Jump to content

STANLEY CUP FINAL - Game 5 - Tampa vs. Habs - 8 PM


 Share

Recommended Posts

16 hours ago, Sir_Boagalott said:

... Numerous people on here often refer to the Habs as Team Tank or Bubble team, but I'm an optimist and prefer to call them Team win 1 round and then lose.  i.e. they're almost always a threat to win 1 round, their issue is with getting beyond that ...

First, for some "Team Tank" is an objective for a particular season ... not a long term descriptor like "bubble team" has been too often 

 

On to my substantive comment ... "they're almost always a threat to win 1 round" is not sufficient in my view ... it means just as likely to lose in 1 round ... I've had more than enough of the "make the playoffs and see" objective of most of the past 28 years ... I want any team I cheer for to expect (in NHL terms) to be top 3 in their Division and win at least one round, and a recognized threat to win the Cup thereafter  ...  I hope to be proven wrong, but at the moment I am not confident the Habs will be more than a bubble team next season ... and not because of the short off-season and an injury carryover to the early parts of the season.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, The Chicoutimi Cucumber said:

If you make the Stanley Cup Finals, you deserve to be there. Full stop.

True.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, The Chicoutimi Cucumber said:

If you make the Stanley Cup Finals, you deserve to be there. Full stop.

True… it is also no guarantee of future success… remember Ottawa… lost in game seven, double overtime of conference final. They convinced themselves they were a player away from regular cup contender… they were not even close. Worse… the moves they made thinking they were set them back even further.

 

the habs played great, but almost any team can put together a string of wins at the right time. It doesn’t negate the holes in the lineup.

 

we definitely have some good young players and both Price and Weber showed they have a couple years left where they can elevate themselves. 
 

we still need a skilled, defensively sound puck moving defenceman and another solid sniper.. 

 

who knows where Drouin is or will be. Can he come back and be that sniper? Can he be traded for one? Is Gallagher fading to a third line energy guy or can he rebound. I know he was banged up but he has been declining for a while. Hopefully it is just injuries and he rebounds next year. 
 

this team needs to improve as they are in a brutal division and it won’t be easy to make the playoffs next year. If they can pull that off, then the experience this year will do a lot to get them deep, as long as they avoid Tampa. I feel they have a mental edge against both Toronto and Boston.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, brobin said:

True… it is also no guarantee of future success… remember Ottawa… lost in game seven, double overtime of conference final. They convinced themselves they were a player away from regular cup contender… they were not even close. Worse… the moves they made thinking they were set them back even further.

 

the habs played great, but almost any team can put together a string of wins at the right time. It doesn’t negate the holes in the lineup.

 

we definitely have some good young players and both Price and Weber showed they have a couple years left where they can elevate themselves. 
 

we still need a skilled, defensively sound puck moving defenceman and another solid sniper.. 

 

who knows where Drouin is or will be. Can he come back and be that sniper? Can he be traded for one? Is Gallagher fading to a third line energy guy or can he rebound. I know he was banged up but he has been declining for a while. Hopefully it is just injuries and he rebounds next year. 
 

this team needs to improve as they are in a brutal division and it won’t be easy to make the playoffs next year. If they can pull that off, then the experience this year will do a lot to get them deep, as long as they avoid Tampa. I feel they have a mental edge against both Toronto and Boston.

 

Oh, I agree the team needs to improve. They are clearly a “tough out” in the playoffs, but the challenge is to actually make the playoffs. And if we had had that elusive top-4 puck-moving D-man, it might have helped v.s. Tampa too.

 

What I resist is the idea that Habs somehow flunked their way to the Finals or somehow didn’t “deserve” to get there. They did. They got monster goaltending and ground three teams (two of which are elite) into powder.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, GHT120 said:

First, for some "Team Tank" is an objective for a particular season ... not a long term descriptor like "bubble team" has been too often 

 

On to my substantive comment ... "they're almost always a threat to win 1 round" is not sufficient in my view ... it means just as likely to lose in 1 round ... I've had more than enough of the "make the playoffs and see" objective of most of the past 28 years ... I want any team I cheer for to expect (in NHL terms) to be top 3 in their Division and win at least one round, and a recognized threat to win the Cup thereafter  ...  I hope to be proven wrong, but at the moment I am not confident the Habs will be more than a bubble team next season ... and not because of the short off-season and an injury carryover to the early parts of the season.

I am fairly confident that the majority of the players on the team do indeed feel that way and that’s more important than the perspective of some fans and their personal vision of what a contender looks like. There have been so many negative posts concerning the Habs over the years that have been proven completely and utterly wrong, that it’s almost not worth replying to those comments. 
 

Of course those who say the Habs will win the cup next year with their rose coloured glasses are just as delusional.

