Jump to content

Habs Defense


PMAC

Recommended Posts

A lot has been written about the Habs defense lately— most of it negative, and deservedly so.

However, I disagree with the idea that Weber’s presence on its own will not fix many of the team’s problems on D. The knock-on effects are enormous.

Think about it:

Alzner exiled

Benn out of the top 4

Petry out of the top pair 

The addition by subtraction is in itself a massive upgrade. Now, if only Mete or Reilly could consistently play well  with Weber and move Sclemhco to the bottom 6 or press box and all will be well. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, PMAC said:

A lot has been written about the Habs defense lately— most of it negative, and deservedly so.

However, I disagree with the idea that Weber’s presence on its own will not fix many of the team’s problems on D. The knock-on effects are enormous.

Think about it:

Alzner exiled

Benn out of the top 4

Petry out of the top pair 

The addition by subtraction is in itself a massive upgrade. Now, if only Mete or Reilly could consistently play well  with Weber and move Sclemhco to the bottom 6 or press box and all will be well. 

We got no one that can move the puck up ice in our top three. We got no one that can QB our power play and set plays up from the back end. We got no one on the left side of the defense. Schlemko is our top left d that says it all. In the off season this needs to be the biggest area to address.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree that the d is not an area of strength but I don’t think that it will be the pitiful chaos that we have seen in recent weeks. Also, Schlemko is not our top left d and I am not sure that anyone other than Claude Julien thinks that he should get the first shot at playing with Weber. I would put Mete or Reilly there ahead of the Schlem, who, in the immortal words of noted Habs fan Shania Twain, “ don’t impress me much”. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, PMAC said:

A lot has been written about the Habs defense lately— most of it negative, and deservedly so.

However, I disagree with the idea that Weber’s presence on its own will not fix many of the team’s problems on D. The knock-on effects are enormous.

Think about it:

Alzner exiled

Benn out of the top 4

Petry out of the top pair 

The addition by subtraction is in itself a massive upgrade. Now, if only Mete or Reilly could consistently play well  with Weber and move Sclemhco to the bottom 6 or press box and all will be well. 

 

Getting Weber back is great but right side defense talent isn't really an organizational problem, and his return doesn't solve what's been plaguing the team for 3 years: Who plays left-side top-pairing?

 

The only guy who might have the talent to fit there is Mete, but he's closer to deserving a role on the top pair in the AHL rather than the NHL right now. Everyone else on the Habs and in the AHL seem best suited to the 3rd pairing. 

 

So unfortunately getting Weber back doesn't solve the problem of who plays with Weber. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is a gaping hole on D besides Weber, I hope the CH doen't rush to try to fill but get a solid top pair LD.

 

I am hopeful that at least they seem to have found some candidates to play besides Petry. Kulak seems to be able to play there (the one I hope fits there); also,  Mete or Benn seem to be good options. In the minors, maybe Olofsson cold be that LD (once he comes back from IR). Alzner should have been "that guy".

If we can get a defensive LD that can allow Petry to attack more freely, it will one less thing to worry about on D.

Mete  - Weber

Kulak -  Petry

Reilly -  Juulsen

Benn, Schlemko, etc, etc

 

(P.S. If they could trade Petry for an offensive 27 yr-old top pair LD to play with Weber, that would solidify the CH's D for years)

Edited by alfredoh2009
Added note about traiding Petry
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Metallica said:

We got no one that can move the puck up ice in our top three. We got no one that can QB our power play and set plays up from the back end. We got no one on the left side of the defense. Schlemko is our top left d that says it all. In the off season this needs to be the biggest area to address.

 

Top 3 includes petry... so thats not true.

 

Qbing the pp is weber so thats not true.

 

The only area that you are accurate here is that the lhd is one of the weakest groups in the nhl

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We definitely need an upgrade on defence.

 

I’d like to see this...

 

Mete Weber

??? Petry

Reilly JuulseN

 

J. Muzzin in LA

Edmundson in STL.

 

they wont cost a fortune, aren’t old and would fit in nicely with Petry’s puck moving/ skating ability?

Keep in mind Josh Brook is playing lights out defence in juniors and is really close to NHL ready for 2020 season.

 

i think ultimitely weber finds himself elevating either of mete or Reilly as the season progresses unless the Schlemko experiment (which actually was for LY) really works out

 

Edmundson  for a depth D, depth forward, D prospect and a 2nd RD pick?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Commandant said:

 

Top 3 includes petry... so thats not true.

 

Qbing the pp is weber so thats not true.

 

The only area that you are accurate here is that the lhd is one of the weakest groups in the nhl

FYI

Weber is not a PP QB... he’s a shooter/trigger man for the point. A harder/ more accurate shot then Petry is what he is.

