Jump to content

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


tomh009

Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, alfredoh2009 said:

I disagree. The Habs have a decent defence 

 

They do not have an elite defence 

A healthy petry and switch out one of Weber Chiarot for a puck mover and that's a good defense. It really hurts to see how well sergachev is playing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, BCHabnut said:

A healthy petry and switch out one of Weber Chiarot for a puck mover and that's a good defense. It really hurts to see how well sergachev is playing.

Expose weber - if we luck and the Kraken take him offer Maker $10m/7 yrs.  make things difficult for the Avs with other key contracts coming up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, alfredoh2009 said:

 

Didn't know you were into lip singing. Karaoke too?

 

Here are the top PPG LD UFAs thi summer:

 

image.png

I wouldn’t sign a UFA. You over pay for old guys, or mediocre players. Either you trade for someone - there are teams that may want assets back rather than lose a dman to the Kraken, or you sign an RFA, who has his best years ahead off him.  Must more effective use of cap space and if you can get a guy like Makar. It’s worth the lost picks. Id rather pay a player for what they will do for us, not what they have done for another team in the past.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, hab29RETIRED said:

I wouldn’t sign a UFA. You over pay for old guys, or mediocre players. Either you trade for someone - there are teams that may want assets back rather than lose a dman to the Kraken, or you sign an RFA, who has his best years ahead off him.  Must more effective use of cap space and if you can get a guy like Makar. It’s worth the lost picks. Id rather pay a player for what they will do for us, not what they have done for another team in the past.

I‘Ve been through the lists of Ds that may be available from other teams and posted the only one I found in the trade proposal thread

 

Inhabe not been able to find the player you say is available. And honestly, I would love to know who you have in mind 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, alfredoh2009 said:

Fixed that for you.

 

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

Duh! Thanks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, alfredoh2009 said:

 

Habs will have about $5M cap space even if they sign Danault, Armia and Lehkonen.  Over $10M if they do not sign Danault. So, yes, they will have the cap room to improve the team

 

Don’t forget another 5.5 if they can manage to dump Drouin.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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. 

 

This game when they were chasing the lead and put him out (rightly so given the score) shows that he just can't play defensively. 

 

Let him walk and look elsewhere.  Let Romanov play next year. 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes 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. 

 

This game when they were chasing the lead and put him out (rightly so given the score) shows that he just can't play defensively. 

 

Let him walk and look elsewhere.  Let Romanov play next year. 

 

 

 

The Bergeron analogy is perfect. The reason we acquired MAB and gave him ice was that we had to. (The specifics escape me, but probably we needed someone other than Markov who could move the damned puck and shoot it from the point). When fans denounced The Count for playing him, they were failing to consider the underlying cause.

 

The reason we acquired Gustafsson and gave him ice is that we had to. The D has nobody other than Petry who can move the damned puck and create anything. When fans denounce the coaches for using him, they are once again failing to consider the underlying cause.

 

It’s kind of incredible, when you think about it, that a team could make the Finals with a D so one-dimensional as to be forced to rely on that guy to add a key element of offensive push from the back end.

 

I agree with letting him go and using Romanov, but unless Romanov suddenly develops his offensive game, we will still need a puck-moving, top-4 quality D-man. Otherwise we’ll either miss the playoffs, or else be in the same situation of trying to add someone’s leftover garbage to fix the hole at the deadline.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, The Chicoutimi Cucumber said:

 

The Bergeron analogy is perfect. The reason we acquired MAB and gave him ice was that we had to. (The specifics escape me, but probably we needed someone other than Markov who could move the damned puck and shoot it from the point). When fans denounced The Count for playing him, they were failing to consider the underlying cause.

 

The reason we acquired Gustafsson and gave him ice is that we had to. The D has nobody other than Petry who can move the damned puck and create anything. When fans denounce the coaches for using him, they are once again failing to consider the underlying cause.

 

It’s kind of incredible, when you think about it, that a team could make the Finals with a D so one-dimensional as to be forced to rely on that guy to add a key element of offensive push from the back end.

 

I agree with letting him go and using Romanov, but unless Romanov suddenly develops his offensive game, we will still need a puck-moving, top-4 quality D-man. Otherwise we’ll either miss the playoffs, or else be in the same situation as trying to add someone’s leftover garbage to fix the hole at the deadline.

