2023-24 Montreal Canadiens Discussion Thread

[alfredoh2009]

Very bold statement by Marc Dumont; Struble and Xhekaj are NHL-calibre defensemen:

Quote

the Habs are a worse team when Xhekaj is not in the lineup

 

The last time we checked #GoHabsGo Jayden Struble's numbers, things were looking good.

Here's an updated Canadiens stats pack covering his excellent play, as well as a suggestion that both Struble and Arber Xhekaj definitely have their place in the NHL⬇️https://t.co/fWkeZE77TC

— Marc Dumont (@MarcPDumont) December 29, 2023

 

[DON]

13 minutes ago, alfredoh2009 said:

Very bold statement by Marc Dumont; Struble and Xhekaj are NHL-calibre defensemen:

 

Why is that bold?

 

[alfredoh2009]

6 minutes ago, DON said:

 

Why is that bold?

 

in the article he is saying how the Habs are worse off without them in the lineup and how the statistics this season show that the Habs will be better served if both Stuble and Xhekaj are in the NHL roster the rest of the season.

 

It is bold, to me, because it seems to imply that other will be squeezed out and that makes for an interesting consequence if it materializes.

 

You are right, I am probably reading too much into it.

 

Did you read the article? what do you think?

[hab29RETIRED]

38 minutes ago, alfredoh2009 said:

in the article he is saying how the Habs are worse off without them in the lineup and how the statistics this season show that the Habs will be better served if both Stuble and Xhekaj are in the NHL roster the rest of the season.

 

It is bold, to me, because it seems to imply that other will be squeezed out and that makes for an interesting consequence if it materializes.

 

You are right, I am probably reading too much into it.

 

Did you read the article? what do you think?

His conclusion is kind of silly - both Struble and Wifi have their place in the lineup - at the same time. How? Both are CURRENTLY third pairing dmen. Either one of them has to move up the lineup, or they play together on their offside. 
 

im not opposed to see if Struble can move up, but you need to move someone for that to happen. I think if they do end up moving Savard, that would create an opening as it will impact the other pairings. I wouldn’t be opposed to try move another dman to a lower pairing - Savard or Barron, but they are all righties. I don’t see the coaching staff moving them down to play a guy in their wrong side. I also don’t see them moving Savard down while they are still close to a wild card position. 
 

Secondly, the only way they could play them wifi-Struble together is together is if one of them plays in their wrong side. Don’t see that happening without a move.

 

IF they move Matheson, that would create an opportunity for Struble to move up, but again, I don’t think they make that trade while they are still close to a wild card spot.  More likely player to move is Savard, and he is a righty, so that really doesn’t create room. No way they are going to move Guhle - that would be a Rejean Houle type of move!!!

Lastly, while their stats may look good on the bottom pairing, not sure how they’d translate if we either were moved up a spot. I’m not opposed to trying Struble up a spot, but there really isn’t any room for him unless another move is made.

 

im all for moving Matheson if someone overpays, Injust don’t think they will do that UNTIL they fall in the standings - which I think is inevitable.

[alfredoh2009]

I do not think Marc Dumont was suggesting playing Xhekaj and Struble as a pair, but that both deserve to be in the NHL. If with the Habs, I understand that as being:

LD-RD

Struble-RD

Xhekaj-RD

 

with one of Guhle, Matheson, Harris being the other NHL-level LDs... and Engstrom and Hutson coming up through the system. That is great depth on LD

[Commandant]

Matheson and Guhle both have to be in your top 2 pairs.  

 

Scratching one is ####ing crazy talk

[Habs Fan in Edmonton]

Bottom line is that (barring a lot of injuries) the Habs will have a surplus of defensemen which is a good problem. Trades will have to be made. Hopefully Hughes can maximize value and get some help up front. 

[hab29RETIRED]

1 hour ago, Commandant said:

Matheson and Guhle both have to be in your top 2 pairs.  

 

Scratching one is ####ing crazy talk

Agreed. But I do think Matheson may be moved this year or next if someone is willing to overpay. 

[hab29RETIRED]

32 minutes ago, Habs Fan in Edmonton said:

Bottom line is that (barring a lot of injuries) the Habs will have a surplus of defensemen which is a good problem. Trades will have to be made. Hopefully Hughes can maximize value and get some help up front. 

