dlbalr Posted January 29, 2004 Share Posted January 29, 2004 Having talked to several Hab fans, as well as frequenting message boards, particularly this one, the general consensus seems to be that we're in a heap of trouble, and moves needs to be made soon, involving Kilger, Perreault, etc... Is all of this panic justified though? I think not. The fact is, we're not capable of playing at the level we were a couple of weeks ago, losing only 1 in 10 games. Are we as bad of a team as we've played in the past 3? Probably not, but in my opinion, our ability is closer to the latter rather than the former. Why you may ask? Easy, contrary to some people's beliefs, we're not overloaded with depth, although Perreault on paper is a nice 4th liner. We, like some other teams, are taking the youth route, which is OK given the current instability of the Collective Bargaining Agreement, but in doing so, we risk having to deal with potential risks in relying on youth more. One of these is that the player is not ready for full-time NHL duty. Case in point: Marcel Hossa. Here’s a player whom many thought was ready for the rigors of full-time NHL duty. Was he? In a word, no. Hossa consistently showed that he wasn’t capable of playing on the 2nd line, which was his assignment at the beginning of the season. Was he a capable 4th liner instead? Nope, he simply wasn’t ready to be a regular. We were lucky to have Dagenais ready in Hamilton, who has been able to score at the rate that we were expecting Hossa to in the preseason/early regular season. If not, our offence would be in a position that I shudder to even think about, scoring at a rate similar to that of the Pittsburgh Penguins. The second point is consistency, or currently, the lack thereof. This is what happens when 3 of your top-6 forwards saw limited NHL-action last season, or is playing in his first NHL season, which is the case with Michael Ryder. When so many of your go-to players are inexperienced, the team is bound to go through some rough stretches. With Jozef Balej currently as a second-liner, consistency is even more of a concern, although he’ll only be on that line for the short-term. With the roster we had heading into the start of the season, I, admittedly, was one of the team's detractors who didn't think this team had a chance at making the playoffs. As a whole this season, I have been pleasantly surprised with the Habs' performance through the first 51 games on the regular season. 56 points is 6 higher than we had at this point last season, and we're actually in a playoff spot, unlike last season. It seems as if some fans are now expecting the level of play we were treated to in early January on a regular basis down the stretch run, which is too high of an expectation for such a young team. The reality is, we don't have the quality of rosters that some of the teams behind us have, and that we need to rebound quickly if we want to stay ahead of them. Is it possible? By all means, even without the nice run earlier this month, we're still a .500 team, which is about the level we'll need to play at to maintain a playoff position. Anything more would be a pleasant surprise, anything less, it's not the end of world in my opinion. Many of us were calling the 2003-04 NHL season a "wash", in that it would be a time to develop and further evaluate some of our younger players, and we've done that. We've has some pleasant surprises in our youth in Ryder and Dagenais, and to a lesser extent, Balej in Hamilton, but we've also has some negatives, particularly in Hossa. This is what you ask for when you take this route, and this is what we're getting. To conclude, is it time to panic? No, our current performance (over the course of the season) is better than what many expected, and, as many say with some of our prospects, patience, people, give them some time (ie: a full season) before we overly praise or bash them. Every team goes through a slump or two during the season, but do they all panic? No, (well maybe the Rangers, but that's a different story for another day possibly) they rebound, and there isn't any evidence that says to me that we can't do the same. We're not overloaded with injuries like some other teams, and we have a goalie who can carry the team if necessary. Now, to answer the question of will we make the playoffs? I'd rather not answer at this time, but how we play in the next 8-10 games should give us a pretty accurate idea. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
