Jump to content

April 26, Canadiens @ Flames, 6:30pm EST


Recommended Posts

Good lord I hope Gustafson’s advanced stats don’t get him another start! Ducharme can’t be that blind

 

No way flames catch us now. Canucks have an opportunity if they win all games in hand. All we need to do is spank the leafs a couple of times. 
 

Caufield will score on the leafs. The flames were too muddy and grinding to get any offensive flow 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 130
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Boy, I'm shocked with that...

Cue the boost this team desperately needs and the subsequent run to the Cup!       *Disclaimer: still might not win the Cup

The smart move would have been not bothering with Gustafsson, 

5 hours ago, bbp said:

Of course he did. He basically only started in the offensive end.

It's true, he had no shifts starting in the defensive zone: Ducharme made sure to have more defensive players there (mostly it was Chiarot/Weber for those, with Danault taking the face-off). But the four offensive zone starts only counted for 4/18 total shifts, so that's not the full story, either.

 

And, at 15:49, he actually had a respectable amount of ice time.

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Trizzak said:

I would be very happy if the games Vancouver and Calgary play after the Habs regular season is over don't matter at all besides which of them gets the lower draft pick.

 

I wouldn't be shocked if that was done by design.  That way, if Montreal has clinched by then, there's a scenario where the North Division playoffs can start while the regular season is still technically going for those two teams.

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, tomh009 said:

Ironically, he's positive in every stats category. Shots %, scoring chances %, high-danger chances %, corsi, fenwick, xGF. By the stats, he was the best D of the game for the Habs.

 

Those stats are highly skewed by his usage.  He was used on the pp and with very favourable zone starts.  The coaching staff sees he cant play D and are sheltering him greatly.

Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, Commandant said:

Those stats are highly skewed by his usage.  He was used on the pp and with very favourable zone starts.  The coaching staff sees he cant play D and are sheltering him greatly.

Yes.

  • 4 offensive zone starts
  • 1 neutral zone start
  • 0 defensive zone starts
  • 14 starts on the fly

As usual, though, most shifts start on the fly. PP was only about 30 seconds of his total.

 

He's a one-sided player, to be sure, but I don't think he's quite as disastrous as some people have said, if used correctly ...

Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, tomh009 said:

Yes.

  • 4 offensive zone starts
  • 1 neutral zone start
  • 0 defensive zone starts
  • 14 starts on the fly

As usual, though, most shifts start on the fly. PP was only about 30 seconds of his total.

 

He's a one-sided player, to be sure, but I don't think he's quite as disastrous as some people have said, if used correctly ...

Like Kaberle, kit vers and other late additions MB made before playoffs.

Guvtafson will be out of Montreal in a blink of the eye 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I could only watch this one in snatches, but it looked to me like we gutted out a playoff-style win in a really key game.

 

Not sure why all this focus is on Gustafson when MB’s main move to help to the D was Merril. 

 

How did Caulfield look?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Focus is on Gustafson because Merril is a good skating, smart defender with a good first pass— exactly as advertised. Nothing to criticize there. 

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, PMAC said:

Focus is on Gustafson because Merril is a good skating, smart defender with a good first pass— exactly as advertised. Nothing to criticize there. 

 

LOL. Well, if we are going to lambaste MB for his deadline acquisitions, we might want to keep in mind the addition of a quality defender...sheesh!

Link to post
Share on other sites
59 minutes ago, The Chicoutimi Cucumber said:

I could only watch this one in snatches, but it looked to me like we gutted out a playoff-style win in a really key game.

 

Not sure why all this focus is on Gustafson when MB’s main move to help to the D was Merril. 

 

How did Caulfield look?

 

I thought Caulfield looked good in his first game, he looked "dangerous" in my opinion. I was one of those that was not convinced his game would translate to the NHL but he does not look out of place at all. In a tight checking game he acquitted himself very well. I am pretty confident he will score at the NHL level, the kid can shoot. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

The game appeared to me slower, seemed to me Habs players were skating a notch less fast, not pushing the pace.

 

if I am right, then that seemed to help Caufield by not having to match the speed of faster skaters

 

he definitely seemed to have a dangerous shot and to recognize the open areas of the ice to make passes and to position himself

Link to post
Share on other sites
57 minutes ago, The Chicoutimi Cucumber said:

LOL. Well, if we are going to lambaste MB for his deadline acquisitions, we might want to keep in mind the addition of a quality defender...sheesh!

Credit for the Merrill acquisition but adding Gustafsson, a player that has to be protected from doing what is supposed to be his job, has tied the cap into the knots that have made managing the roster such a mess last few days 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Merrill is a very good and steady Dman with great positions and great breakouts. 
 

