Jump to content

What took so long to understand that we had/have to get bigger?


alexstream
 Share

Recommended Posts

Somewhere, Saku Koivu is crying. For years, we've ignored the size factor while drafting, signing and trading. For years, we've had regular sized and small sized players. Some exceptions (komisarek, quintal, ivanans) but, never more than 1-2 at a time.

Until now, it seemed that they denied totally that factor ...

Erik Cole, Max Paccioretty, Rene frikkin Bourque

(and, to a certain extent, Travis Moen & Blunden, when you think that we had Steve Begin in that role before)

I mean we drafted signed and traded for those guys. What was so tough? I'm saying Saku b/c it's a fact, his play has been hindered by the fact that his wingers were Bulis, Zednik, Czerkawski, Berezin, Savage (ok, Recchi too), etc.

The last big winger this team had was Shane Corson. We did get a declining (well, at that state, it's not an active tense, but a past tense : a declined!) Randy McKay... But what else? What was so tough to understand?

We had 30M$ to spend on the Market 2 years ago and we went ALL IN on... smurfs? yes, they played well, while it lasted... but fact is, right now, Among our best players night in night out, there is MaxPax, Cole, Bourque etc. and their size IS A FACTOR.

There is not much difference between the way Cole and Gionta play. But between the two of them there is 35 lbs and 7 inches.

So congrats for getting them, but GEEEEZ, let that be a lesson and always try to balance the size factor on the lineup.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is this a Koivu rant thread? The moves BG and team made coming out of the lock out wasn't a bad thought process. meaning the rules were going to be totally different, no hooking holding, obstruction. So haveing small, fast skilled players was what they were thinking.

I wasn't thinking it, i have been saying they needed to add size, more specifically toughness and some rugged players who can win bettles, throw checks, fight, stand up for team mates, etc.

IMO they still aren't there yet. They need an actual 4th line of grinders, hittters and penalty killers.

The one question i had on PG, is would he change the team over to a more rugged style, bigger players. That was the teams he had in Anaheim i believe.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The move towards size started a while ago but Rome wasn't built in a day so its taken some time to notice this and for our lineup to become bigger, even then we aren't done yet. We need at least a top 6 center and a dman with size to be added.

The thing with adding size, is that size without skill is useless, especially on this team of fast skaters. Cole and patches work because they have speed, latendresse didn't because he lacks it.

As for when adding size started, it was after the loss to philly. PG went out and traded Halak for Eller and Shultz. Then he drafted Tinordi. Next he added Boyd, and signed Halpern. There was definitely the start of a size movement going on. It just takes time to overhaul a roster.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is this a Koivu rant thread? The moves BG and team made coming out of the lock out wasn't a bad thought process. meaning the rules were going to be totally different, no hooking holding, obstruction. So haveing small, fast skilled players was what they were thinking.

I wasn't thinking it, i have been saying they needed to add size, more specifically toughness and some rugged players who can win bettles, throw checks, fight, stand up for team mates, etc.

IMO they still aren't there yet. They need an actual 4th line of grinders, hittters and penalty killers.

The one question i had on PG, is would he change the team over to a more rugged style, bigger players. That was the teams he had in Anaheim i believe.

no, it's a poor Koivu, he never had the chance that DD has now.

I was watching the game yesterday and I said to myself wow, DD is good, maybe the best offensive center we've had since Koivu... Then I thought wow put Koivu with Cole and Pacio!! what would that be?!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I like DD but it's really sad that he's considered the best offensive C in years...just saying...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>

I like DD but it's really sad that he's considered the best offensive C in years...just saying...

I think its criminally underrating what Plekanec has done for this team.  Sure he's having a bad year, but he has 69 and 70 pt years before.  I dont think Desharnais is gonna get to that. Hell Desharnais has been playing with the two best wingers all season, and has 2 pts more than Pleks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>

I think its criminally underrating what Plekanec has done for this team.  Sure he's having a bad year, but he has 69 and 70 pt years before.  I dont think Desharnais is gonna get to that. Hell Desharnais has been playing with the two best wingers all season, and has 2 pts more than Pleks.

