Jump to content

Habs-Leafs Series Discussion Thread


dlbalr

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, The Chicoutimi Cucumber said:

 

A totally reasonable projection. It will be up to Price and the D to prove it wrong.


He missed one more prediction;

 

After the game Ducharme realizes that playing slow , experienced, old players instead of speed and skill was frigging stupid

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Prime Minister Koivu said:


He missed one more prediction;

 

After the game Ducharme realizes that playing slow , experienced, old players instead of speed and skill was frigging stupid

 

I remember a Canucks playoff series against the Flames in 2015 when idiot head coachWillie Desjardins had a PLAN to spread the minutes around and avoid overtaxing the Sedins. The entirely predictable result was that the Flames owned the Canucks. There had to be an intervention from team president Trevor Linden to force him to change tactics after they were 0-2; Wee Willie Wonka refused to adjust on his own.

 

It's a different situation, but this has the same feel to me: a coach who has overthought himself out of commons sense. Will DD have the humility to adjust if necessary? Guess we'll find out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, illWill said:

I'm sure if we dug up the thread for the play-in round against the Pens last year we would find the same people complaining that we have no chance

 

They wanted us to lose for the draft pick last year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Prime Minister Koivu said:


He missed one more prediction;

 

After the game Ducharme realizes that playing slow , experienced, old players instead of speed and skill was frigging stupid

 

It would be nice if it only took him one game to figure that out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Go with the lineup that on their best day would give you the best chance to win. And CC and KK bring more possibility of greatness than some of the vets. 

This is where I wish players stepped in - like Weber and Price and Gallagher - and say hey coach we want the kids in, let us help them get us there. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, sbhatt said:

 

It would be nice if it only took him one game to figure that out.

But would be much much nicer if they beat the Leafs 11-0 in game #1.:tumbleweed:

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I’ve been avoiding media for the most part cause I want to stay positive and reading about Ducharme’s roster choices makes me not so positive. 
 

Commandant laid out the why our coach is doing these things and we can see the thinking behind the moves. However, is there one single poster here or one single media person that agrees? 
 

Poor decisions that are made for safety. Instead of trying to win we are trying not to lose. Ducharme, Bergevin, and any other old boys club type need to go away. 
 

Ive said all season that this team can win. Perhaps we are all wrong and Ducharme is the one person that is right. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Prime Minister Koivu said:

I’ve been avoiding media for the most part cause I want to stay positive and reading about Ducharme’s roster choices makes me not so positive. 
 

Commandant laid out the why our coach is doing these things and we can see the thinking behind the moves. However, is there one single poster here or one single media person that agrees? 
 

Poor decisions that are made for safety. Instead of trying to win we are trying not to lose. Ducharme, Bergevin, and any other old boys club type need to go away. 
 

Ive said all season that this team can win. Perhaps we are all wrong and Ducharme is the one person that is right. 

 

I am most disappointed that Caulfied is not in the lineup because he is a potential game breaker and the Habs don't have many of those.  Having said that I am absolutely fine to be proven wrong if the vets come up with a big performance but I am not holding my breath for that to happen. I expect DD to make changes quickly if things don't work out in Game 1.  I also expect that some of the vets know very well that with a Caulfield chomping at the bit to get in that they can't get away with a bad performance. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

47 minutes ago, Habs Fan in Edmonton said:

 

I am most disappointed that Caulfied is not in the lineup because he is a potential game breaker and the Habs don't have many of those.  Having said that I am absolutely fine to be proven wrong if the vets come up with a big performance but I am not holding my breath for that to happen. I expect DD to make changes quickly if things don't work out in Game 1.  I also expect that some of the vets know very well that with a Caulfield chomping at the bit to get in that they can't get away with a bad performance. 

 

There is no heavier burden than an unfulfilled potential.” —Charles Schulz

 

Proof of that is Drouin, and before that Galchenyuk, Beulieu, Tinordi, McCarron, Juulsen, ...

 

Caufield will probably be a really good sniper, Romanov will probably a really good top-4 D and Kotkaniemi will probably be a solid top6 forwards.  But none of these three is at that level this week.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Prime Minister Koivu said:

Poor decisions that are made for safety. Instead of trying to win we are trying not to lose. 
You dont really believe this do you?

 

Ive said all season that this team can win.

Win what? A game or a few games, surely not a playoff round or two?

Perhaps we are all wrong and Ducharme is the one person that is right.

Fans typically make horrible GMs and few good coaching decisions, but we live in fantasy land with no repercussions or career at stake. So maybe more of the 1st bit. 

I dont even think Scotty Bowman could win with this line up, he warned Babcock that must have a good roster to be successful, period. He didnt have that in Buffalo and promptly left.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/18/2021 at 5:12 PM, The Chicoutimi Cucumber said:

 

I agree. It is a typical rookie head coaching mistake, actually - default to what feels "safest." Yes, it is a balancing act, but leaving all three out is erring too much on the side of caution and ignoring the strengths of Romanov and CC in particular.

 

Heck, one reason the team was successful against PITTS was the confidence it showed in untested youngsters Suzuki and KK; the playoffs can often be a coming out party for promising young players. By sitting ALL of them you deprive the team of the chance to have that happen.

 

Dumb.

It’s only a mistake or dumb if they lose. If they win it’s called savvy coaching 😎

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, The Chicoutimi Cucumber said:

 

I remember a Canucks playoff series against the Flames in 2015 when idiot head coachWillie Desjardins had a PLAN to spread the minutes around and avoid overtaxing the Sedins. The entirely predictable result was that the Flames owned the Canucks. There had to be an intervention from team president Trevor Linden to force him to change tactics after they were 0-2; Wee Willie Wonka refused to adjust on his own.