puck7x Posted January 29, 2004 Share Posted January 29, 2004 Nice post... No its not time to panic , 3 more straight losses , then yes... panic. Are we capable of playing the way we did before the 3 game losing streak? In my opinion ... yes . We've been playing great from the Nov-22nd outdoor game up until the NJ/TOR/BUF games. The habs showed that they are capable of playing at a high level for a sustained period (2 straight months) , thats not a streak ... thats how we are capable of playing. Right now we're banged up , sick from the flu , and straying from Julien's system and guidlines (Ribeiro taking longer shifts again , etc.) ... Once CJ calms everyone down and reminds them of how he wants them to play , then we'll be okay. Do I think we are a contender? No ... We're missing a piece or 2 ... But I think we can do pretty well for the rest of the regular season. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westcoasthabsfan Posted January 29, 2004 Share Posted January 29, 2004 again I say Jeff O'Neill.... the guy isnt one demensional like another centre on this team who I have mentioned a time or two... he would also take some of the pressure off of Saku Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bonavistaman11 Posted January 29, 2004 Share Posted January 29, 2004 If the Habs lose against the Hawks on Sunday, then it's panic time. Right now, I dont think so.. :ghg: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dalhabs Posted January 29, 2004 Share Posted January 29, 2004 As long as the team isnt panicing I wont. Lets see what Julien and Gainey does. I think they will do the right things. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RJP Posted January 29, 2004 Share Posted January 29, 2004 Let's be straight. This is not an issue of panicking. This is an issue of playing to the teams capability. I don't think any real fan minds their team losing 3-straight if the team plays like it has the capability of, and I think they truly have the capability of being in the top 5 in the conference with maybe a tougher forward or two. Lets look at Perrault: This guy has obviously lost confidence, but in retrospect, it was his to lose. When your team is getting embarrased as they were against the Leafs and your playing on a 4th line, you do not jump over the boards with a giggle on your face and try to say something funny to Domi, who, judging by his reaction, couldn't care less about Perrault. Or, take a lazy, inexcusable penalty when we are on the PP against Buffalo that results in a goal. Or, trip yourself over your own blueline, lose the puck, force Quintal to take a penalty because of it, and Buffalo scores again on their PP. No, panicking is for the weak-minded. The fact of the matter is, they have not played the way they can, and that is the frustrating issue. Anyone watching the last 3 games knows this team had no intensity. Their feet weren't moving, they were lazy and soft. Tired? won't accept that. Hurt? OK, excuse a few, but all of them? In my opinion, you get paid to give a 100% not just show up, and with the Habs, we can only win games in which we compete. If we lose, but competed, then as a fan you accept that because you can't win every game. But to lose because you didn't compete, then ........... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Habs77 Posted January 29, 2004 Share Posted January 29, 2004 On RDS yesterday they showed an interesting stat about how teams fall hard after a nice run. Like our Habs who went on a great stretch since the Outdoor Classic but have now sudenly run into hard times. They showed how a few teams were something like 12-1-2... then went 3-9-2, or similar numbers. The teams were Boston, Philly, a few others I can't remember right now... the only team that didn't fall flat after a good run was NJ who managed to avoid a slide. The point is this is normal, happens to alot of teams... so no it's not panic time. And we had much lower expectations than the other teams that went up then down this year... I agree that us relying so much on youth makes us more susceptible to a 2nd half downturn. So does being a small team, fighting against bigger players all year takes a toll. That's why this is a good time for Gainey to make a move, bring in some new blood, new energy, and more of a veteran big-body presence. It's not panic time, but it is a good time to make a move. P.S. The age old question of whether we can afford to have two small top centers re-emerged after the way TO handled us... talk is that if we land Arnott for example, Koivu or Ribs would have to go... or move to the wing. RDS mentionned a Arnott/Koivu swap... add whatever on each side to even things out if you don't think it's equal value. Then land O'Neil for Hossa and a pick... or something along those lines. Ryder-Arnott-O'Neil Zednik-Ribeiro-Dagenais Bulis-Sundstrom-Ward Langdon-Begin-Kilger - That 1st line is pretty big/physical... and can score. I can't remember the last time we've had a line like that. - 2nd line is ok, but remember we have Higgins, Perezhogin, Balej on the way. - Juneau and his bad back is not something I'm counting on... you could always move Ward or Sundstrom to the 4th and sit Kilger. This probably won't happen... but if Gainey really wanted to make it happen he could. I'd still like an upgrade on D as well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jl.roberts Posted January 29, 2004 Share Posted January 29, 2004 I think Gainey would trade Ribeiro before he traded Koivu. Arnott's a nice player, but he becomes a lot less likeable if we're giving up Saku to get him. I don't think the big centre thing is much of an issue. New Jersey, Colorado and Detroit never seem to have problems. Playing for the two points; giving it all every shift, playing for your teammates, and playing hard in all three zones will get you more success than having a couple of 6'4 centreman who don't do a whole hell of a lot. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Habs77 Posted January 30, 2004 Share Posted January 30, 2004 Originally posted by jl.robertsI think Gainey would trade Ribeiro before he traded Koivu. Arnott's a nice player, but he becomes a lot less likeable if we're giving up Saku to get him. I disagree about who Gainey would trade first... cheap young & tons of yet untapped potential beats older, more expensive, injury prone. But a lot of CH fans just can't shake their Saku adulation, as well as their short changing Ribeiro.. I think they both come hand in hand. Btw I'm not sold that swapping Koivu for Arnott would solve all our problems either. There's a loss of offense there, which is kind of scary on a team already offensively challenged. Then that would mean no more Koivu on the PP, and he has helped a great deal there... although of late he and Souray have cooled off big time on the PP. To the point where CJ went with Breezer & Markov and they did very well. I don't think the big centre thing is much of an issue. New Jersey, Colorado and Detroit never seem to have problems. Playing for the two points; giving it all every shift, playing for your teammates, and playing hard in all three zones will get you more success than having a couple of 6'4 centreman who don't do a whole hell of a lot. I agree getting bigger for the sake of getting bigger won't transform us into a top contender. But the teams you mention with smaller centermen... have centermen who very solid defensively, which both Koivu & Ribs are not. NJ has Madden & Gomez, Colorado has Sakic & Forsberg who is strong like a horse, Detroit has Yzerman and the excellent underrated Maltby. No way in hell can you compare that to Koivu, Ribs, Juneau... I mean c'mon. If we could land Arnott for something other than Koivu or Ribs... I'd see Koivu moving to the wing, or Arnott taking the draws then moving to the wing for the rest of the shift. Koivu would benefit tremendously from having someone who could stand up for him on his own line... as Corson used to do. Koivu-Arnott-Ryder doesn't sound too bad to me. But if we've kept Koivu, forget getting O'Neill too IMO. Next year the rest of the lines could look like: Zednik-Ribeiro-Dagenais/Balej/Perezhogin Higgins-Bulis-Ward Langdon-Begin-Kilger/whoever Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ch_nl Posted January 30, 2004 Share Posted January 30, 2004 I think it's totaly unecessary to speculate in next years line and so. Last year many was predicting that that Perezhogin, Balej, Higgins and Ward would be on our top lines. And what happend? Michael Ryder came from nowhere and has been on one of the two top-lines since season started! My point is that's is impossible to speculate in prospects. Some will make it and some will fail. And maybe the one that we suspect will be our new favourite the least in the one to make it. But it's not panic-time yet. We are in the re-building phase and Bob Gainey seems to be a Glen Sathers direct opposite. Calm and calculating. But I think we will see a one to three new players if we are still in the playoff race by trading deadline. I think Gainey will add a commig UFA to bring some physical play since it's likley we'll have to face a big Philadelphia, Toronto or New Jersey in the first round if we can keep it up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Habs77 Posted January 30, 2004 Share Posted January 30, 2004 Where exactly am I speculating so wildly? Koivu-Arnott-Ryder (all NHLers) Zednik-Ribs-Dagenais/Balej/Perezhogin (I'm keeping the present line, and ackowledging the possibility that Balej or Perezhogin could come steal Dags' spot) Higgins-Bulis-Ward (Higgins is the most NHL ready prospect we have, he'll be on the team next year... if no strike) Langdon-Begin-Kilger (present line) So basically I'm only counting on Higgins to make the team next year... not a big stretch. Thes rest will work itself out. My biggest speculation was not about the prospects, but the Arnott trade I'd say. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ch_nl Posted January 30, 2004 Share Posted January 30, 2004 Maybe it was my (poor) english that made that state sound harder than it was... It just came to my mind that all my own speculation about the Habs isn't what i expected. So I didn't meant that you are going wild... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Habs77 Posted January 31, 2004 Share Posted January 31, 2004 Originally posted by ch_nlMaybe it was my (poor) english that made that state sound harder than it was... It just came to my mind that all my own speculation about the Habs isn't what i expected. So I didn't meant that you are going wild... No prob... I agree with you that specualting on next year's lines is kinda pointless since we don't know which kids will do well, what trades or UFAs will shake up the roster. But on the other hand it's what most fans love to do... we can't help it. But then again GMs having to look forward too... even if they don't know how things will play out themselves, it's not an easy job. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ch_nl Posted January 31, 2004 Share Posted January 31, 2004 Agree. Lines, trades, prospect and free agent signing... Speculation-material. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.