At some point yes. But non need to make a decision this year. we don’t know if Reinbacher and Hutson will be ready for that NHL next year, or if Mailloux will need another year in Laval.
 

I think we probably move Savard this year (for sure next year), and Matheson next year. So will have some spots open up.

 

[Habs Fan in Edmonton]

41 minutes ago, hab29RETIRED said:

At some point yes. But non need to make a decision this year. we don’t know if Reinbacher and Hutson will be ready for that NHL next year, or if Mailloux will need another year in Laval.
 

I think we probably move Savard this year (for sure next year), and Matheson next year. So will have some spots open up.

 

 

Agreed that no major moves need to be made with the young guys this year. Hopefully the Hab veterans are healthy at the trade deadline this year. 

[GHT120]

33 minutes ago, Habs Fan in Edmonton said:

Agreed that no major moves need to be made with the young guys this year. Hopefully the Hab veterans are healthy at the trade deadline this year. 

None *** NEED *** to be made ... but if another team makes an offer that HuGo feels sufficiently overvalues a young defenceman (i.e., compared to what HuGo project him to become) then I think they have to consider it.

[Habs Fan in Edmonton]

29 minutes ago, GHT120 said:

None *** NEED *** to be made ... but if another team makes an offer that HuGo feels sufficiently overvalues a young defenceman (i.e., compared to what HuGo project him to become) then I think they have to consider it.

 

Of course, if a team makes an offer that overvalues any player (young, old, forward, goalie, etc etc) then Hughes has to consider it. 

[DON]

42 minutes ago, Habs Fan in Edmonton said:

 

Of course, if a team makes an offer that overvalues any player (young, old, forward, goalie, etc etc) then Hughes has to consider it. 

Suzuki, Slafkovski, Reinbacher & Caufield likely seen as 'the' core guys. The rest could be swapped for young NHLer/prospects/picks.

[DON]

Holy whining Batman!

 

Bottom Six Minutes: Habs should recall Xhekaj, send Barron down (habseyesontheprize.com)

[tomh009]

1 hour ago, DON said:

Suzuki, Slafkovski, Reinbacher & Caufield likely seen as 'the' core guys. The rest could be swapped for young NHLer/prospects/picks.

So, suppose you swap Guhle for an early first-rounder-plus. Assuming that you hit on your draft pick, you now have a hot prospect--who is 18 years old next June (assuming you got a 2024 pick and not a 2025 one), rather than 21 as Guhle will be. And that prospect will then need three years of development to mature to the Guhle level. Same for trading Dach or Newhook.

 

What you have just done is delay the Habs' contention window. This is the total opposite of what Hughes and Gorton did with the trades for Dach and Newhook, acquiring promising young players in exchange for picks.

 

While Hughes may be swayed by a massive overpay, I don't think he'll be much interested in trading young players (who have proven that they belong in the NHL) for picks, unless it's players that cannot crack the Habs' starting lineup.

[The Chicoutimi Cucumber]

On 12/29/2023 at 4:40 PM, tomh009 said:

So, suppose you swap Guhle for an early first-rounder-plus. Assuming that you hit on your draft pick, you now have a hot prospect--who is 18 years old next June (assuming you got a 2024 pick and not a 2025 one), rather than 21 as Guhle will be. And that prospect will then need three years of development to mature to the Guhle level. Same for trading Dach or Newhook.

 

What you have just done is delay the Habs' contention window. This is the total opposite of what Hughes and Gorton did with the trades for Dach and Newhook, acquiring promising young players in exchange for picks.

 

While Hughes may be swayed by a massive overpay, I don't think he'll be much interested in trading young players (who have proven that they belong in the NHL) for picks, unless it's players that cannot crack the Habs' starting lineup.

 

I like this post because it shows a concern for the “window” that I think has been too absent in discussions about the rebuild. Part of me thinks that fans are a little too comfortable with being in the rebuild phase…it’s anxiety free, and we live in a perpetual state of pleasant hope for the future. There’s a certain seductiveness to saying “just wait three years,” year after year. But the organization will need to flip the switch from that passively narcotic state sooner or later. Preferably sooner.

 

Suzuki will be 25 next season. Not a kid anymore. We should be looking to make the playoffs next year and developing into a serious contender 1-2 years after that.

 

We have endured the growing pains of our incredible crop of defencemen, presumably with an eye to having them be ready to play serious games on something like that timeline. I’m in no rush to now trade the best of them unless, as you say, we get an absolutely killer return. 

