8-10 minute 4th line. Blunden really doesn't do anything other than hit, it's why he hasn't stuck in Chicago or Columbus previously. White is missed for sure. It's important to have that physical element, but it's not so important as to blatantly put players who can't play at this level in the lineup. I don't know if we'll ever have the issue of who to sit with a fully healthy team anyways, but I'd like to see White in the lineup even if that situation unfolds. Palushaj has done way more in his limited time than Blunden has. I felt in the first round of callups that Engqvist was holding him back a bit, nice to see him get another chance now that we have that 4th line C spot filled. Sorry man I gotta disagree. When you have a 12 man roster a typical line-up has 2 scoring lines, a 2 way 3rd line and then an energy line for the fourth line. Typically across the NHL when a top 2 line player is injured then another offensive player is inserted in his place. When it's a 4th liner that goes down then another energy guy is inserted. Martin seems absolutely reluctant to go with energy guys. He'd rather play Gomez as a 4th line Lwer or Weber as a 4th line Rw'er then to insert a player who can bring energy, provide toughness and chip in with the odd goal. In an ideal world it is great to have guys like Neil or Darren McCarty who scored around 10 goals a year and provided an element of toughness but these guys don;t come around often. None the less it is the mold of almost every team in this league (unless you are the Wings) to go with energy guys on that 4th line. Intimidation, hard forecheck, keeping people honest out there is still an extremely crucial component to hockey. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Willey101 Posted November 14, 2011 Share Posted November 14, 2011 I shouldn't say way more. Palushaj was burdened a bit by Engqvist who couldn't play at this level, either. I trust Palushaj more in a road game where the other team can get better players on the ice against him than either Engqvist or Blunden, though. Blunden is also putting up zeroes across the board, though. And he's a -2 in 40 minutes while barely touching the puck (he doesn't have a recorded giveaway or takeaway). Palushaj generates more offence and is an even in 46 minutes so far. Small samples, and I apologize for exaggerating the difference, but there is a difference and Palushaj comes out a bit better. I think Palushaj is legitimately our 14th forward, a guy that has the potential to stick with the regular lineup within a year. Blunden is simply a placeholder. I don;t like the idea of Palushaj on the team unless he is filling in for a top notch scorer. ive him a shot offensively and let's see what he can do. Why no re-unite Pacioretty-DD-Palushaj to see what they can do. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Chicoutimi Cucumber Posted November 14, 2011 Share Posted November 14, 2011 The sad fact is, there is no single right way to develop players. There IS a good argument to giving a kid spotty minutes, letting him learn the NHL game in a gradual fashion and challenging him to prove that he deserves more minutes through great play. The net result should more more complete all-around players who have paid their dues and learned the necessary lessons. This is how, for instance, Saku Koivu was developed. He was on a checking line with Turner Stevenson - who never had so many scoring chances in his life! Eventually he had made an undeniable case for a top-line role, and got it. It's also what Vancouver has done with Cody Hodgson, for instance, and to comparable controversy among fans. There's an equally good argument that you can't fit a square peg in a round hole, and that it's crazy to expect an offensive player to play the role of a 4th-liner; you have to put him in a position where he will be most successful. Back in the 50s and 60s, the Habs always told rookies to 'do what got you here' rather than ask players to adapt to a pre-specified team role. That seemed to work out OK. I remember Coach Gainey doing that with Higgins and Komisarek, putting them with Koivu and Markov respectively, with the result that those players actually achieved a level of success that surpassed what they were capable of sustaining long-term. I don't have the answer and I think it really depends on the individual player - and that which player is best suited to which approach is not necessarily knowable in advance, by anyone. The only error, it seems to me, is in being too arrogant in thinking the answers are obvious. 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.