GDT STANLEY CUP FINALS: Game 3: Tampa Bay Lightning at Montréal Canadiens

[dlbalr]

15 hours ago, hab29RETIRED said:

Decent D when compare to Buffalo, or NJD - although with Dahlin, Buffalo do have more upside. Our D is average when compared to the other teams in this year’s North division. 
 

Clearly inferior than Boston, Tampa, and Florida, which are teams they will be battling fir a playoff spot next year, as well as other eastern teams like the Islanders, Rangers, and capitals.

 

Have you seen Boston's defence corps?  There's McAvoy, Carlo, Grzelcyk, and a whole lot of nothing after that.  Montreal's back is not a little better than theirs, it's a lot better.

 

14 hours ago, alfredoh2009 said:

Ok, I had to take a look and I concede that FLA has a better D than MTL. specially for the bottom 3 Ds. But the Habs have a better than average defense compared to the league this season.

 

I don't see that either.  Florida has Ekblad and Weegar and then it goes downhill.  Stralman is a shadow of his former self, Yandle was benched in the playoffs, Forsling played over his head, and guys like Nutivaara and Gudas are third pairing guys.  Their third pairing might be better but Montreal's top four is stronger.

[DON]

ONE guess which city's media this came from...even if i cut this, tiny bit out of context.

 

"On the other — and here is where the jokes come in — down 3-0 to the Lightning, it’s still been 28 years since they actually won a game in the final.

Ba-dum-TISH.

That’s the fear now — that if the Habs get swept in a series in which they have looked overwhelmed and overmatched, they will have something to be embarrassed about. That four games will essentially wipe out what they accomplished in the previous three rounds of the playoffs. That they have gone from being put on a pedestal to being the country’s punch line."

[hab29RETIRED]

6 minutes ago, dlbalr said:

 

Have you seen Boston's defence corps?  There's McAvoy, Carlo, Grzelcyk, and a whole lot of nothing after that.  Montreal's back is not a little better than theirs, it's a lot better.

 

 

I don't see that either.  Florida has Ekblad and Weegar and then it goes downhill.  Stralman is a shadow of his former self, Yandle was benched in the playoffs, Forsling played over his head, and guys like Nutivaara and Gudas are third pairing guys.  Their third pairing might be better but Montreal's top four is stronger.

Unlike a house, you buls a D from the top. Who would you rather have to start next year  - Petry, Weber and Edmondson, or Mcavoy Carlo, or Grzelcyk?  With Florida, is there anyone you’d take over Ekblad on our team?? He’a had injury issues, but I’d still take him over Petry and going forward Weegar is still a more productive dman than what we have outside of Petry. It’s easier filling the depth d rules than high end ones.

[dlbalr]

40 minutes ago, hab29RETIRED said:

Unlike a house, you buls a D from the top. Who would you rather have to start next year  - Petry, Weber and Edmondson, or Mcavoy Carlo, or Grzelcyk?  With Florida, is there anyone you’d take over Ekblad on our team?? He’a had injury issues, but I’d still take him over Petry and going forward Weegar is still a more productive dman than what we have outside of Petry. It’s easier filling the depth d rules than high end ones.

 

Three defencemen don't make a whole unit.  If Boston fills out their back end with unproven rookies and journeymen like they did this season - Jarred Tinordi was playing for them down the stretch - then I'm taking Montreal's crew quite easily.  Edmundson plays a similar shutdown role to Carlo and while McAvoy and Grzelcyk might be a bit better offensively than Montreal's top two, they're not as good in their own end.  And Montreal's depth is much better.  They are the better overall unit as things stand (Boston has some cap space this summer and would be wise to add an impact D which could change things).

 

For Florida, yes, I'd have Ekblad ahead of everyone and Weegar had a nice year though I think he overachieved.  But if we're taking the best of the best from each team, 4 of the top 6 are from Montreal.  Call me crazy but depth matters a lot over the course of an 82-game regular season and it's not as easy as you think to find quality depth.

[GHT120]

17 hours ago, alfredoh2009 said:

... He should be resigned, he is one of the best offensive LDs in the market this summer

I am not in favour of signing Gustafsson, but if he is to be re-signed that there is nobody better on the UFA market is not a good enough reason ... the Habs have their best prospect pool in ages and lots of draft picks ... they can afford to trade for a defenceman instead of settling for the least terrible UFA option ... they are building a roster for next season, not 2-3-4 years from now.