[Habs Fan in Edmonton]

4 minutes ago, The Chicoutimi Cucumber said:

 Part of me thinks that fans are a little too comfortable with being in the rebuild phase…it’s anxiety free, and we live in a perpetual state of pleasant hope for the future. There’s a certain seductiveness to saying “just wait three years,” year after year. But the organization will need to flip the switch from that passively narcotic state sooner or later. Preferably sooner.

 

 

I tend to agree. I went into this year optimistic that the Habs could really surprise and take a big step forward. Then Dach is out for the season in game 2 and I was deflated. It put me back into that rebuild phase of thinking as Dach is such an important piece for the forward group. Next year I will start really optimistic again and hope the injury gods look the other way for a change. 

[DON]

Almost everyone picked Habs to finish in bottom third of league and they seem to be headed that way.

A lost prime development year for Dach & Newhook really really sucks though, but i guess it should allow another young'ish' player some ice time (or Armia-Pezzetta-Stephens i guess). 

[tomh009]

The Habs have lost three straight on this road trip now, after taking five of six points in the first three games. Tomorrow's game in Dallas is the last chance to come out of this tour with seven of fourteen possible points.

 

And yet, I'm not entirely unhappy. The team has not been blown out, they have been in all three games with a chance to win. Some different puck luck, some different refereeing decisions or some more care avoiding penalties (too many men, pulling a helmet off etc) and they could have won a game or two.

 

Some individual players have made mistakes, but the young ones are still learning, and the veterans won't be with us much longer, so those mistakes are not a concern for me in the long term. On the other hand, Slafkovsky's improved play is a hugely encouraging indicator, and Caufield's efforts in the D-zone make me super happy.

 

We lost Dach for essentially the entire season, and Newhook for half of it. If we get one more decent first-round pick out of this season, and then start a serious drive for a playoff spot next year, I'm OK with that.

[hab29RETIRED]

5 hours ago, The Chicoutimi Cucumber said:

 

I like this post because it shows a concern for the “window” that I think has been too absent in discussions about the rebuild. Part of me thinks that fans are a little too comfortable with being in the rebuild phase…it’s anxiety free, and we live in a perpetual state of pleasant hope for the future. There’s a certain seductiveness to saying “just wait three years,” year after year. But the organization will need to flip the switch from that passively narcotic state sooner or later. Preferably sooner.

 

Suzuki will be 25 next season. Not a kid anymore. We should be looking to make the playoffs next year and developing into a serious contender 1-2 years after that.

 

We have endured the growing pains of our incredible crop of defencemen, presumably with an eye to having them be ready to play serious games on something like that timeline. I’m in no rush to now trade the best of them unless, as you say, we get an absolutely killer return. 

I think we need to try and be a bubble team that squeaks in next year, and be a playoff team next year. Having said that’s not going to happen unless at least the majority of the following happen:

1) Dach is healthy,and productive as a viable 1a/1b

2) Caufield starts producing like the 40 goal scorer we all think he is.

3) more consistency and production from Suzuki.

4) Slafkovsky continues to develop and starts producing- he still has another couple of years to become the player we hope he will be - but he has to start being a productive presence.

5) we have at least two forwards step up from Laval by the end of this year and show that they can produce at the NHL level.

6) At least three of of young Dmen take the next steps in their development - Guhle needs to be a legit #1/2 type of guy and has to play like he would be one on a GOOD team. Struble continues to impress, improve and not be a victim of the sophomore regression. At least one of Harris, Barron, or Wifi show they are  capable of legit top line minutes. Ideally, Matheson gets pushed to the second pairing (I’m assuming Savard will be gone).

7) Hutson shows he can at least step in and help the PP and shows that he can play in the NHL - even though he shouldn’t be expected to be a star right away.

8) we get rid of some dead weight in the lineup - Armia, Dvorak (no hope of dumping Gallagher), to create some cap room to bring in a proven scorer.

9) goaltending- Montembeault needs to show he can be top 10 goalie - with the young D, we are going to need it.

 

A lot has to go right for us to make it next year, and I wouldn’t look at the fact that we are close to a playoff spot to think we can win without changes up front to get more scoring, and a drastic improvement on D. That’s why I think 25/26 is the year to target - more development time for the kids and we will either be rid of or have a better opportunity to move contracts that are hard to move for guys that are not consistent or reliable - Armia, Svorak and Anderson.

