Jump to content

Mar. 5, Habs vs Oilers, 7 PM


dlbalr
 Share

Recommended Posts

3 minutes ago, alfredoh2009 said:

 

those holes need to be addressed with a proper hockey move. The past two GMs (Gainey and Bergevin) believed that they could tweak the team into contention and "with a goalie like Price, anything can happen" in the playoffs.

 

That era is done, and the team has to be transformed into a different structure from the prospects to the team stars. The moves Hugh-Gort (or Hugo as some call him) seem to point in that direction: a team not built around Price anymore, a team that develops high skilled players and plays a fast offensive-first game.

 

And "anything" almost did happen in the playoffs last year but it's "rebuild" time not tweak or reset time. The Weber/Price era is over, time to move forward.  I think we will look back and say that it was a good thing they had a horrible year (or 2/3 of a year) this year because it forced them to realize that a rebuild is required. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, hab29RETIRED said:

I still think we need a proper rebuild - particularly on D. Still need to move Chiarot, and I’d move Lekhonan, if we get a 1st, or a blue chip prospect and a 2nd. Aside from that we should still be trying to move Petry, Gallagher, Hoffman, Byron, and Savard between the next two deadlines. 

 

Yeah, the back end and C are really the reasons why a full-scale rebuild is required. 

 

On D we have exactly one quality young player (Romanov), we’ve lost Weber, Petry is 34, and Edmundson is a question-mark. It’s a collection of aging, broken garbage.

 

If Price plays again, he is unlikely to be Vintage Price; and even if by some miracle is, how durable will he be? He’s 35 FFS.

 

C, as you note, is Suzuki and…???? Dvorak seems to just not be good enough, Evans’s career seems to have been derailed by concussions, Dauphin tops out as a 4th line C, Poehling may never be more than that either. 

 

Too many holes in the roster + not enough obvious saviours in sight in the minors = rebuild.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, The Chicoutimi Cucumber said:

 

C, as you note, is Suzuki and…???? Dvorak seems to just not be good enough, Evans’s career seems to have been derailed by concussions, Dauphin tops out as a 4th line C, Poehling may never be more than that either. 

 

Too many holes in the roster + not enough obvious saviours in sight in the minors = rebuild.

 

The way we look at the center position could change quickly with the right pick in the draft this year.  A configuration of Suzuki/ Wright or Cooley/ Dvorak at#3/ and then Evans/Poehling at 4 could be outstanding. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Habs Fan in Edmonton said:

 

The way we look at the center position could change quickly with the right pick in the draft this year.  A configuration of Suzuki/ Wright or Cooley/ Dvorak at#3/ and then Evans/Poehling at 4 could be outstanding. 

 

I wouldn't disagree necessarily. Look at the playoffs last season. With Slick Nick/Danault/KK/Evans we were being widely hailed as monsters down the middle.  None of those four was being asked to do more than they are capable of.

 

We subtracted two and added Dvorak. Hence the problem. If we were by some miracle able to add an impact C at the draft, then everything would be looking up again. 

 

On the other hand, assuming that even Wright or Cooley are going to step into the NHL right away and be effective is a huge assumption. In fact it's a dangerous assumption - precisely the thinking that f**ked up both KK and Galhenyuk. So even if we get those guys, thinking 2-3 years down the line makes more sense.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Even things really go badly with Evans, I don't think C is "just Suzuki". If we assume Suzuki at 1C -- and he is increasingly showing that he is capable of that, Dvorak is a credible 3C (maybe 2C, we'll see once he spends some time with St Louis), and we have Dauphin and Poehling capable of playing 4C.

 

So, the gap is really at 2C, or possibly 3C. It's not the total disaster scenario, I think.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, tomh009 said:

Even things really go badly with Evans, I don't think C is "just Suzuki". If we assume Suzuki at 1C -- and he is increasingly showing that he is capable of that, Dvorak is a credible 3C (maybe 2C, we'll see once he spends some time with St Louis), and we have Dauphin and Poehling capable of playing 4C.

 

So, the gap is really at 2C, or possibly 3C. It's not the total disaster scenario, I think.

 

Makes sense, but I need to see more from Dvorak before buying into this completely.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, The Chicoutimi Cucumber said:

Makes sense, but I need to see more from Dvorak before buying into this completely.

Same for me. He should be a 2C/3C, and has shown flashes of it. But, let's see what he can do with St Louis. As Commandant said, he has little value right now anyway, we might as well let him play for the rest of the season and see whether he can make this a better team.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, tomh009 said:

Even things really go badly with Evans, I don't think C is "just Suzuki". If we assume Suzuki at 1C -- and he is increasingly showing that he is capable of that, Dvorak is a credible 3C (maybe 2C, we'll see once he spends some time with St Louis), and we have Dauphin and Poehling capable of playing 4C.