Agreed. I don't buy that he's the best offensive C in years...was only commenting on Stream's post.

And for what its worth...it's also sad to say Pleks might be the best C in years.

Frankly it's sad we haven't had an 85 point C since when?? Hell, name the last 100 point Hab...how sad is that? I can live with good balanced teams like the last 2 cup winners but we rarely even get that these days...

I may sound like a pessimist lately but we don't have much to be excited about other then 3 things: Price, Subban and MaxPac...Even the farm system looks only okay...Sure Beaulieu, LeBlanc look like they good be good and maybe Kristo and Tinordi...after that it's sketchy. This was a top 5 farm system for years until recently...shouldn't we be better today and how did it become a bottom 6 farm team if we weren't exactly winning (and thus drafting late). Not actually looking for reasons, I know how/why...just venting...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The habs farm system looks 'depleted' because it is. The habs have graduated so many players to the big club:

Weber, DD, Pax, Subban, White, Halak, SK, I am missing some....I'm sure others can help me fill in...

Just think of the wave of players for Hamilton next season: Beauieau, Tindordi, Gallagher, Bournival

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Added to the Bulldogs Roster next season

For Sure on fwd: Brendan Gallagher, Michael Bournival, Patrick Holland,

Probable fwd: Danny Kristo (all rumours out of UND is that he will leave school after this season, and sign with Montreal)

Possible fwd: Steve Quailer

Possible 2013s: Olivier Archambault, Daniel Pribyl, Mark McMillan, Mike Cichy, Dustin Walsh,

For Sures on Defence: Jarred Tinordi, Nathan Beaulieu, Greg Pateryn, Morgan Ellis

Possible Def: Scott Kishel, Magnus Nygren

2013 on Defence: Magnus Nygren, Darren Dietz, and probable Mac Bennett.

Because of the way the picks were made 08, 09s with college players.... 10, 11, more CHLers

and with the graduation of Eller, Subban, Weber, Diaz, Emelin, White, Pacioretty, Desharnais, all together.

We've gotten a period where one set of prospects is in the NHL, and the other big set hasn't hit the AHL yet, with only a few guys in Hamilton, so its a bit of a weird spot in the cycle... but there is still a ton of depth in the system.

What the system lacks, and has pretty much never had since Saku Koivu, is a premier top line forward... We don't have that, and it should be the priority with our next draft pick which will be high.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Other than the LeClair trade has montreal traded away any other big top 6 forwards?

Yeah, Chad Kilger *snickers*

It's kind of interesting to me that people are celebrating the Canadiens move to size at a time when they are producing their worst record since the early 2000s.

Though to be fair, we probably have our worst coaching since the early 2000s as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Added to the Bulldogs Roster next season

For Sure on fwd: Brendan Gallagher, Michael Bournival, Patrick Holland,

Probable fwd: Danny Kristo (all rumours out of UND is that he will leave school after this season, and sign with Montreal)

Possible fwd: Steve Quailer

Possible 2013s: Olivier Archambault, Daniel Pribyl, Mark McMillan, Mike Cichy, Dustin Walsh,

For Sures on Defence: Jarred Tinordi, Nathan Beaulieu, Greg Pateryn, Morgan Ellis

Possible Def: Scott Kishel, Magnus Nygren

2013 on Defence: Magnus Nygren, Darren Dietz, and probable Mac Bennett.

Because of the way the picks were made 08, 09s with college players.... 10, 11, more CHLers

and with the graduation of Eller, Subban, Weber, Diaz, Emelin, White, Pacioretty, Desharnais, all together.

We've gotten a period where one set of prospects is in the NHL, and the other big set hasn't hit the AHL yet, with only a few guys in Hamilton, so its a bit of a weird spot in the cycle... but there is still a ton of depth in the system.