 

We need another D, but that D is probably best to be on the Right Side. 

Between Edmundson, Chiarot, Romanov, Kulak the left side is covered.  Add in the fact that almost all of our best prospects are LHD and that RD is limited to Fleury and Brook, and acquiring a RHD should be a priority.  This would also allow you to manage Weber and Petry's minutes through the gruelling 82 game regular season. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Commandant said:

 

We need another D, but that D is probably best to be on the Right Side. 

Between Edmundson, Chiarot, Romanov, Kulak the left side is covered.  Add in the fact that almost all of our best prospects are LHD and that RD is limited to Fleury and Brook, and acquiring a RHD should be a priority.  This would also allow you to manage Weber and Petry's minutes through the gruelling 82 game regular season. 

 

Agree 👍

 

You know, before he came over, I’d heard that Romanov was potential top-pairing material, a legit stud. It surprises me a bit that he did not show more offensive mojo, given that rep, but it is what it is, I guess.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, The Chicoutimi Cucumber said:

 

Agree 👍

 

You know, before he came over, I’d heard that Romanov was potential top-pairing material, a legit stud. It surprises me a bit that he did not show more offensive mojo, given that rep, but it is what it is, I guess.

 

He's 20 years old.

 

He has shown offence at junior levels, but not every Dman is Quinn Hughes or Cale Makar (who are both top 10 picks) and can do it as 19 year old or 20 year old rookies.  Most D don't even break into the league until age 22 or 23. 

So he could develop offence, it is up to the Habs to give him the opportunity to do so. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Commandant said:

 

He's 20 years old.

 

He has shown offence at junior levels, but not every Dman is Quinn Hughes or Cale Makar (who are both top 10 picks) and can do it as 19 year old or 20 year old rookies.  Most D don't even break into the league until age 22 or 23. 

So he could develop offence, it is up to the Habs to give him the opportunity to do so. 

 

That’s extremely fair. It’s not that I expect him to be Quinn Hughes, it’s more that I don’t recall any sign of him showing that aspect to his game at all. He seems to be happiest playing in the mode of Edmundson, i.e., hitting brutally hard and making a pass to exit the zone. Whether this really is his default position, or whether he will unfold his offensive skills as he develops, remains to be seen, but I sure hope he can bring that element in 2-3 years.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, The Chicoutimi Cucumber said:

 

That’s extremely fair. It’s not that I expect him to be Quinn Hughes, it’s more that I don’t recall any sign of him showing that aspect to his game at all. He seems to be happiest playing in the mode of Edmundson, i.e., hitting brutally hard and making a pass to exit the zone. Whether this really is his default position, or whether he will unfold his offensive skills as he develops, remains to be seen, but I sure hope he can bring that element in 2-3 years.

I think Romanov TODAY is a better option than Gustafson, Merril, and Kulak.  As has been stated he’s 20, so he could become significantly better and find more offence, the way a guy like McDonough did, or could end up being a solid top 4. Worst case scenario is that he just solidifies as a steady reliable bottom pairing dman.  We should be playing him now in these big games, since I don’t really think we have a better option anyways to help his progression (we have been sheltering Gustafson and Merrill anyways).

 

on the mention of Hughes, I would be all I. On trying an offer sheet for Hughes, or Makar. Both would provide us with a stud dman in the Suzuki, Caufield, Kk age group. I’d be willing to give up 4 draft picks for either. Not sure if Vancouver would be able to match a $10m offer sheet this year, Paterson to sign, along with the dead weight they have. Similarly, I’m not sure the Avs could risk matching with Rantanan and than McKinnon to sign. On our end, the only way we could make it work is dumping Weber’s contact.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, hab29RETIRED said:

I think Romanov TODAY is a better option than Gustafson, Merril, and Kulak.  As has been stated he’s 20, so he could become significantly better and find more offence, the way a guy like McDonough did, or could end up being a solid top 4. Worst case scenario is that he just solidifies as a steady reliable bottom pairing dman.  We should be playing him now in these big games, since I don’t really think we have a better option anyways to help his progression (we have been sheltering Gustafson and Merrill anyways).

