Trizzak Posted May 30, 2014 Share Posted May 30, 2014 Hey all, List your good, bad, and/or ugly of the Montreal Canadiens season. Whatever comes to mind. The Good: Bergevin trading for 3 key playoff pieces near the deadline without overly mortgaging the future. Vanek was performing as expected until Subban ran him over. The Habs record when playing Wiese vs not playing Wiese is pretty astounding... he performed better than anyone expected (even Bergevin I reckon.) And Weaver was what we had wanted from the beginning of the season: a right-handed calming defensive presence. All told, we got a trip to the Eastern Conference Final (with a good shot at the final with Price in the net) at the cost of Collberg, a 2nd round pick, a 5th round pick, and Raphael Diaz. A+ deadline deals going into the playoffs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Habinator33 Posted May 30, 2014 Share Posted May 30, 2014 The Good: - Beating the Boston Bruins to make the ECF - Carey Price winning 2 series and a gold medal - Marc Bergevin's moves both Dance and deadline - The comeback against Ottawa - 100 point season and getting to the ECF giving good experience to our young core - Having someone finish top 5 in goals - The team's chemistry - standing up for each other both on and off the ice - Desharnais bounce back after a god awful start - Stephane waite - The Penalty Kill was solid - Tokarski The Bad: - Lars Eller, Danny Briere, Rene Bourque's, and Brandon Prust's regular season - Lack of production from some of the Vets in the playoffs - Treatment of Tinordi and Beaulieu during the regular season. Too many games for Bouillon and Murray. - 5 on 5 goal scoring - Giving Galchenyuk only one game at center during the season and it being against the St Louis Blues - Public treatment of some of the players by MT - MT not noticing certain lines just aren't working - Only having 2 guys scoring 20 goals or more. The Ugly: - 18 shots on goal in an elimination game - George Parros - Douglas Murray's skating - The many weak clearing attempts - The Defenses play in the Rangers series - Too many penalties and a few were late game that cost Price a shutout Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Machine of Loving Grace Posted May 30, 2014 Share Posted May 30, 2014 The Good: I was right in that Montreal was good enough to make the Eastern Conference final. We have a lot of players and a lot of depth. People are starting to recognize this is a very good team close to being great, not a bad team that sometimes gets lucky. The Bad: Montreal was built to beat a team they are faster than. They are not build to beat a team that can outskate them. Not enough discipline and we get pinned in our zone too often. The Ugly: Nothing, really. Therrien proved he can coach this team in the playoffs. Price proved he could win in the playoffs. Players proved to be clutch when needed. Subban is our superstar. We're looking good. If I could name anything to be ugly, it's that in another universe, McDonaugh is a Hab and Girardi/Del Zotto doesn't get the Rangers past the Flyers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lovett's Magnatones Posted May 31, 2014 Share Posted May 31, 2014 Good- +39 goals for Pacioretty +Resurgence of Desharnais +Respect for Price/Subban/Therrien, guys who are rarely mentioned positively without a healthy dose of "yeah, but..." +Season/series victory against the Bruins +Vanek trade at the deadline, deadline deals +Rogers deal. Perhaps HNIC can be more than an infomercial to hype up a mediocre franchise. +With the exception of the mid-seasom slump, the entertainment value/product was excellent. +Fights! Lot's of fighting. Even two in the playoffs, while the Bruins had zero. I remember the days when the Habs had 15-20 scraps a year. This year, they fought five times on opening night. Fights kick ass. Bad +Free agency period. Each free agent was worse than the last, and none of the free agents provided any kind of boost early in the season. Parros smashed his face into the ice, Briere had a concussion early in the year, and Murray showed up out of shape and hurt himself in camp. +Subban Olympic drama. Let's never do that again. "Will he make it?! Will he play?! Why isn't playing?!?! How can he win the Norris trophy when he didn't even play on team Canada?!?! +Media hullaballoo around Therrien and Murray. The Therrien criticism was flat out wrong, and the Murray regular seasom criticism was rooted in facts, but overblown. +Galchenyuk getting injured, Price getting injured after the Olympic break. The Ugly +Danny Briere. He sucked. He didn't do what he came here to do, which was to give the first line a boost, and as Bergevin said "get the Habs through the playoffs." There's no place for him in the lineup. As a playoff fourth line center he's great, but with the grind and brutality of the regular season, he's a VERY poor fit to line up against the Orrs, the Konopkas, the Rosehills. I don't really know what is to be done with him? A trade to FLA or EDM for a third round pick, or to a contender would be ideal for all parties involved. I do respect Briere, through all of the scratchings, and being ignored by Therrien he handled himself like a gentleman. +Boston media bs. What was the greatest rivalry in sports is becoming is a WWE sideshow. I wonder what Jumbo Joe and Saku think of this? +Carey Price 's injury. Kreider-stick your 19 career goals... +Rookie development. A number six isnt a big factor, but Tinordi should have been out there in the playoffs instead of Murray. I think when Therrien has his extension, he will loosen up on the kids. +The draft. Big bust entertainment wise. Four picks in the first and second round, and the takeaway was Jacob De La Rose. