Jump to content

What do we need going forward?


REV-G

Recommended Posts

I read an article recently and it listed the starting lineup for the game that night and I was a little surprised. What surprised me as I looked at the starting lineup was what I believe we still need in order to be a playoff and contending team in the next few years among the forwards, and for me our needs are still substantial.

 

I feel good about our defence going forward with the young guys we have in the starting lineup now, in the AHL and what we've drafted. I think we've got a solid foundation in place on defence. It's the forwards and goalies that I was a bit surprised at what we're lacking. 

 

For the forwards, the starting lineup listed was:

Caufield - Suzuki - Dach

Dadonov - Monahan - Drouin

Hoffman - Dvorak - Gallagher

Slafkovsky - Evans - Armia

 

Josh Anderson - suspended. 

 

I think we would agree that our first line is a solid, NHL first line with some elite talent emerging. But after that, looking forward I only see 4 forwards out of 9 that could be part of our young, rebuilding team. I see Slafkovsky, Anderson, Dvorak and Evans possibly sticking, but the rest of Dadonov, Monahan (he could remain as an experienced veteran??), Drouin, Hoffman, Gallagher and Armia are likely not going to be around or part of the team going forward. 

 

So what has left me wondering is who do we have coming up in the next year or two for our second and third lines? Depending on where we finish this year we could have a really good top 5 draft pick, but unless we start to lose a lot more games, there seems to be more teams than what I expected that are doing really poorly, meaning it may be harder than what many of us expected for us to finish nearer to the bottom rather than closer to the middle of the pack. 

 

It appears that Carey Price is done. If we assume that, we don't have his heir apparent. We're still lacking a young, solid, promising young goalie that could be our goalie of the future. 

 

Any thoughts on what we will or could do regarding our 2nd and 3d lines and goalies going forward? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have hopes for at least a couple of our prospect forwards becoming top-6ers, especially Beck and Mesar. Kidney, Roy, and Farrell also look promising.

 

Allen seems like a decent option in goal for the mid term future.

 

We'll start to lose more and wind up with a good pick.

 

We just have to hope for more high-scoring regulation losses, a productive deadline, and to continue to patiently play the long game.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A reason I do not want to chase a playoff spot is that only one line is scoring so far this season ... by Sportsnet's EARLY 2023 ranking 9 of the top 10 prospects (i.e., everyone but their # 2, RW Matvey Michkov) is a centre ... in fact, for some reason I almost want Adam Fantelli more than Bedard (perhaps because he is a "newer" name in the discussion) ... and not certain I see Dvorak as more than a very good 3C and am happy to leave Dach on RW if that is where he produces the best.

 

The higher the draft position, the higher the Habs pick in each round ... along with any extra picks they end (late first, second or third) up with gives them a better chance to be able to take a shot at whoever are considered the better goalie prospects.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This team is overperforming the analytics.  We've played 1/8th of the season and have a better record than we expected in this small sample.  But based on the analytics we are still the bottom 10 team most expected and doubt we are chasing a playoff spot. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Commandant said:

This team is overperforming the analytics.  We've played 1/8th of the season and have a better record than we expected in this small sample.  But based on the analytics we are still the bottom 10 team most expected and doubt we are chasing a playoff spot. 

 

I agree with you, over performing is a nice way to put it.

 

To reply to the thread: I would NOT add any player that would lessen the chances of drafting high. I would trade assets at any time in the season to support development of the future/young core

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree with Alfredoh.  There is no point to adding in an attempt to make the playoffs this year.  

 

We continue to need RHD help and G help as two.priorities for future but overall you just want to keep adding future talent with the view to a ling term build.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Commandant said:

This team is overperforming the analytics.  We've played 1/8th of the season and have a better record than we expected in this small sample.  But based on the analytics we are still the bottom 10 team most expected and doubt we are chasing a playoff spot. 

 

Hopefully we'll start underperforming the analytics to compensate. Finishing 10th last wouldn't be ideal. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Commandant said:

I agree with Alfredoh.  There is no point to adding in an attempt to make the playoffs this year.  