 

on the mention of Hughes, I would be all I. On trying an offer sheet for Hughes, or Makar. Both would provide us with a stud dman in the Suzuki, Caufield, Kk age group. I’d be willing to give up 4 draft picks for either. Not sure if Vancouver would be able to match a $10m offer sheet this year, Paterson to sign, along with the dead weight they have. Similarly, I’m not sure the Avs could risk matching with Rantanan and than McKinnon to sign. On our end, the only way we could make it work is dumping Weber’s contact.

 

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).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes 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 

Gustafson has not dine the job this year, why sign him for another??? I’m all for sending Romanov to develop in Laval next year if he needs it - but we are in the friggin finals after 28 years, with potentially one last chance to prevent being swept. We need to change what hasn’t been working, to try and win a game and have a minuscule chance at a miracle comeback.  It’s not happening with Gustafson. There was a reason he was available cheap and was the 8th dman in Philly. He is useless. Shows a flash here and there l, but he w more of a liabilit. MAB at least shot the drugging puck a lot- something Gustafson is not doing. MAB had one simple job - shoot the friggin puck, and Markov was the QB. Gustafson does not have the skill, or hockey sense to be a QB on the PP.  he is eventually going to be an AHL/KHL dman, I do not want him back next year. We need at least two better top 4 dmen next year. Weber is not a top pairing dman anymore. Petry is al we have. Chiarot and Edmondson are better suited as bottom pairing dmen, and I’d be okay having one on the top 4 if we can’t get a better option, but certainly not both. Gustafson? Any nothing to do with him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I expected to be more angry but I am just resigned to the inevitable. The best I am hoping for now is a Montreal victory in game 4 and an ot loss in game 5 to salvage a little pride and to avoid losing the cup on home ice for only the second time in the team’s’ history. 
Also, Romanov should play game 4

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute 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).

I’m not saying he is a better option on the PP. I think we are better off with Petry, and 4 forwards, or just go with 5 forwards than using a Gustafson. He doesn’t shoot enough, or get enough shots through when he does, and he does not move the puck fast enough. One of our biggest issues is we aren’t getting enough shots on net (let alone with shots with a lot of traffic), another is getting shots off sooner. The only guy who have lent been hesitant in getting a shot of as soon as it’s on his stick is Caufield. Gustafson really had one good game on the PP, otherwise has been a liability, and having to shelter him and Merrill has worn down the other 4 dmen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes 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).

We have a lot of good young players at forward, but no can’t miss D prospects. We have maybe 2 years left of Price, capable of providing high level goaltending like these playoffs. Either we go for it now and full the hole on D, that’s been there since MB’s stupidity with Markov and Sergechev, or we may as well try and trade Price now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, PMAC said:

I expected to be more angry but I am just resigned to the inevitable. The best I am hoping for now is a Montreal victory in game 4 and an ot loss in game 5 to salvage a little pride and to avoid losing the cup on home ice for only the second time in the team’s’ history. 
Also, Romanov should play game 4

I’ve waited 28 friggin years to see the habs in another cup final - check that - win another cup!!!  I’m pissed, and no chances are low, but I’m not going to resign on the inevitable, until we actually stop the insanity of trying the same stupid approach that isn’t working. Have to still try to get back in the series one game at a time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute 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.

Kind of Agree with you - that’s why I’m saying I’d be okay with one on the top 4, not both. They are minute munching, because we don’t have a bottom pairing that can be trusted to play more than 5-7 min a game. They also looked great when Price was superman. Now that Price is just good to okay Price, they don’t look like they both should be part of a legit top 4.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

THE goal right now is to win Game Four - avoiding the sweep and preventing Lucky Tampa from winning the goddamned Cup on sacred Bell Centre ice. If the team does not rally and put out its very best effort for these noble ends, then I will be very disappointed.

 

After that, well, you have to think beating Tampa in Tampa for a Cup-clinching game is a ridiculously long shot. But to lose tomorrow would be to make the Habs’ disastrous and humiliating failure in the Finals complete. Salvage SOME kind of dignity, for heaven’s sake.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, PMAC said:

I expected to be more angry but I am just resigned to the inevitable. The best I am hoping for now is a Montreal victory in game 4 and an ot loss in game 5 to salvage a little pride and to avoid losing the cup on home ice for only the second time in the team’s’ history. 

Hope win game #4 obviously; but, if do lose can still hope Caufield has hat-trick, Romanov get a goal & assist, or some other exciting good things happen.

 

Will be a short off-season for Habs no matter how series ends and future seems to be looking up for Habs.:D

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...