Gustafsson does not know how to play defence. He is a forward pretending and he stinks. 
 

Kulak is miles upon miles better than Gustafson. 
 

Caufield is going to be a serious sniper that is probably one dimensional. He has an incredible way of hiding in open ice, he just needs the pass. His shot is fast and hard and you can see the swagger in his game. Caufield will be our best goal scorer 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, The Chicoutimi Cucumber said:

I could only watch this one in snatches, but it looked to me like we gutted out a playoff-style win in a really key game.

 

Not sure why all this focus is on Gustafson when MB’s main move to help to the D was Merril. 

 

How did Caulfield look?

 

The focus is on Gustafsson because. 

 

1) He could be replaced by Kulak.

2) If the Habs choose Romanov over Caufield, it will be Gustafsson as the first one replaced. 

3) Gustafsson's cap hit is what made sending down Romanov necessary in order to callup Caufield.  If we didnt' trade for him, we could have both in the lineup as we wouldn't have had to put Romanov on taxi squad to get Caufield in the lineup. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Can anyone tell me why Suzuki drops his stick 20 times/game? Not a big deal, just seems odd and he is always fishing for it on the ice afterwards.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, The Chicoutimi Cucumber said:

 

LOL. Well, if we are going to lambaste MB for his deadline acquisitions, we might want to keep in mind the addition of a quality defender...sheesh!

We actually traded a 7th and pretty much Romanov for the rest of the season for Gustafsson. Who do you think helps us more Guatafsson or Romanov?  

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, hab29RETIRED said:

We actually traded a 7th and pretty much Romanov for the rest of the season for Gustafsson. Who do you think helps us more Guatafsson or Romanov?  

we were not winning with Romanov, but we won with Gustafsson.... your point?

Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, DON said:

Can anyone tell me why Suzuki drops his stick 20 times/game? Not a big deal, just seems odd and he is always fishing for it on the ice afterwards.

 

I noticed this many games ago...it's infuriating.  It needs to be beaten out of him; Ducharme should assign him hard punishment laps / suicides at the next practice every time it happens.

 

The same for Kotkaniemi falling all the damn time for no good reason...looks like Bambi out there.

Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, alfredoh2009 said:

we were not winning with Romanov, but we won with Gustafsson.... your point?

Yes Gustafsson is the reason we won and Romanov is the real. We were losing  🙄

By that logic we should trade Romanov this off-season and extend Gustafsson🙄

Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, alfredoh2009 said:

we were not winning with Romanov, but we won with Gustafsson.... your point?

 

I think that's a pretty small sample size. That's like saying we won last night because Gallagher wasn't in the lineup? Same logic. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, sbhatt said:

 

I noticed this many games ago...it's infuriating.  It needs to be beaten out of him; Ducharme should assign him hard punishment laps / suicides at the next practice every time it happens.

 

The same for Kotkaniemi falling all the damn time for no good reason...looks like Bambi out there.


I was musing on Kotkaniemi falling down so much as it drives me crazy and I was reminded of a younger me. 
 

I am built similar to KK but taller. I remember a serious disconnect with my feet and coordination from 16 to about 22 years of age as my body filled out. I wonder if that’s JK’s problem? 

Link to post
Share on other sites
59 minutes ago, alfredoh2009 said:

we were not winning with Romanov, but we won with Gustafsson.... your point?

 

I'm very confident in saying that Romanov and Kulak are both better players than Gustafsson. 

 

Seems to me that we moved Mete cause we wanted DeAngelo.... another offence first, defence questionable defenceman (more problematic off ice than Gustafsson, but better on ice than him)... and when that couldn't happen MB panicked and took Gustafsson. 

 

I still think if he wanted an offence first, no defence defender, he should have tried Byron for Gostisbehere, which could have saved Philly some cap space and the term on the two players is the same. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Commandant said:

Seems to me that we moved Mete cause we wanted DeAngelo.... another offence first, defence questionable defenceman (more problematic off ice than Gustafsson, but better on ice than him)... and when that couldn't happen MB panicked and took Gustafsson. 

 

I still think if he wanted an offence first, no defence defender, he should have tried Byron for Gostisbehere, which could have saved Philly some cap space and the term on the two players is the same. 

Maybe he did try for Gostisbehere ... Flyers balked at the deal in the end, and Bergevin panicked and picked up Gustafsson?

Link to post
Share on other sites

possible, but if they balked I wouldn't have gone to Gustafsson. 

 

I just would have went with what we have. 

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Habs Fan in Edmonton said:

 

I think that's a pretty small sample size. That's like saying we won last night because Gallagher wasn't in the lineup? Same logic. 

You caught me there in my shallow logic :)

 

Link to post
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...