 

So, the gap is really at 2C, or possibly 3C. It's not the total disaster scenario, I think.

 

exactly, we have a 1C (Suzuki) and three 3C/4C (Evans, Dauphin, Poehling) Dvorak is a 3C that has poor hockey IQ and cannot lead the offence on his line

 

One of Poehling, Evans, Dauphin an Dvorak has to move to make room for an NHL 2C that Habs would get through free agency (Vinny's job), drafting in the top 10 or traded for (Hugh-Gort's job)

 

It is not a total disaster but a situation that need fixing sooner than later

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, The Chicoutimi Cucumber said:

On the other hand, assuming that even Wright or Cooley are going to step into the NHL right away and be effective is a huge assumption. In fact it's a dangerous assumption - precisely the thinking that f**ked up both KK and Galhenyuk. So even if we get those guys, thinking 2-3 years down the line makes more sense.

 

I am not assuming that at all, I am looking 2-3 years down the road. The Habs should not rush anybody, hopefully they have learned their lesson. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If the team picks 1st overall... that player will be in the NHL next season.  

 

Is this montreal rushing Wright?

 

Not really.

 

The last 1st overall forward to not play in the NHL right after being drafted was Ovechkin and that was only because of the 2004-05 lockout.

 

And I honestly don't even know who it was before that.

 

The idea the Habs would be different than literally every team in this situation? Im not buying it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, Commandant said:

If the team picks 1st overall... that player will be in the NHL next season.  

 

Is this montreal rushing Wright?

 

Not really.

 

The last 1st overall forward to not play in the NHL right after being drafted was Ovechkin and that was only because of the 2004-05 lockout.

 

And I honestly don't even know who it was before that.

 

The idea the Habs would be different than literally every team in this situation? Im not buying it.

Well ... Owen power decided to return to U of Michigan this season
😉 😊

And who knows whether Yakupov, or even Lafreniere, would have benefited from another year in junior ... BUT ... I completely agree that it would be VERY unusual for a #1 over-all pick not to make the jump ... I just hope that if it is the Habs with that pick they do it because the player is ready and not because they feel they must.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Habs Fan in Edmonton said:

 

The way we look at the center position could change quickly with the right pick in the draft this year.  A configuration of Suzuki/ Wright or Cooley/ Dvorak at#3/ and then Evans/Poehling at 4 could be outstanding. 

Sure. But it by next year. So we still will suck next year, and plan accordingly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, tomh009 said:

Even things really go badly with Evans, I don't think C is "just Suzuki". If we assume Suzuki at 1C -- and he is increasingly showing that he is capable of that, Dvorak is a credible 3C (maybe 2C, we'll see once he spends some time with St Louis), and we have Dauphin and Poehling capable of playing 4C.

 

So, the gap is really at 2C, or possibly 3C. It's not the total disaster scenario, I think.

Dvorak should never have been thought as anything more than a 3C. And with roster we had, it was stupid to trade a 1st and 2nd for him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, Commandant said:

If the team picks 1st overall... that player will be in the NHL next season.  

 

Is this montreal rushing Wright?

 

Not really.

 

The last 1st overall forward to not play in the NHL right after being drafted was Ovechkin and that was only because of the 2004-05 lockout.

 

And I honestly don't even know who it was before that.

 

The idea the Habs would be different than literally every team in this situation? Im not buying it.

I think NJD should have had Hughes play another year of college. Would have gained another year to develop physically and added a year of control on the entry level contract. So just because teams don’t do it, doesn’t mean a 1st rounder should be held back. I do agree that there is no point sending a player in CHL back if he is #1 pick. Probably won’t help his development, and you can’t send him to the AHL, because of a stupid deal with the CHL. But college path players, can still benefit going back.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, GHT120 said:

Well ... Owen power decided to return to U of Michigan this season
😉 😊

And who knows whether Yakupov, or even Lafreniere, would have benefited from another year in junior ... BUT ... I completely agree that it would be VERY unusual for a #1 over-all pick not to make the jump ... I just hope that if it is the Habs with that pick they do it because the player is ready and not because they feel they must.

Power rangers as a college path player though. I think Lafreniere was not as much of a lock, and could have benefitted going back: but I doubt if the Covid situation would have benefited him in the AHL. I think the NHL should do away with the deal with the CHL when it comes to top ten, or top five 1st rounders. They should be allowed to develop in the AHL.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, GHT120 said:

Well ... Owen power decided to return to U of Michigan this season
😉 😊

And who knows whether Yakupov, or even Lafreniere, would have benefited from another year in junior ... BUT ... I completely agree that it would be VERY unusual for a #1 over-all pick not to make the jump ... I just hope that if it is the Habs with that pick they do it because the player is ready and not because they feel they must.

 

"The last 1st overall forward to not play in the NHL right after being drafted was Ovechkin and that was only because of the 2004-05 lockout."