[BCHabnut]

1 hour ago, The Chicoutimi Cucumber said:

This thread has indeed gone off the rails, and I’m enjoying it

 

In the spirit of tangents, I just want to say that I disagree with the classification of Chiarot and especially Edmundson as “ideally” bottom-pairing guys. The latter, in particular, is a minutes-munching, prototypical shutdown defenceman. I started out as very skeptical toward him but he has totally won me over. Chiarot impresses me less, but he too can play top-4 minutes and be reliable and effective. 

 

It’s not that those guys aren’t legit top-4 D-men…it’s that we have too many of the same type of guy back there.

Edmundson and Chiarot are most certainly top 4 on good teams. Edmundson is down right impressive. He knows his limitations and almost never makes mistakes. 

[The Chicoutimi Cucumber]

1 minute ago, BCHabnut said:

Edmundson and Chiarot are most certainly top 4 on good teams. Edmundson is down right impressive. He knows his limitations and almost never makes mistakes. 

 

Yeah, I gotta admit, I’ve learned to love the guy

[tomh009]

5 hours ago, Commandant said:

Gustafsson is Marc Andre Bergeron 2.0

 

It doesn't matter what he does offensively, he cannot be trusted to play 5v5 minutes, not even on the third pair.  He's that bad.

I really don't like judging a player based on a single game.

 

Looking at the playoffs to date, Weber is more effective 5v5 with Gustafsson than with any other D. And so is Petry. This is true whether looking at goals/60, xG%/60 or high-danger %/60 (Weber-Edmundson is just slightly better on that last one than Weber-Gustafsson).

https://www.naturalstattrick.com/pairings.php?fromseason=20202021&thruseason=20202021&stype=3&sit=5v5&score=all&rate=y&team=MTL&loc=B&toi=20&gpfilt=none&fd=&td=&tgp=410

 

What is it that I am missing here?

 

No, Gustafsson is not elite. But I really don't see him as a 5v5 disaster, either.

[alfredoh2009]

4 minutes ago, tomh009 said:

I really don't like judging a player based on a single game.

 

Looking at the playoffs to date, Weber is more effective 5v5 with Gustafsson than with any other D. And so is Petry. This is true whether looking at goals/60, xG%/60 or high-danger %/60 (Weber-Edmundson is just slightly better on that last one than Weber-Gustafsson).

https://www.naturalstattrick.com/pairings.php?fromseason=20202021&thruseason=20202021&stype=3&sit=5v5&score=all&rate=y&team=MTL&loc=B&toi=20&gpfilt=none&fd=&td=&tgp=410

 

What is it that I am missing here?

 

No, Gustafsson is not elite. But I really don't see him as a 5v5 disaster, either.

 

He has been burned a couple of times trying to close gaps or pinching at the wrong time. As far as I can remember, he has been fine except for a couple of plays that led to goals

[Prime Minister Koivu]

Gustofsson would be great for the regular season and I would be okay with a cheap contract. Against a team that punishes every mistake? We can’t play him right now. 
 

Romanov is the right choice for this series. One well timed hit to Point or Hedman or Kucherov could change the entire series. 
 

15 minutes for Romanov not the 5 he played last time 

[alfredoh2009]

36 minutes ago, Prime Minister Koivu said:

Gustofsson would be great for the regular season and I would be okay with a cheap contract. Against a team that punishes every mistake? We can’t play him right now. 
 

Romanov is the right choice for this series. One well timed hit to Point or Hedman or Kucherov could change the entire series. 
 

15 minutes for Romanov not the 5 he played last time 

 

As long as he doesn't get himself out of position going for the hit.

 

He is good at controlled  O-zone  entries, so he may help that way

[GHT120]

5 hours ago, tomh009 said:

I really don't like judging a player based on a single game.

 

Looking at the playoffs to date, Weber is more effective 5v5 with Gustafsson than with any other D. And so is Petry. This is true whether looking at goals/60, xG%/60 or high-danger %/60 (Weber-Edmundson is just slightly better on that last one than Weber-Gustafsson).

https://www.naturalstattrick.com/pairings.php?fromseason=20202021&thruseason=20202021&stype=3&sit=5v5&score=all&rate=y&team=MTL&loc=B&toi=20&gpfilt=none&fd=&td=&tgp=410

 

What is it that I am missing here?

 

No, Gustafsson is not elite. But I really don't see him as a 5v5 disaster, either.