What the system lacks, and has pretty much never had since Saku Koivu, is a premier top line forward... We don't have that, and it should be the priority with our next draft pick which will be high.

i think you got it 100% bang on and i am looking forward to see how all the guys you noted take to being a pro; ie: will Gallagher's offense translate against bigger/faster players.

With Cole/Pacioretty/Bourque/Eller/Blunden/Engqvist/Kostitsyn/White/Leblanc/Moan; the size up front will be quite different next year, but still have 1 too many small centres i think and Desharnais or Plekanec being traded in a package for a big top centre would seem the next move to make. Plekanec and Weber/Moan and/or Kostitsyn for a bigger centre? Like a Getzlaf/Koivu/Stastny/ORielly/Kopitar?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd like that big centre, but Id like to keep Pleks too.

Ideally you get a top 5 pick, take one of Grigorenko or Galchenyuk, and you have that big centre going forward.

Move DD to wing.

A Centre line with Pleks - G or G - Eller as the top 3 should be big enough and skilled enough. Eventually, the kid is gonna surpass Pleks and push him into the number 2 spot anyway.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I get graduating a lot of youth the past few years but we have very few quality prospects...our system depth projects poorly too. Given where we've performed in recent years its hard to consider this even an average system.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I get graduating a lot of youth the past few years but we have very few quality prospects...our system depth projects poorly too. Given where we've performed in recent years its hard to consider this even an average system.

This system has a ton of depth.... I just listed all the guys headed to Hamilton.

We had 3 guys on Team Canada, plus a guy on Team USA, and a guy on the Czechs at the recent WJCs. I think Minnesota with 6 was the only team with more prospects in that tourney.

We've also seen guys like Leblanc, Palushaj, and Kristo put in really good performances in this best of the best tourney recently.

The issue is there is no high end prospect.... but considering how we haven't drafted top 10 since Price, that shouldn't be a huge surprise.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I get graduating a lot of youth the past few years but we have very few quality prospects...our system depth projects poorly too. Given where we've performed in recent years its hard to consider this even an average system.

All the "experts" rate our prospects and system pretty low.I rate it as middling.Too many #3 ctrs and small forwards.Beaulieu and Tinordi seem to be our 2 best,imo. I think our prospect depth has been poor since around 07-08. Just another case of Hab fans overrating our team and /or players.Like I've said,we have only 1 player to even get a sniff at the NHL over the last 4 drafts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>

I think its criminally underrating what Plekanec has done for this team. Sure he's having a bad year, but he has 69 and 70 pt years before. I dont think Desharnais is gonna get to that. Hell Desharnais has been playing with the two best wingers all season, and has 2 pts more than Pleks.

When things are going good,Pleks is our best all around forward.Trading him would be a lateral or worse move,considering who we'd probably get back. Also one of the only Habs who play with a mean strek. He'd be a great fit in Philly or Boston

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Somewhere, Saku Koivu is crying. For years, we've ignored the size factor while drafting, signing and trading. For years, we've had regular sized and small sized players. Some exceptions (komisarek, quintal, ivanans) but, never more than 1-2 at a time.

Until now, it seemed that they denied totally that factor ...

Erik Cole, Max Paccioretty, Rene frikkin Bourque

(and, to a certain extent, Travis Moen & Blunden, when you think that we had Steve Begin in that role before)

I mean we drafted signed and traded for those guys. What was so tough? I'm saying Saku b/c it's a fact, his play has been hindered by the fact that his wingers were Bulis, Zednik, Czerkawski, Berezin, Savage (ok, Recchi too), etc.

The last big winger this team had was Shane Corson. We did get a declining (well, at that state, it's not an active tense, but a past tense : a declined!) Randy McKay... But what else? What was so tough to understand?

We had 30M$ to spend on the Market 2 years ago and we went ALL IN on... smurfs? yes, they played well, while it lasted... but fact is, right now, Among our best players night in night out, there is MaxPax, Cole, Bourque etc. and their size IS A FACTOR.

There is not much difference between the way Cole and Gionta play. But between the two of them there is 35 lbs and 7 inches.