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Toronthab Posted May 31, 2014 Share Posted May 31, 2014 Anybody see any Bruins on TV lately? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dlbalr Posted May 31, 2014 Share Posted May 31, 2014 Good- +Rogers deal. Perhaps HNIC can be more than an infomercial to hype up a mediocre franchise. The Ugly +The draft. Big bust entertainment wise. Four picks in the first and second round, and the takeaway was Jacob De La Rose. - I wouldn't count on HNIC changing much now that it's owned by Rogers. Don't forget, Rogers has a significant ownership stake in the Leafs. The hype for that team will most certainly continue. - Don't forget Fucale as a takeaway from that draft. He still looks like he'll be a good goalie for the future so it's not all bad there either. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DON Posted May 31, 2014 Share Posted May 31, 2014 Bad +Subban Olympic drama. Let's never do that again. "Will he make it?! Will he play?! Why isn't playing?!?! How can he win the Norris trophy when he didn't even play on team Canada?!?! +Media hullaballoo around Therrien and Murray. The Therrien criticism was flat out wrong, and the Murray regular seasom criticism was rooted in facts, but overblown. +Galchenyuk getting injured, Price getting injured after the Olympic break. The Ugly +Boston media bs. What was the greatest rivalry in sports is becoming is a WWE sideshow. I wonder what Jumbo Joe and Saku think of this? +The draft. Big bust entertainment wise. Four picks in the first and second round, and the takeaway was Jacob De La Rose. I agree with most of your stuff; but, couple differences - am fine with Boston media, sure can be tough to stomach and so over the top is humorous, but like WWF the NHL is also just a entertainment business. And the draft with taking McCarron from out of left field, to buying what Craig Button was ranting about and picking Fucale. Lehkonen also looks like a skilled kid who is developing nicely and all 4 later picks Crisp-Reway-Gregoire-Andrighetto are all showing promise, so seems was a super haul (excluding McCarron, who seems was a swing for the fences high risk/reward pick and reeks of anti Smurf-Hobbit pressure from media-fans-Upper Mgmt). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Toronthab Posted May 31, 2014 Share Posted May 31, 2014 You guys , as expected have covered it all. Trizzak leads with Bergeron's moves. ... That's a good spot. He really showed himself to be incisive and wise in his excellent selections, including formerly if not laterally, Vanek who sparked the club in an amazing way. ( I read a reference to a rumour that he was playing with a broken bone in his hand.. which I frankly hope is true simply for moral reasons.) But who isn't happy with our GM. Higher in my ranking is Bob Gainey's wunderkind..... Carey Price. The youngster has left the building and the mature goaltender remains. I also really liked what I read about the goalie coach's approach to the "book" on Price on high glove side shots and his supposed weakness. He replayed 22,000 highlight real glove saves and then asked him if he really thought he had a problem.. No problem. Great response. And what can you say about PK.. a league wide revision in his status as a rock star worth going to see. Simply wonderful. What a treat. Absolutely wonderful to see PacMan come back with such wonderful competence and spirit , an NHL leader. My next good.. is Pleks. Period. What a solid, solid, complete hockey player. Amazing. The rest (as above) has already been said better by others and I lack the competence for much insight but I have terrific respect for our motley crew , the Gorges, the Emelin and Cube...the miracle kid from the AHL who made goaltending no excuse at all.. astonishing...On that note, I think we have a chance for solid trade bait here, and he won't be happy as a Number 2 for long, so I would keep the wonderful Budaj and send Stoparski off to begin an illustrious career. I suppose a final note must go to MT. I really liked the comments coming from players about how well he built up their confidence all along the way, and am not at all even remotely competent to second guess his choices and decisions and their rationales. I really hope Vanek was injured. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