 

Our QB for pretty much 1:30 of each PP is Drouin

 

with that said, a lot of NHL deploy 4 F and 1D on the PP.. so that isn’t a biggy.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Commandant said:

 

Top 3 includes petry... so thats not true.

 

Qbing the pp is weber so thats not true.

 

The only area that you are accurate here is that the lhd is one of the weakest groups in the nhl

Weber is not a pp QB, weber is the guy you set up on the pp, Markov was a pp QB, who is our Markov on this D right now??????????  

 

Petry is not a top 2 he is a top 3/4 guy. When he plays more then he should he is bad. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, Metallica said:

Weber is not a pp QB, weber is the guy you set up on the pp, Markov was a pp QB, who is our Markov on this D right now??????????  

 

Petry is not a top 2 he is a top 3/4 guy. When he plays more then he should he is bad. 

 

If thats what you want... your PP QB is Drouin. 

 

It doesn't need to be a defenceman.  In fact, most of the successful pps in the NHL have four forwards and include a PP QB who is a forward, not a defenceman.  So I'm still not buying that as an issue. 

 

Stats show that PPs are more successful with 4 fwds and 1D... so if you want your PP QB to be a D, it means you are also taking Weber off the PP. 

 

 

As for Petry... Advanced stats over the time that Weber was injured, show that he is a top 20 defenceman in the entire NHL over that time (which is basically a full calendar year).... He's not been bad, and he's been playing as a #1... so he's easily a very good number 2 defenceman.  No doubt about that in my mind whatsoever.  Even then, you said none of the top 3 defencemen move the puck... so if you aren't considering Petry part of that, then you are down to calling Petry a number 4 which just doesn't fit with the stats at all, not with or without Weber in the lineup. 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, IN THE HEARTS OF MEN said:

FYI

Weber is not a PP QB... he’s a shooter/trigger man for the point. A harder/ more accurate shot then Petry is what he is.

 

Our QB for pretty much 1:30 of each PP is Drouin

 

with that said, a lot of NHL deploy 4 F and 1D on the PP.. so that isn’t a biggy.

 

 

 

I agree... I was going with the fact that you are only going to have 1 D on the PP and that will be Weber... so there is a guy on Defence for the first unit....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Commandant said:

 

If thats what you want... your PP QB is Drouin. 

 

It doesn't need to be a defenceman.  In fact, most of the successful pps in the NHL have four forwards and include a PP QB who is a forward, not a defenceman.  So I'm still not buying that as an issue. 

 

Stats show that PPs are more successful with 4 fwds and 1D... so if you want your PP QB to be a D, it means you are also taking Weber off the PP. 

 

 

As for Petry... Advanced stats over the time that Weber was injured, show that he is a top 20 defenceman in the entire NHL over that time (which is basically a full calendar year).... He's not been bad, and he's been playing as a #1... so he's easily a very good number 2 defenceman.  No doubt about that in my mind whatsoever.  Even then, you said none of the top 3 defencemen move the puck... so if you aren't considering Petry part of that, then you are down to calling Petry a number 4 which just doesn't fit with the stats at all, not with or without Weber in the lineup. 

Drouin is your best goal scorer on the team why put him in a set up roll on the power play? He should be the guy you put in the slot  to set up for one timers.  Our best passer on the team is probably Domi. If you put any forward on the back end it should be your best passer/set up man. I think that's Domi or once he gets more season under his belt Kotkaniemi as the pp QB.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, IN THE HEARTS OF MEN said:

J. Muzzin in LA

Edmundson in STL.

 

they wont cost a fortune, aren’t old and would fit in nicely with Petry’s puck moving/ skating ability?

Keep in mind Josh Brook is playing lights out defence in juniors and is really close to NHL ready for 2020 season.

 

i think ultimitely weber finds himself elevating either of mete or Reilly as the season progresses unless the Schlemko experiment (which actually was for LY) really works out

 

Edmundson  for a depth D, depth forward, D prospect and a 2nd RD pick?

6

 

What's in it for St. Louis in that proposal?  They give up a top-four d-man for a collection of spare parts.  If you're getting a top-four d-man that's a restricted free agent next summer, it's going to cost an asset of significance, not some depth guys and lottery tickets.

 

As for Muzzin not costing a lot, why wouldn't he?  He was at one point discussed in the Pacioretty trade talks.  With the contract he has (not a rental) and his recent track record, their asking price is probably a first rounder plus something else.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Metallica said:

Drouin is your best goal scorer on the team why put him in a set up roll on the power play? He should be the guy you put in the slot  to set up for one timers.  Our best passer on the team is probably Domi. If you put any forward on the back end it should be your best passer/set up man. I think that's Domi or once he gets more season under his belt Kotkaniemi as the pp QB.