Gustaffson has averaged 8:05 carefully managed minutes per game 5-on-5 throughout the playoffs ... somewhat inflated by games where injuries forced more TOI, need for offence outweighed risks on defence, or wins/losses allowed the staff to "rest" the top 4 ... that is 35-40% of what the top 5 have played ... he cannot be anything but a 5/6/7 defenceman in the regular season (IMO). 

[GHT120]

8 hours ago, The Chicoutimi Cucumber said:

THE goal right now is to win Game Four...

Agreed ... that is the sole focus.

[hab29RETIRED]

Just now, GHT120 said:

Gustaffson has averaged 8:05 carefully managed minutes per game 5-on-5 throughout the playoffs ... somewhat inflated by games where injuries forced more TOI, need for offence outweighed risks on defence, or wins/losses allowed the staff to "rest" the top 4 ... that is 35-40% of what the top 5 have played ... he cannot be anything but a 5/6/7 defenceman in the regular season (IMO). 

Was 8th on a powerhouse philly team😧

[hab29RETIRED]

Just now, GHT120 said:

Agreed ... that is the sole focus.

Yep. And we need to make adjustments for that game, and than keep adjusting as needed to win.

 I’ve watched 6 habs cup finals, and they have only lost once. I don’t want my son’s first to be one where we get swept!

[Toronthab]

Look at the bright side. We could have won the second game and we're in the NHL Final. 

 

And we've made it to game 4 !!!!!  😛

[Commandant]

9 hours ago, alfredoh2009 said:

Ok, let’s highjack this thread a bit more ...

MAB was Small like Mete and part of his downside was his lack of strength, but he had a great accurate shot. Gustafson can play the body and wins board battles.

 

IMHO, if we want Romanov to be an offensive threat, we should send him to Laval to develop that part of his game. Start him there and call him up when he is ready.

Fleury can stay with the Habs now that he is waiver eligible

 

Gustafsson can play up/down the lineup until Romanov is recalled. Look at his stats, he can help the Habs during the season and be a PP specialist  in the playoffs again next year

 

If We really need Romanov to be that guy, then we need to help him develop that part of the game 

 

No, Gustafsson can't play up and down the lineup.  He is ABSOLUTELY NOT CAPABLE of playing big even strength minutes.  His defensive deficiencies are massively exposed.

As for putting Romanov in Laval, this is problematic for two reasons.

1) He's proven that he can play in the NHL.

2) He has a clause in his contract that if not in the NHL, he has to be loaned to the KHL.  Then his contract is up and he's an RFA in 2022... and if you aren't giving him an NHL spot and sending him to the KHL, there is a good chance he signs there and doesn't bother to re-sign in Montreal.  You are pissing him off and could lose one of your best young assets for nothing. 

 

[Commandant]

9 hours ago, The Chicoutimi Cucumber said:

 

While Romanov is indeed better than Gustafsson in many aspects of the game, I do not agree that Romy is, right now, better than Gustafsson at the *specific* task of moving the puck, creating plays, and generating things on the PP. No way.

 

Interesting ideas. A $10 mil (!!) offer on Hughes would certainly throw the Canucks into chaos - plus Benning is an unimaginative idiot who would not be nimble in his response. It just might work. Can the Habs afford to lose the picks, though? (I don’t know the answer - just asking).

 

Hughes is a 10.2 (c) exclusive rights free agent. 

 

While his contract is up, he has not spent three years in the league. 

 

This means that he cannot receive an offer sheet.  He either signs with the Canucks or sits out the season.  This kills his leverage.

[Commandant]

5 hours ago, tomh009 said:

I really don't like judging a player based on a single game.

 

Looking at the playoffs to date, Weber is more effective 5v5 with Gustafsson than with any other D. And so is Petry. This is true whether looking at goals/60, xG%/60 or high-danger %/60 (Weber-Edmundson is just slightly better on that last one than Weber-Gustafsson).

https://www.naturalstattrick.com/pairings.php?fromseason=20202021&thruseason=20202021&stype=3&sit=5v5&score=all&rate=y&team=MTL&loc=B&toi=20&gpfilt=none&fd=&td=&tgp=410

 

What is it that I am missing here?

 

No, Gustafsson is not elite. But I really don't see him as a 5v5 disaster, either.

 

Gustafsson is benefitting from 3 things here

 

1) He starts almost all his shifts in the offensive zone. 