So congrats for getting them, but GEEEEZ, let that be a lesson and always try to balance the size factor on the lineup.

Hey.

Hey.

You leave Bulis out of this.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Somewhere, Saku Koivu is crying. For years, we've ignored the size factor while drafting, signing and trading. For years, we've had regular sized and small sized players. Some exceptions (komisarek, quintal, ivanans) but, never more than 1-2 at a time.

Until now, it seemed that they denied totally that factor ...

Erik Cole, Max Paccioretty, Rene frikkin Bourque

(and, to a certain extent, Travis Moen & Blunden, when you think that we had Steve Begin in that role before)

I mean we drafted signed and traded for those guys. What was so tough? I'm saying Saku b/c it's a fact, his play has been hindered by the fact that his wingers were Bulis, Zednik, Czerkawski, Berezin, Savage (ok, Recchi too), etc.

The last big winger this team had was Shane Corson. We did get a declining (well, at that state, it's not an active tense, but a past tense : a declined!) Randy McKay... But what else? What was so tough to understand?

We had 30M$ to spend on the Market 2 years ago and we went ALL IN on... smurfs? yes, they played well, while it lasted... but fact is, right now, Among our best players night in night out, there is MaxPax, Cole, Bourque etc. and their size IS A FACTOR.

There is not much difference between the way Cole and Gionta play. But between the two of them there is 35 lbs and 7 inches.

So congrats for getting them, but GEEEEZ, let that be a lesson and always try to balance the size factor on the lineup.

Gainey always said he wanted to surround Saku with big top 6 forwards. He never did.And every analyst,scout, former player and knowledgeable fan wknew we needed this size upgrade ever since we got took 7 games by an inferior,but physical #8 B's team and then k.o'd by Philly in the 07-08 playoffs,as a #1. And our last 3 k.o's have been by the B's or Flyers. Team hasn't been built to go all the way to the cup with the playoff gauntlet.Our defense is still the softest/smallest in the league.Size only matters when you playbig.Look at Gill and Enquist.Begin was much more physical than Blunden or Moen though not that big

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think Gainey had a plan all along, which was to wait until 2009 to come to a final assessment of the team he had rebuilt via the draft. When that team tanked, he used the option he had given himself, which was a total reconstruction via free agency. What he could not control in this equation was the nature of the players that would be available as UFAs. By the time that summer rolled along, teams had begun locking up their RFAs to long-term deals, so the truly powerhouse names were off the market. Nevertheless, there were a lot of good players available, and Gainey ran the table on the most desirable UFAs. Problem was, they happened to be small. Feisty, combative, skilled, but small.

So, that was the team he rolled the dice on. He didn't set out to build a small team, that's just how things worked out.

This doesn't mean he or his successors were unaware of the value of size. I suspect it's just hard to find top-6 players with size and character. Look at Cammalleri, who in the end yielded nothing better than Bourque. If you're not careful, you end up transforming a team that (prior to this season) was highly competitive and had a lot of cojones for a team of plodders - Bourques and Dustin Penners.

As for the draft, I think, again, it's more the way the dice tumble than any deliberate devaluation of size. You know, they draft a Chipchura in the first round and he flops; they draft Grabovski in the 5th and he turns out to be a pistol of an NHLer; they pluck a hulking Latendresse at #45 and he becomes a plodder, they pick a medium-sized Sergei Kostitsyn at #200 and he succeeds. I mean, it wasn't supposed to work out that way.

If there is an issue with management's approach to size, I think it exists at the level of the draft - but not intentionally. The Habs seem pretty good at identifying small players who have been overlooked due to their size, who then go on to become quality prospects/players: think Gallagher, Grabovksi, or Desharnais. But we also seem to have a history of drafting players with size who turn out to be plodders at best (a tendency which reached its absurd peak under Burns/Savard, when we wasted 1st round picks on guys like Lindsay Vallais and Turner Stevenson). I don't want to exagerrate this, because we *have* drafted good players with size and/or robustness (AK 46, McDonagh, Pacioretty, Subban, Emelin), but it seems as though there is something in the way we evaluate talent that skews us slightly away from isolating top-6 big guys and slightly toward top-6 small guys. It must be an unintended side effect of whatever criteria Timmins et al. are bringing to their approach to evaluation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think you are giving gainey to much credit.