Drouin has been a set up guy on the pp for ever. Before Montreal. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, BCHabnut said:

Drouin has been a set up guy on the pp for ever. Before Montreal. 

I understand that but he shouldn't be, I would use him the way we used Cammy on the power play.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Metallica said:

Drouin is your best goal scorer on the team why put him in a set up roll on the power play? He should be the guy you put in the slot  to set up for one timers.  Our best passer on the team is probably Domi. If you put any forward on the back end it should be your best passer/set up man. I think that's Domi or once he gets more season under his belt Kotkaniemi as the pp QB.

 

I'm not sure Drouin is the best goal scorer on the team.  I think you'd have to say Gallagher is the best goal scorer on the team.

 

Its also a role that Drouin has done very successfully in the past. 

 

Also where does the PP QB play?  Does it have to be at the point? or can it be on the half boards?  We are seeing more and more of the successful PPs in the NHL being run from the half boards position.  Thats where Mitch Marner is running the Leafs PP from.  With four forwards on PPs there is a lot more emphasis on down low play then there has been in the past and a number of teams are successful doing that. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Metallica said:

I understand that but he shouldn't be, I would use him the way we used Cammy on the power play.

 

I've never thought of Drouin as having a great one-timer like Cammy had, or Galchenyuk last year.  His skill is his ability to handle the puck and the moves he can make with it. 

 

You could put him in Cammalleri's spot, but you wouldn't use him in the same way at all, you'd use him as the QB from there, more than as what Cammy did which was to take one-timers. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, IN THE HEARTS OF MEN said:

We definitely need an upgrade on defence.

 

I’d like to see this...

 

Mete Weber

??? Petry

Reilly JuulseN

 

J. Muzzin in LA

Edmundson in STL.

 

they wont cost a fortune, aren’t old and would fit in nicely with Petry’s puck moving/ skating ability?

Keep in mind Josh Brook is playing lights out defence in juniors and is really close to NHL ready for 2020 season.

 

i think ultimitely weber finds himself elevating either of mete or Reilly as the season progresses unless the Schlemko experiment (which actually was for LY) really works out

 

Edmundson  for a depth D, depth forward, D prospect and a 2nd RD pick?

 

 

I'm a no on Muzzin.  I still think we are rebuilding this team, I don't think its a cup contender, even with Muzzin.  I don't want to give up young assets for a guy who will turn 30 before the NHL Trade Deadline. 

 

Edmundson is 25, so I'd be more interested in him. 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, Commandant said:

 

I'm not sure Drouin is the best goal scorer on the team.  I think you'd have to say Gallagher is the best goal scorer on the team.

 

 

 

Most of his goals don't come from this kind of plays (Cammy's spot, one-timer, etc).


I'd go with Tatar for the most qualified new Cammy.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Commandant said:

 

I'm a no on Muzzin.  I still think we are rebuilding this team, I don't think its a cup contender, even with Muzzin.  I don't want to give up young assets for a guy who will turn 30 before the NHL Trade Deadline. 

 

Edmundson is 25, so I'd be more interested in him. 

I would  want edmundson to...

I think muzzin would be a lot cheaper especially with LA on the verge of a “reset” as well which is where that suggestion comes from

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, IN THE HEARTS OF MEN said:

I would  want edmundson to...

I think muzzin would be a lot cheaper especially with LA on the verge of a “reset” as well which is where that suggestion comes from

 

Even with a reset, that doesn't mean that they're going to significantly lower the asking price.  It just means that they're going to look for long-term upside over the short-term. 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, JoeLassister said:

 

Most of his goals don't come from this kind of plays (Cammy's spot, one-timer, etc).


I'd go with Tatar for the most qualified new Cammy.

 

Ive said before that Tatar is the best for the spot Galchenyuk was in last year.  They have Domi there now

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, IN THE HEARTS OF MEN said:

I would  want edmundson to...

I think muzzin would be a lot cheaper especially with LA on the verge of a “reset” as well which is where that suggestion comes from


I don't know for sure what LA would be asking for but

 

Given Muzzin is signed this year and next at a very reasonable $4 million, I'd think the minimum would be someone like Poehling or Brook and a 1st round pick

 

Thats not the type of deal I'd want to make at this stage of the team's development. 

I'd say stay the course, see how we are with Weber in the lineup, and make a decision on what we are doing closer to the trade deadline, but my thinking is that we are likely still to be in the mode of adding young NHLers or prospects, picks... not players in their 30s.  But that's just my thought right now. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The problem with "staying with the course", is that dmen usually take more time to develop than forwards.

 

You're better of drafting your dmen first and then your FW, IMO.  So they peak around the same time.

So yeah,  like you say,  it would be very nice to add some young and promising LD to take  1st pair duty pretty soon.

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.

×
×
  • Create New...