 

It's a different situation, but this has the same feel to me: a coach who has overthought himself out of commons sense. Will DD have the humility to adjust if necessary? Guess we'll find out.

He has been quoted by Arpon Basu  as saying that adjustments are part of the plan.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, alfredoh2009 said:

 

There is no heavier burden than an unfulfilled potential.” —Charles Schulz

 

Proof of that is Drouin, and before that Galchenyuk, Beulieu, Tinordi, McCarron, Juulsen, ...

 

Caufield will probably be a really good sniper, Romanov will probably a really good top-4 D and Kotkaniemi will probably be a solid top6 forwards.  But none of these three is at that level this week.

I don’t think there was much potential to fulfill in the case of McCarron and Tinordi - they were the size fetish (combined with with hockey family genes in Tinordi’s case). They were players that should never have been picked anywhere close to where they were drafted.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, PMAC said:

It’s only a mistake or dumb if they lose. If they win it’s called savvy coaching 😎

 

True. What everyone is saying is that they expect it to be moves which make it harder for an already-outgunned team to win.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, PMAC said:

It’s only a mistake or dumb if they lose. If they win it’s called savvy coaching 😎

 

Disagree, a coach can make a dumb move and still win the game, just like a goalie can let in a bad goal and still win. 

 

The bad move is just giving the rest of the roster one more thing to overcome... just a like a bad goal means you now need to produce one more goal than before. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, hab29RETIRED said:

I don’t think there was much potential to fulfill in the case of McCarron and Tinordi - they were the size fetish (combined with with hockey family genes in Tinordi’s case). They were players that should never have been picked anywhere close to where they were drafted.

 

Agreed. They were only drafted where they were because of their size. I feel bad about Juulsen, had some really tough luck because of injuries and it really set him back. Galchenyuk and Beaulieu had/have talent but I think they were missing some components from the neck up, maturity ?  hockey IQ?  They weren't developed properly. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, hab29RETIRED said:

I don’t think there was much potential to fulfill in the case of McCarron and Tinordi - they were the size fetish (combined with with hockey family genes in Tinordi’s case). They were players that should never have been picked anywhere close to where they were drafted.

 

@hab29RETIRED , I agree on McCarron adn Tinordi; most fans and commentators said so since their draft.

 

I just listed the 1st rounders, Galchenyuk, (Missed Sherbak) and Juulsen had potential. Second rounders like Fucale, Lehkonen, Mete were fringe from the start.

More recent draft picks like Poehling, Brook, Ikonen, Ylonen are still developing. In this recent group we have the more promising prospects of Suzuki (2017), Kotkaniemi & Romanov (2018), and Caufield (2019) => these four prospects out of all the other ones are very close to being reliable top NHLers but out of them only Suzuki has established himself at a good level

 

I am OK in not betting the farm on Kotkaniemi, Romanov and Caufield for the first two games in Toronto. I am 50/50 in having them for the games in Montreal where line matching can be better managed. That is all I am saying.

Edited by alfredoh2009
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, alfredoh2009 said:

 

@hab29RETIRED , I agree on McCarron adn Tinordi; most fans and commentators said so since their draft.

 

I just listed the 1st rounders, Galchenyuk, (Missed Sherbak) and Juulsen had potential. Second rounders like Fucale, Lehkonen, Mete were fringe from the start.

More recent draft picks like Poehling, Brook, Ikonen, Ylonen are still developing. In this recent group we have the more promising prospects of Suzuki (2017), Kotkaniemi & Romanov (2018), and Caufield (2019) => these four prospects out of all the other ones are very close to being reliable top NHLers but out of them only Suzuki has established himself at a good level

 

I am OK in not betting the farm on Kotkaniemi, Romanov and Caufield for the first two games in Toronto. I am 50/50 in having them for the games in Montreal where line matching can be better managed. That is all I am saying.

He’s also the only one we didn’t draft ourselves. I have high hopes foe Caulfield becoming a top line winger. Not sure if Romanov’s ceiling is being part of a second pairing, or if KK will become at least a 2nd line centre or not.

 

Galchenyuk you had to take. That year up until around Xmas Forsberg was high on all draft lists, but fell down dramatically. In hindsight, he was the better player, but given he consensus, I think almost every team would have taken Galchenyuk like we did. It’s just too bad he doesn't have have the hockey sense to put everything together. He’s also another example of rushing a player in - particularly one who was injured for a large portion of his junior career. Quick brief success  and a quick flameout.

The only other pick I had any expectations for was Jullsen. Sheehan was a role the dice pick in the late round, and I’d prefer doing that for a skilled player like him, than a Tinordi or McCarron. I didn’t get the point of the Fucale pick based on our needs at the time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, hab29RETIRED said:

He’s also the only one we didn’t draft ourselves. I have high hopes foe Caulfield becoming a top line winger. Not sure if Romanov’s ceiling is being part of a second pairing, or if KK will become at least a 2nd line centre or not.

 

Galchenyuk you had to take. That year up until around Xmas Forsberg as high on draft lists, but fell down dramatically. In hindsight, he was the better player, but given he consensus, I think almost every team would have taken Galchenyuk here wee did. It’s just too bad he doesn't have have the hockey sense to out everything together. He’s also another example of rushing a player in - particularly one who was injured foe a large portion of his junior career. Quick brief success  as quick flameout.

The only other puck I had any expectations for was Jullsen. Sheehan was a role the dice pick in the late round, and I’d prefer ding that for a skilled player like him, than a Tinordi or McCarron. I didn’t get the point of the Fucale pick based on our needs at the time.

Revisiting history, not bad after a few years when we have enough games to evaluate the players

 

Let’s give Caufield and Romanov a bit more time

 

KK... it is getting harder and harder to keep a positive projection for him

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...