We dodged a HUGE bullet, not once, but TWICE, that was part of his great master plan that preceded the signing of Gomez, and that was only due to the incompetence and stupidity of the TB ownership.

How would it have been if either of these two versions being reported of the my cousin Vinny deal went down:

-vinny for pleks, Subban, Higgins

-vinny for price, Subban and either pleks or Higgins

That was the real master plan for gainey to bring in a big centre, first it was killed during the season and then at the draft proceeding the Gomez trade.

Would you even trade Subban or price straight up for everyone in Quebec's cousin Vinny and his retirement deal??

Although I think those idiotic ex-coaches and "analysts" on RDS would probably had the Quebec flag out and organized a parade!!

I think Gainey had a plan all along, which was to wait until 2009 to come to a final assessment of the team he had rebuilt via the draft. When that team tanked, he used the option he had given himself, which was a total reconstruction via free agency. What he could not control in this equation was the nature of the players that would be available as UFAs. By the time that summer rolled along, teams had begun locking up their RFAs to long-term deals, so the truly powerhouse names were off the market. Nevertheless, there were a lot of good players available, and Gainey ran the table on the most desirable UFAs. Problem was, they happened to be small. Feisty, combative, skilled, but small.

So, that was the team he rolled the dice on. He didn't set out to build a small team, that's just how things worked out.

This doesn't mean he or his successors were unaware of the value of size. I suspect it's just hard to find top-6 players with size and character. Look at Cammalleri, who in the end yielded nothing better than Bourque. If you're not careful, you end up transforming a team that (prior to this season) was highly competitive and had a lot of cojones for a team of plodders - Bourques and Dustin Penners.

As for the draft, I think, again, it's more the way the dice tumble than any deliberate devaluation of size. You know, they draft a Chipchura in the first round and he flops; they draft Grabovski in the 5th and he turns out to be a pistol of an NHLer; they pluck a hulking Latendresse at #45 and he becomes a plodder, they pick a medium-sized Sergei Kostitsyn at #200 and he succeeds. I mean, it wasn't supposed to work out that way.

If there is an issue with management's approach to size, I think it exists at the level of the draft - but not intentionally. The Habs seem pretty good at identifying small players who have been overlooked due to their size, who then go on to become quality prospects/players: think Gallagher, Grabovksi, or Desharnais. But we also seem to have a history of drafting players with size who turn out to be plodders at best (a tendency which reached its absurd peak under Burns/Savard, when we wasted 1st round picks on guys like Lindsay Vallais and Turner Stevenson). I don't want to exagerrate this, because we *have* drafted good players with size and/or robustness (AK 46, McDonagh, Pacioretty, Subban, Emelin), but it seems as though there is something in the way we evaluate talent that skews us slightly away from isolating top-6 big guys and slightly toward top-6 small guys. It must be an unintended side effect of whatever criteria Timmins et al. are bringing to their approach to evaluation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Timmins and the Canadiens biggest issue when it comes to drafting is they seem to almost completely avoid the OHL.

Since 2003 when Timmins was hired.

PK Subban

Yannick Weber

Matt Dagostini

Greg Stewart

Jason Missiaen

Corey Locke

Mark Flood

Seven picks in 10 drafts from the OHL.

You could also add in Dustin Walsh (OJHL) as another player from Ontario.

Also as you know... Benoit Pouliot and Marc Staal were two OHLers Timmins nearly took in 2005.

Plus the Org encouraged Tinordi and Sergei Kostitsyn to go to the OHL after they were drafted.

I don't think there is any plan to "avoid the OHL"; I just think they haven't had them as BPA when they have drafted.

I bet they'd love to get an OHLer like Yakupov, Galchenyuk, Gaunce, Faska, if they have the chance this year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...