 

With that being said, stating that the Habs need to improve is an obviously true remark but that can be said for any team, including Tampa. 
 

The Habs are going to be an even tougher team to play against than this year as their young kids have another year of experience under their belt. That comment is also coming from someone (me) who loves veterans. Caufield and Suzuki (and KK) are only going to get better and I am confident that we will continue to add some pieces after the run we made this year.

 

There should only be room for optimism heading into next year. Whether or not things pan out, time will tell. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, xXx..CK..xXx said:

I am fairly confident that the majority of the players on the team do indeed feel that way and that’s more important than the perspective of some fans and their personal vision of what a contender looks like ...

I am equally confident that the vast majority of players pay no attention to what fans say on boards such as this ... but we are entitled to our own opinions

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am confident that the Habs will prove many wrong in believing they are merely a bubble team, as confident as I am that some posters in this forums are trolls

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/8/2021 at 1:25 PM, GHT120 said:

Comparable signings since 19/20:

  • Joel Eriksson EK - 8 yrs @ $5.25M after a breakout 25g/82gms season
  • RNH - 8 yrs @ $5.125M - 28g/82gms scorer over the last 4 seasons (albeit with McDavid/Draisaitl)
  • Adam Lowry - 5 yrs@$3.25M - slightly better scorer (less assists) in a less offensive role
  • Dylan Strome - 2 yrs@$3M - better scorer - don't know that Danault would consider 2 years
  • Pierre-Luc Dubois - 2 yrs@$5M - presumed 1C scoring centre
  • Anthony Cirelli - 3 yrs@$4.8M - 18 g/82gms - on a CUP contender in a no-state tax state
  • Mikael Granlund - 1 yr@$3.75M - 22g/82gms previous 5 seasons

IMO Lowry is the best comparison ... Danault is better defensively but defence only gets paid so much ... makes $3.74-4M the range I would would look at.

A bit late on this ... but I think $4M would be a good friendly deal for the Habs. Danault is unlikely to get Eriksson Ek money elsewhere but $4.5M might be possible. And I think at least three years, probably more.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, tomh009 said:

A bit late on this ... but I think $4M would be a good friendly deal for the Habs. Danault is unlikely to get Eriksson Ek money elsewhere but $4.5M might be possible. And I think at least three years, probably more.

Until he signs, nothing is "late"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Unless Danault and Bergevin agree on on short contract,  I can't see Danault going for less than 5.5 in Montreal with taxes and everything.

Buying UFA years means going over 5M$ IMO.   RHN money, minimum. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, JoeLassister said:

Unless Danault and Bergevin agree on on short contract,  I can't see Danault going for less than 5.5 in Montreal with taxes and everything.

Buying UFA years means going over 5M$ IMO.   RHN money, minimum. 

 

Such a shame that KK has been so wildly inconsistent. At his best, KK would be a perfect Danault replacement; and If he were more reliable, we could just let Danault walk rather than suffer that painful overpay. As it is, we can’t really afford to let Danault go, not if we want to have a shot at a playoff run again next year. A patch-up job at #2 C (some combo of KK/Evans and maybe a C acquired at the deadline) is pretty chancy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, The Chicoutimi Cucumber said:

 

Such a shame that KK has been so wildly inconsistent. At his best, KK would be a perfect Danault replacement; and If he were more reliable, we could just let Danault walk rather than suffer that painful overpay. As it is, we can’t really afford to let Danault go, not if we want to have a shot at a playoff run again next year. A patch-up job at #2 C (some combo of KK/Evans and maybe a C acquired at the deadline) is pretty chancy.

I found it interesting that on the end-of-season media interview he mentionned a few times “KK s’en vient” translating to “KK is coming” as a reason why he turned down the offer because he wanted to know what his role would be

 

KK will replace Danault, but not right-a-way; to continue competing at a high level the Habs need Danault. If not, they’ll revert to a bubble team

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/11/2021 at 8:32 PM, The Chicoutimi Cucumber said:

 

Oh, I agree the team needs to improve. They are clearly a “tough out” in the playoffs, but the challenge is to actually make the playoffs. And if we had had that elusive top-4 puck-moving D-man, it might have helped v.s. Tampa too.

 

What I resist is the idea that Habs somehow flunked their way to the Finals or somehow didn’t “deserve” to get there. They did. They got monster goaltending and ground three teams (two of which are elite) into powder.


absolutely… a team that ups their game that much deserves the run they had. I think too many people thought they would be easy to beat. They played well to their strengths in the playoffs, they just didn’t have an answer for Tampa..

 

had the isles managed to knock off Tampa, I suspect the habs and isles would have been a game 7 toss up.

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.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...