 

We continue to need RHD help and G help as two.priorities for future but overall you just want to keep adding future talent with the view to a ling term build.

Yes, RHD and G ... we may have a future starter G in our system but more likely not yet, so we need more tickets for that voodoo lottery.

 

But, for this season, both our D and G have been good enough to make the team competitive (against expectations!),even if we end up losing the game, and that really should be enough this season, we simply don't need to make the playoffs this year. I hope (and expect!) that any trades of veteran players, whether now or at the deadline, will bring us futures rather than current roster players.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, tomh009 said:

I hope (and expect!) that any trades of veteran players, whether now or at the deadline, will bring us futures rather than current roster players.

If they dealt Anderson & package for a young'ish' top 4 RH d-man, that would work for me, but in general agree. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, DON said:

If they dealt Anderson & package for a young'ish' top 4 RH d-man, that would work for me, but in general agree. 

 

in stock trade terms: I don't want to short Anderson, let's wait for the rebound and trade on the news not on the trend

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, DON said:

If they dealt Anderson & package for a young'ish' top 4 RH d-man, that would work for me, but in general agree. 

Think it would be an expensive "package" for a young-ish, legit top 4 RHD ... with term, which IMO is a key criterion ... Anderson is a 21g/15a per 82 game player, who has only once played 82 games ... his full season average is 55 games.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Great thread.

 

Squinting two years into the future, I also wonder about FW depth. It’s a strength right now, but the bottom half of our FW roster will basically be gone by then. We’ll need a wave of FWs coming up and playing well over the next couple of seasons. Do we have the prospect pool to make that happen? Beats me.

 

The promising play of the young D suggests that, contrary to my fears over the past couple of seasons, we’ll be OK on the back end. But unless Monty really does hit another level, we have a gaping organizational hole at G.

 

As fun as this season is turning out to be, it is still far from clear that we have a future champion in the making here IMHO.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, alfredoh2009 said:

in stock trade terms: I don't want to short Anderson, let's wait for the rebound and trade on the news not on the trend

 

Don't know that many GMs trade based on short-term news that contradicts established trends ... especially with four more years beyond 22/23 on the contract.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, GHT120 said:

Think it would be an expensive "package" for a young-ish, legit top 4 RHD ... with term, which IMO is a key criterion ... Anderson is a 21g/15a per 82 game player, who has only once played 82 games ... his full season average is 55 games.

Naw, could be one on entry-level deal still.

3 hours ago, alfredoh2009 said:

 

in stock trade terms: I don't want to short Anderson, let's wait for the rebound and trade on the news not on the trend

Who is saying you should or need to trade Anderson tomorrow?

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, DON said:

Who is saying you should or need to trade Anderson tomorrow?

 

you didn't write that, I know.

 

I just couldn't resist replying using the stock trading lingo :nuts:

 

I tend to spend hours looking for potential trades; and to be honest, the Habs are carrying lots of dead weight at this moment including Anderson. He is playing at the same level as Armia!!!

Last year he did better and looking back, he was a better asset to trade then. I am hoping that by the 30-35 game mark Anderson and the other trade chips have regained their  value

Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, DON said:

Naw, could be one on entry-level deal still ...

 

Guess it depends on how "ish" they are.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, alfredoh2009 said:

you didn't write that, I know.

 

I just couldn't resist replying using the stock trading lingo :nuts:

 

I tend to spend hours looking for potential trades; and to be honest, the Habs are carrying lots of dead weight at this moment including Anderson. He is playing at the same level as Armia!!!

Last year he did better and looking back, he was a better asset to trade then. I am hoping that by the 30-35 game mark Anderson and the other trade chips have regained their  value

I see Anderson a guy who will always be overvalued because if his mix of size, speed, and potential to be a 20+ goal guy.

 

I also see him as a guy his go can’t stay healthy (part of his reckless style), but a guy who will probably always be associated with his potential. 
 

id move him as part of a package for for a solid d prospect that has #1 pairing potential. Deadline or draft move though. Not a November move.

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...