2) When he is put on the ice with Petry and Weber, they are facing soft opposition (the opponents 3rd or 4th line).  When Petry and Weber play with their regular partners, they are facing the opponents best. 

3) When the Habs have the lead, he rarely gets 5v5 minutes.  He is used when we are trailing and there are score effects in those stats. 

 

[The Chicoutimi Cucumber]

1 hour ago, Commandant said:

 

Hughes is a 10.2 (c) exclusive rights free agent. 

 

While his contract is up, he has not spent three years in the league. 

 

This means that he cannot receive an offer sheet.  He either signs with the Canucks or sits out the season.  This kills his leverage.

 

Thanks for sorting that out. Oh well, it was a nice fantasy for five minutes there, LOL

[hab29RETIRED]

2 hours ago, Commandant said:

 

No, Gustafsson can't play up and down the lineup.  He is ABSOLUTELY NOT CAPABLE of playing big even strength minutes.  His defensive deficiencies are massively exposed.

As for putting Romanov in Laval, this is problematic for two reasons.

1) He's proven that he can play in the NHL.

2) He has a clause in his contract that if not in the NHL, he has to be loaned to the KHL.  Then his contract is up and he's an RFA in 2022... and if you aren't giving him an NHL spot and sending him to the KHL, there is a good chance he signs there and doesn't bother to re-sign in Montreal.  You are pissing him off and could lose one of your best young assets for nothing. 

 

Didn’t realize he had that clause. I would rather have him in the NHL, but he needs to play and when he plays it can’t be for 6 friggin minutes if he is to develop. It would have been good to have had the option to send him down fir 4 or 5 game stunts if needed and have him play big big minutes in all situations..

[hab29RETIRED]

2 hours ago, Commandant said:

 

Hughes is a 10.2 (c) exclusive rights free agent. 

 

While his contract is up, he has not spent three years in the league. 

 

This means that he cannot receive an offer sheet.  He either signs with the Canucks or sits out the season.  This kills his leverage.

That is pretty pointless to be have your contact start a year ealry, but not be able to be a RFA. Does he still benefit by being able to become a UFA earlier?

 

Didn’t Hughes and Makar come up the same year?  I had read that Makar will be an RFA if he isn’t signed.  If Makar can become an RFA, what is the difference  in their status? Is it because Makar is a year older? Games played? 
 

if Makar is an RFA, He’d be another guy I’d take a run at $10m or $10.5m - assuming of course that we could unload Weber’s contract. Avs would probably be forced to match, but it wouldn’t be easy with Rantanen and McKinnon’s contact coming up.

 

 

[dlbalr]

10 hours ago, Commandant said:

As for putting Romanov in Laval, this is problematic for two reasons.

1) He's proven that he can play in the NHL.

2) He has a clause in his contract that if not in the NHL, he has to be loaned to the KHL.  Then his contract is up and he's an RFA in 2022... and if you aren't giving him an NHL spot and sending him to the KHL, there is a good chance he signs there and doesn't bother to re-sign in Montreal.  You are pissing him off and could lose one of your best young assets for nothing.

 

Players with a European Assignment Clause technically can still be sent to the AHL, it just has to be approved by the player first.  Lots don't approve it but the odd one does.  I think back to Jakub Jerabek as a somewhat recent Montreal example - he had the clause but accepted his AHL assignment with the understanding he'd be brought up soon after. 

[tomh009]

9 hours ago, hab29RETIRED said:

That is pretty pointless to be have your contact start a year ealry, but not be able to be a RFA. Does he still benefit by being able to become a UFA earlier?

 

Didn’t Hughes and Makar come up the same year?  I had read that Makar will be an RFA if he isn’t signed.  If Makar can become an RFA, what is the difference  in their status? Is it because Makar is a year older? Games played? 
 

if Makar is an RFA, He’d be another guy I’d take a run at $10m or $10.5m - assuming of course that we could unload Weber’s contract. Avs would probably be forced to match, but it wouldn’t be easy with Rantanen and McKinnon’s contact coming up.

Makar is an RFA.

[Commandant]

2 hours ago, dlbalr said:

 

Players with a European Assignment Clause technically can still be sent to the AHL, it just has to be approved by the player first.  Lots don't approve it but the odd one does.  I think back to Jakub Jerabek as a somewhat recent Montreal example - he had the clause but accepted his AHL assignment with the understanding he'd be brought up soon after. 

 

Yes, he could accept the assignment to Laval, but why would he?