[hab29RETIRED]

1 hour ago, tomh009 said:

The Habs have lost three straight on this road trip now, after taking five of six points in the first three games. Tomorrow's game in Dallas is the last chance to come out of this tour with seven of fourteen possible points.

 

And yet, I'm not entirely unhappy. The team has not been blown out, they have been in all three games with a chance to win. Some different puck luck, some different refereeing decisions or some more care avoiding penalties (too many men, pulling a helmet off etc) and they could have won a game or two.

 

Some individual players have made mistakes, but the young ones are still learning, and the veterans won't be with us much longer, so those mistakes are not a concern for me in the long term. On the other hand, Slafkovsky's improved play is a hugely encouraging indicator, and Caufield's efforts in the D-zone make me super happy.

 

We lost Dach for essentially the entire season, and Newhook for half of it. If we get one more decent first-round pick out of this season, and then start a serious drive for a playoff spot next year, I'm OK with that.

I’m happy with his improvement in the D zone, but we aren’t paying him to be Bob Gainey. We need him to be the 40+ goal scorer he is capable of becoming. I think part of his issue is probably needing time to get his timing back after shoulder surgery.but I also think part of the issue is his linemates. Too many times passes are behind him, and he has to reach back, get control before shooting, instead of unleashing his wicked one timer. The other issue is that as usual, the pass to Caufield is so predictable, that the opposition has two guys on him a lot of the time. Even though his covered, Matheson has made idiotic attempts to pass it to Caufield, when Slafkovsky has been open. Until the team learns to use the double coverage on Caufield to their advantage by passing to other guys that are open, his teammates will continue to limit Caufield’s effectiveness.

[tomh009]

26 minutes ago, hab29RETIRED said:

I’m happy with his improvement in the D zone, but we aren’t paying him to be Bob Gainey.

Not Gainey, but it would not be a bad thing to see some hints of MacKinnon or Bergeron in him. He's a sniper, no doubt, but if he can also help prevent the other team from scoring as much while  he's on the ice, it will make him that much more valuable to the Habs.

[The Chicoutimi Cucumber]

CC’s teammates can’t be the main cause of his limited production this season…he scored at a much higher clip last year, when his teammates were no better.

 

It’s possible that the cause is that he is focusing more on his 200-foot game. He wouldn’t be the first offensively gifted player to see his production drop as coaches lean on him to become a more rounded player. That troubles me, though, because it suggests that his ceiling may be lower than I thought; i.e., instead of becoming a reliable 40-goal man, he settles in as a 25-30 goal guy who is reliable in all zones. Which is nice and all, but not the Cole Caufield I was hoping for.

 

That’s why I really, really hope Commandant is right and that the real cause is after-effects of his shoulder surgery. His shot has not been going in as reliably this season, so that’s a plausible theory. We won’t really know until next season.

[REV-G]

If Savard is moved, what do you think a reasonable return would be? 

 

A 1st? 2nd? Or a decent prospect?? 

[alfredoh2009]

14 minutes ago, The Chicoutimi Cucumber said:

CC’s teammates can’t be the main cause of his limited production this season…he scored at a much higher clip last year, when his teammates were no better.

 

It’s possible that the cause is that he is focusing more on his 200-foot game. He wouldn’t be the first offensively gifted player to see his production drop as coaches lean on him to become a more rounded player. That troubles me, though, because it suggests that his ceiling may be lower than I thought; i.e., instead of becoming a reliable 40-goal man, he settles in as a 25-30 goal guy who is reliable in all zones. Which is nice and all, but not the Cole Caufield I was hoping for.

 

That’s why I really, really hope Commandant is right and that the real cause is after-effects of his shoulder surgery. His shot has not been going in as reliably this season, so that’s a plausible theory. We won’t really know until next season.

if it is the injury, I hope it is not the type that forever limits him, like Drouin's wrists (I could not think of anything else, not looking to trigger anyone).

 

His goal where he stole the puck from Stamkos was great and if that is the type of player he may become, I would not mind. I am glad his latest drought comes under MSL as coaching will not be questioned; last time it happened it got the coach fired.  I am hopeful that he will learn from this season and be a more productive player in the future. I have felt most of the time he would hover around 30 goals for the best part of his career, and because of my lower expectations I am happy with his development.