GDT Nov. 24, Habs vs Capitals, 7 PM

[The Chicoutimi Cucumber]

Petry is a mystery.

 

Has he just gotten old?

 

Is he playing through injury?

 

Did he really suffer from the short summer?

 

Is he the defensive equivalent of Jake Allen - i.e., very good as a #2, not too successful as a #1? (What is puzzling with this is that his minutes were high when he was the #2 and they're high now; it's not as though he is suddenly being asked to take on minutes he did not previously play. So if he is struggling as the "#1 guy" that would seem to be a largely psychological issue).

[Commandant]

The good news is the Chiarot-Savard pairing is back in practice today. 

 

OH Vey

[GHT120]

15 hours ago, hockeyrealist said:

... and regarding you question about D on PK, all five guys do, especially the four skaters ...

 

Assume that was tongue-in-cheek/sarcastic ... with the 29th ranked penalty kill (68.2%), there certainly is a lack of defence being played on the Habs PK ... the Habs give up goals at a rate that exceeds what all but one team (Edmonton) scores them on the PP ... the 15th/16th ranked PKs (i.e, the median of the league) are at 81.6/82%) ... Habs would need to kill the next 50 penalties to be "average".

[alfredoh2009]

2 hours ago, dlbalr said:

 

Call me crazy but I think Savard has been one of Montreal's better blueliners the last couple of weeks.  The glaring mistakes haven't been as frequent and he seems to have settled in a bit.  So I'm not surprised he had decent numbers - particularly last night - when he probably was their best blueliner considering how bad the top pairing was and Wideman/Niku's defensive difficulties.

I kind of saw the same, but I was not sure enough to post it.

I would like a top four of Chiarot-Petry and Edmundson-Savard instead of what we saw in training recently. I think Savard will be more reliable if paired with Edy

[The Chicoutimi Cucumber]

I said early in the semester...as was true of Edmundson, we do need to give Savard time to adjust.

 

20 games in would about the point where I'd expect to see him to consistently show improvement IF he is gonna improve. So, let's take that as a hopeful sign. Lord knows we need all that we can get.

[Commandant]

I have no issue with Savard on his own, he's a 4/5 dman and paid as such. 

 

My issue is the coaching... and the pairings they put him on.  Know what you have and use it properly. 

 

Dom Ducharme is a like a baker making two cakes... .one cake gets all flour and no sugar... the other cake gets all sugar and no flour.

[The Chicoutimi Cucumber]

2 hours ago, Commandant said:

I have no issue with Savard on his own, he's a 4/5 dman and paid as such. 

 

My issue is the coaching... and the pairings they put him on.  Know what you have and use it properly. 

 

Dom Ducharme is a like a baker making two cakes... .one cake gets all flour and no sugar... the other cake gets all sugar and no flour.

 

I am always amazed when highly paid professional coaches seem to miss what is glaringly obvious to nearly every other observer on the planet. This doesn’t happen as much as fans think it does, but this does seem to be a genuine case of it. It’s as if the playoff success has pledged him to undying loyalty to the principle of bizarrely imbalanced D pairs.

[GHT120]

12 minutes ago, The Chicoutimi Cucumber said:

I am always amazed when highly paid professional coaches seem to miss what is glaringly obvious to nearly every other observer on the planet. This doesn’t happen as much as fans think it does, but this does seem to be a genuine case of it. It’s as if the playoff success has pledged him to undying loyalty to the principle of bizarrely imbalanced D pairs.

RIGHTLY OR WRONGLY (I cannot emphasize that enough), I suspect DD and LR are just not confident that any of Romanov, Norlinder, Niku, Wideman or Kulak (when with the team) are really ready to handle true 2nd pairing minutes ... with separate partners, Chiarot and Savard give DD&LR two pairings that they can't really depend on for bigger minutes, but they have confidence playing them together gives them a 2nd pairing that can carry more minutes and insulate whoever forms the 3rd pairing.

[tomh009]

At this point in time, the season is pretty much a write-off, anyway. Why not try to see whether we can turn Kulak, Niku and/or Wideman into a decent puck-moving pairing for one of the heavier D? If it works, we have at least a partial improvement to the mobility of our D, and if it doesn't ... well, there is not much to lose anyway.

[DON]

15 minutes ago, tomh009 said:

At this point in time, the season is pretty much a write-off, anyway. Why not try to see whether we can turn Kulak, Niku and/or Wideman into a decent puck-moving pairing for one of the heavier D? If it works, we have at least a partial improvement to the mobility of our D, and if it doesn't ... well, there is not much to lose anyway.

If Wideman keep up 0.5pts/gm till deadline day, i would assume he would have good trade value?

Would love to see Niku get extended string of games with 1/2 decent icetime and see if any promise in his game.

Kulak is what he is; overpaid, inconsistent & mediocre at both ends of ice.

[dlbalr]

2 hours ago, DON said:

If Wideman keep up 0.5pts/gm till deadline day, i would assume he would have good trade value?

 

Maybe.  Look back to Gustafsson a year ago (10 points in 24 games) and the Habs got him basically for free.  Some of that was contract-related but it was also because since there were concerns about needing to shield him.  If Wideman can play 15+ minutes a game on a regular basis as a #6 and put up points, he'll have a decent market especially with a minimum contract.  But if they have to shield him and at times play seven defencemen, then he's just another Brad Hunt except for changing a booming shot (Hunt) for good passing (Wideman).  

 

(Hunt is a PP specialist type of defenceman who has bounced around on cheap contracts for a few years, produces a bit when he plays, but has next to no value on the trade market.)