 

Owen Power is not a forward.  Neither is Erik Johnson who returned to college for a year too. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, Commandant said:

"The last 1st overall forward to not play in the NHL right after being drafted was Ovechkin and that was only because of the 2004-05 lockout."

 

Owen Power is not a forward.  Neither is Erik Johnson who returned to college for a year too. 

Entirely my bad on Power ... apologies

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, hab29RETIRED said:

Dvorak should never have been thought as anything more than a 3C. And with roster we had, it was stupid to trade a 1st and 2nd for him.

It's what it cost to get him. I'm sure Bergevin wasn't offering any more than was necessary.

 

And if they didn't get him, our C situation would have been even worse this year. There were not a lot of other options.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dvorak was fine as the #2 c in phoenix.  I know the coyotes arent good but he was showing capable of the role.

 

I think its hard to say what his ceiling is in Montreal for the fact no one looked good earlier this year.

 

He was on a 40 point/82 game pace (16 points in 33 games, i don't count the 34th game where he played 23 seconds before being hurt) on our terrible team as well. He wouldn't have to improve much to be doing the same offensive results as Danault typically did in Montreal. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, tomh009 said:

It's what it cost to get him. I'm sure Bergevin wasn't offering any more than was necessary.

 

And if they didn't get him, our C situation would have been even worse this year. There were not a lot of other options.

If are centre position was worse, would we actually have been worse than we were prior to the coaching change? Can you finish lower than 32?

 

My point is that a team that is tanking doesn’t trade a 1st and 2nd for a guy who was reportedly “a great 3rd line centre on a team”.   Some of the posts in this and other threads implied we were tanking this year (along with 2012 and 2017). We didn’t go into these seasons trying to tank. We just sucked, management was to dumb to know it.
 

I get it, and have said it, a lot of our issues on HOW bad we were was because DD was a lousy coach. Because if the job DD did we were the worst team in the league and most likely will finish in the bottom 5.  
 

But we are also not as good as our record in the last 10 games shows. I think we would have finished between 22 to 25 with competent coaching and Price. We scraped into the playoffs last year, and at best we were a MARGINAL bubble team this year. Definitely would not have finished even in the top four in our divisison (despite last year’s memorable cup run).

 

A rational GM does not trade a 1st and a 2nd rounder for a guy like Dvorak. If we were a legit team a piece away -  sure. Go for it. But we weren’t even close. It was a dumb and desperate move, the type a gambler makes when he doesn’t know when to fold.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Isn’t this the wrong thread to be rambling about the past GM?

 

I am happy the Habs won again. I am enjoying the winning streak, shows the

roster was not destroyed before St-Louis started coaching.

 

Hoffman is really good on the O-zone. Gallagher has turned a corner and is getting points

 

Kulak continues to show he is NHL-caliber. 
Anderson is showing why the trade with CBJ was a steal.

 

Montembeault played well

 

All is positive when you are winning :) 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, alfredoh2009 said:

Isn’t this the wrong thread to be rambling about the past GM?

 

I am happy the Habs won again. I am enjoying the winning streak, shows the

roster was not destroyed before St-Louis started coaching.

 

Hoffman is really good on the O-zone. Gallagher has turned a corner and is getting points

 

Kulak continues to show he is NHL-caliber. 
Anderson is showing why the trade with CBJ was a steal.

 

Montembeault played well

 

All is positive when you are winning :) 

Kulak was also very noticeable live. After seeing Lehkonen play last night, I don't see why you trade home for a 2nd round pick. Will you get a 1st for him? Do you want to gamble that that 1st will be better than him? If he makes 3 to 3.5, I don't see why you don't just keep him. His speed, defensive prowess and fierce forechecking are too good in my view. I says keep him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, BCHabnut said:

Kulak was also very noticeable live. After seeing Lehkonen play last night, I don't see why you trade home for a 2nd round pick. Will you get a 1st for him? Do you want to gamble that that 1st will be better than him? If he makes 3 to 3.5, I don't see why you don't just keep him. His speed, defensive prowess and fierce forechecking are too good in my view. I says keep him.

 

I trade lehkonen because his value will never be higher than it is now and by the time your rebuild is over he will be 30 or 31 years old.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can't remember the play, but during the playoffs, a goalie made a save on suzuki and gave him a look. The very next play, he did it again and scored. Cheeky. Last night the goal was called back. Cheeky Suzuki scored the exact same goal. I love that competitive gene in him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

43 minutes ago, Commandant said:

 

I trade lehkonen because his value will never be higher than it is now and by the time your rebuild is over he will be 30 or 31 years old.

 

I agree, I really value Lehkonen but you trade a guy when his value is at a peak.  The question is will the other teams recognize his true value and make the right offer. As a previous poster stated, a 2nd isn't nearly good enough but a 1st definitely grabs my attention.

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...