habs rule Posted May 31, 2014 Share Posted May 31, 2014 Vanek says he wasn't injured, he just couldn't play with Pleks. He never recovered from being rplaced on the number 1 line. Take a pure goal scorer and put him on the 3rd and 4th line, excellent coaching MT, no wonder everyone thinks you are a genius. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dlbalr Posted June 1, 2014 Share Posted June 1, 2014 Vanek says he wasn't injured, he just couldn't play with Pleks. He never recovered from being rplaced on the number 1 line. Take a pure goal scorer and put him on the 3rd and 4th line, excellent coaching MT, no wonder everyone thinks you are a genius. He didn't produce a ton on the top line in the playoffs which is why he got sent to the 2nd line. He didn't produce there either. They could have moved him up and played him more despite his struggles but it seems to me Therrien gets criticized for playing his struggling veterans too much. Vanek fell under the struggling veteran category. Vanek on the more offensive-minded 3rd line I think was the best fit for him. Plekanec's trio was for defence first and foremost, Vanek I suspect would have been more comfortable with Eller. He also likely would have benefited from lesser competition with Plekanec covering the best opposition players. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hab29RETIRED Posted June 1, 2014 Share Posted June 1, 2014 He didn't produce a ton on the top line in the playoffs which is why he got sent to the 2nd line. He didn't produce there either. They could have moved him up and played him more despite his struggles but it seems to me Therrien gets criticized for playing his struggling veterans too much. Vanek fell under the struggling veteran category. Vanek on the more offensive-minded 3rd line I think was the best fit for him. Plekanec's trio was for defence first and foremost, Vanek I suspect would have been more comfortable with Eller. He also likely would have benefited from lesser competition with Plekanec covering the best opposition players. It made zero sense to play Vanek with Pleks and I think Galchenyuk could have benefited on an other line. Pleks should have been on a strictly shutdown role. I would have liked to see Galcenyuk and Vanek with Eller, or Briere. Both are creative players and while Pleks is a great all-round player and hard worker, he is not very creative. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neech Posted June 1, 2014 Share Posted June 1, 2014 We beat the Bruins, as big underdogs, a round later than usual. The season is a great success. We kicked their stupid, idiot asses. We ole'ed in their face. Chara toppled to the ice on numerous occasions, and Lucic was nullified. I even grew to hate Iginla, and he lost. There are only two teams' fans who should be happier than us, and they'll be facing off later this week. Full disclosure: (I'm a little biased because I'm not in Montreal and would be gutted to not be there for a Cup Final, but I wouldn't expect too much sympathy for this hereabouts with all you far-flung people) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
habs rule Posted June 1, 2014 Share Posted June 1, 2014 He didn't produce a ton on the top line in the playoffs which is why he got sent to the 2nd line. He didn't produce there either. They could have moved him up and played him more despite his struggles but it seems to me Therrien gets criticized for playing his struggling veterans too much. Vanek fell under the struggling veteran category. Vanek on the more offensive-minded 3rd line I think was the best fit for him. Plekanec's trio was for defence first and foremost, Vanek I suspect would have been more comfortable with Eller. He also likely would have benefited from lesser competition with Plekanec covering the best opposition players. Well coming into the playoffs the hottest line is hockey was patches dd and vanek. I think it was the 2nd game in the Boston series that he broke the line up, it never really got back together after that and all of them struggled. I would have gone back to that line. Maybe break it up for 1 game but go back to it next game. jmo Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Toronthab Posted June 2, 2014 Share Posted June 2, 2014 I caught an interview or comments based on one where Vanek confirms he was not injured. He mentions the line change and states he couldn't find the chemistry with his new line. I can get that, but what I saw did not appear to be a chemistry problem. He quite often seemed utterly disengaged. This one's a mystery to me.. the guy was amazing out of the box.. Oh well .... And what will Bergeron do.. hmmm.....? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KoRP Posted June 3, 2014 Share Posted June 3, 2014 And what will Bergeron do.. hmmm.....? I don't think it will be sign Vanek.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neech Posted June 4, 2014 Share Posted June 4, 2014 The Bad: seeing firsthand how freakin good McDonagh is. Subban-McDonagh is a match made in heaven. This could have been an ALL-TIME defense pairing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Stogey24 Posted June 7, 2014 Share Posted June 7, 2014 He didn't produce a ton on the top line in the playoffs which is why he got sent to the 2nd line. He didn't produce there either. They could have moved him up and played him more despite his struggles but it seems to me Therrien gets criticized for playing his struggling veterans too much. Vanek fell under the struggling veteran category. Vanek on the more offensive-minded 3rd line I think was the best fit for him. Plekanec's trio was for defence first and foremost, Vanek I suspect would have been more comfortable with Eller. He also likely would have benefited from lesser competition with Plekanec covering the best opposition players. Struggling veteran? He led Montreal in points in the regular season. He was a top line player that was struggling, unlike Gionta who was a struggling veteran who was over played. Vanek has scored some clutch goals in his career and he wasn't out in the final 30 seconds. That's just Therrien being selfish. You have an elite scorer on your bench, whether he has performed in the playoffs or not, he has the pedigree to win you that game. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KoRP Posted June 7, 2014 Share Posted June 7, 2014 Struggling veteran? He led Montreal in points in the regular season. He was a top line player that was struggling, unlike Gionta who was a struggling veteran who was over played. Vanek has scored some clutch goals in his career and he wasn't out in the final 30 seconds. That's just Therrien being selfish. You have an elite scorer on your bench, whether he has performed in the playoffs or not, he has the pedigree to win you that game. Yeah, gotta agree with ya there bud.... Gallagher nearly wrecked himself trying to get the #1 line going, when it made sense in all ways to put Vanek there and leave him. It's akin to letting Ray Bourque shoot in the Shootout and leave Gretzky on the pine, well close anyway Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
habs rule Posted June 7, 2014 Share Posted June 7, 2014 Yeah, gotta agree with ya there bud.... Gallagher nearly wrecked himself trying to get the #1 line going, when it made sense in all ways to put Vanek there and leave him. It's akin to letting Ray Bourque shoot in the Shootout and leave Gretzky on the pine, well close anyway Therrien does this a lot, he did it to Subban. He thinks teaching a lesson is more important than winning the forking game. Which is why he will fail once again, his ego is bigger than Pierre Mcquire and that takes some doing. His stubboeness in not re-uniting the 1st line was a huge mistake. But as always that is just my opinion, you are certainly entitled to your own. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DON Posted June 7, 2014 Share Posted June 7, 2014 OK, thanks. Yes coaches normally do make many decisions regarding playing time, combos and just because you would make different ones, is not evidence why he will fail and didn't seem stubborn enough to play the crap out of Subban in the playoffs (a win in practice/regular season when losing by 3 in 3rd period, is a good time to sit a superstar if he pulls a selfish move like Subban did, am 100% behind that whooping 4 shift benching) and did well switching up roster/goalies to get deep into playoffs....but, as you say is just one opinion/point of view. (is he a genius, highly unlikely, but average to very good seems to be where he falls for last 2 years work and results are there, so I got very few complaints about Mgmt). Bourque, Eller regular season offense was Ugly. And not one Bulldog d-men cracking roster for a full time gig was Bad (But was good that Hab d-core stayed relatively healthy and Weaver was a good pick-up so cant complain about him neither, good for team but bad for prospects; or maybe be great motivation for off-season training of Tinordi-Beaulieu-Pateryn). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
habs rule Posted June 7, 2014 Share Posted June 7, 2014 Don you and I will one day agree about MT, the day he gets fired. Untill then we will just agree to disagree. You know darn well that there is a lot more to Subban thing than 1 game. I have only good things to say about Marc Bergevin, he has made some very astute pickups, I think this is the result of the collective making the decisions, which is great cause it shows he listens to the people he hires. MT has a good record in his 2nd go round with us, therre is no disputing that. That does not mean that I am going to be a fan, coaches get far too much credit for the record when they win and way too much blame when they lose. Some of the moves he has made this year are mind boggling. Not putting the hottest line in hockey back together in my opinion was an error. We were losing, what the heck did we have to lose by putting them together. The 1 game he showed some balls was when he pulled the goalie with 5 mins to go. He must have watched Patrick do it so he thought it was a good idea. He also showed some spunk when he put tokarski in, however I temper that with he knew damn well that Budaij couldn't do it so what choice did he really have. Hats off to him for doing it. He will get his extension and probably get fired in jan or feb. I'll betcha the hole in a donut. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Chicoutimi Cucumber Posted June 8, 2014 Share Posted June 8, 2014 We will never, ever have a coach whose every single personnel move each of us agrees with 100%. What that means is that Jesus Christ could be behind the bench and a significant portion of fans would be on-line calling for his replacement or, at least, adamantly asserting his mediocrity. It's valid to criticize specific decision X or Y, of course; but I find that waaay too many fans get hung up on very narrow, specific coaching choices ("he played so-and-so with such-and-such for five shifts!! What an idiot!!!" "So-and-so played 20 minutes last night!!! That's [too much/too little]!!!! What an idiot!!!!") Considering that coaches make literally thousands of such decisions over the course of a season/playoff - often in a much wider context of complex considerations that fans seldom think about - it's like obsessing over a single small crater on the moon. A better way for fans to evaluate coaches, IMHO, is, obviously, the overall team outcomes, which in this case are above reproach, and maybe other "big picture" considerations such as whether the system is well-suited to the team. As for advanced stats, all I know is if they were everything the Habs wouldn't even have made the playoffs, let alone come within two games of the Finals. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Toronthab Posted June 8, 2014 Share Posted June 8, 2014 Coaching is one big judgment call with the added perspective and insight that spending all day every day with people brings. I'm very glad I wasn't coaching the Habs this year and we should all be thankful for that. I liked what I was hearing from the players regarding confidence and support from MT. I cannot even begin to asess his individual call. I think I have to agree with the Cuke and allow a lot of latitude for the actual net performance which was I think, pretty danged good and with special thanks to MB. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
habs rule Posted June 8, 2014 Share Posted June 8, 2014 We will never, ever have a coach whose every single personnel move each of us agrees with 100%. What that means is that Jesus Christ could be behind the bench and a significant portion of fans would be on-line calling for his replacement or, at least, adamantly asserting his mediocrity. It's valid to criticize specific decision X or Y, of course; but I find that waaay too many fans get hung up on very narrow, specific coaching choices ("he played so-and-so with such-and-such for five shifts!! What an idiot!!!" "So-and-so played 20 minutes last night!!! That's [too much/too little]!!!! What an idiot!!!!") Considering that coaches make literally thousands of such decisions over the course of a season/playoff - often in a much wider context of complex considerations that fans seldom think about - it's like obsessing over a single small crater on the moon. A better way for fans to evaluate coaches, IMHO, is, obviously, the overall team outcomes, which in this case are above reproach, and maybe other "big picture" considerations such as whether the system is well-suited to the team. As for advanced stats, all I know is if they were everything the Habs wouldn't even have made the playoffs, let alone come within two games of the Finals. Well CC I have at least been consistant, I have not agreed with his approach from the begining and still don't. The kitty bar the door, play not to lose system is not a good system in my opinion. He has the results. I do not dispute that. But I think we need a more agressive approach. We have speed and skill but are playing a dump it in and chase the puck system, not very effective for what we have in talent. Which is a bunch of small guys with speed. Hey it is just my opinion. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Chicoutimi Cucumber Posted June 8, 2014 Share Posted June 8, 2014 Well CC I have at least been consistant, I have not agreed with his approach from the begining and still don't. The kitty bar the door, play not to lose system is not a good system in my opinion. He has the results. I do not dispute that. But I think we need a more agressive approach. We have speed and skill but are playing a dump it in and chase the puck system, not very effective for what we have in talent. Which is a bunch of small guys with speed. Hey it is just my opinion. Actually, I'm inclined to agree about the system; and while I know EOTP is controversial, one of the more interesting points made in this assessment of Therrien is that he adopted the kind of system you want in 2012-13, then inexplicably abandoned it this year, before suddenly reverting to it in the playoffs: http://www.habseyesontheprize.com/2014/6/5/5783318/after-two-years-with-michel-therrien-where-do-the-canadiens-stand (You'll find this in the section on 'Tactics'). The difference between our attitudes, habs rule, comes down to the emphasis placed on results. Despite our agreement in principle, I feel that attacking MT over "system" is something of a solution in search of a problem. Are you really going to sit here and argue that the Habs are VASTLY better than the 100+-point team they've been for two years? That they are massively under-performing due to The System? If so, then we must have a roster befitting a powerhouse, because most franchises would trade their past two seasons for ours. Complaining too vigorously seems to be letting theory determine reality rather than the reverse. I don't know why Therrien switched toward a more plodding system this season - he surely had reasons - but the bottom line is it hasn't hurt us. 1 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.