Talon Posted November 16, 2006 Share Posted November 16, 2006 What about SAMSONOV?!?! He's a right-handed shot... He doesn't shoot though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Psycing Posted November 16, 2006 Share Posted November 16, 2006 Just a krazy idea... I actually don't like Higgins playing center too much because he makes for a great winger along the boards... but his 2-way play is much more suited for Center than Kovy. Was is everyone so interested in moving Higgins back to centre after he failed to make it as a centre in the AHL and NHL and then had tremendous success as a LW'er? Just thought I'd point out that I'm well aware of that, and mentioned it in my post... however.. I read awhile back when the 2nd Line was struggling that Carbonneau mentioned that he had thought of using Higgins with Samsonov and Kovalev. That's why I went back to it. I'm just itching to see Koivu play with Samsonov... but I don't know that it will happen. I'd love to have a line of Samsonov/Koivu with a Power-Forward type (such as Latendresse or Higgins) but all are LW's. Samsonov does have a R-shot which could see him moved to the RW position, but that didn't work to well when he played there this season when Perezhogin played LW on that line. The problem is that we have too many LWers when Higgins get's back now. Someone is going to have to play out of position. Higgins - Koivu - Ryder Samsonov - Kovalev - Kostitsyn Perezhogin - Bonk - Johnson Latendresse - Plekanec - Downey (Begin - plays best as LW) Murray Come the return of all our injured players in early-to-mid December, we're going to have too many bodies. What I believe this indicates is a potential trade to address one of our needs: A solid #2 Center, an all-around defenseman, or a better suited 2-way RW player for the 4th line. I'm actually quite happy with our top-6 defensemen, but we could use another guy who can do it all like Markov. So let me get this straight. Lats had zero points in 13 games. That warrented a promotion. He now has 5 points. Ryder has 10 points. Why would I dump Ryder over a few games? You seem to assume that Lats will continue to score at this level, while Ryder will not. We don't really know about Lats, but we do know that Ryder is streaky and he could turn around and get 5 goals over the next few games. He could easily had 3 goals last night, i thought he played better then Lats (last night). So I just don't get the logic. Once Higgins gets back, the first line should go back to Ryder, Koivu, and Higgins. I want to see if Lats can produce on the 3rd or 4th line (maybe even the 2nd). If he is so awesome, he will. To date, Ryder and Higgins have convinced me that can contribute on the 1st line, and the second line. In reply to you, the only player I feel that could knock Ryder out of position is Kostitsyn. Latendresse plays the LW, so even if he does great, or sucks monkey butt, it won't affect Ryder's position because Ryder plays the right side. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colin Posted November 16, 2006 Share Posted November 16, 2006 Higgins-Koivu-Latendresse Kosty-Kovy-Sammy Perez-Bonk-Johnson Begs-Plex-Murray/Downie/Lapierre Komi-Markov Dandy-Rivet Cube-Streit Huet Souray and Ryder potentially to net us a centre thus moving Kovy back to the wing and popping Sammy or Kosty to the 4th. For the first time in a long time, we have a surplus of NHL-calibre players. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cfposi Posted November 16, 2006 Share Posted November 16, 2006 Begs-Plex-Murray/Downie/Lapierre How long are we going to expand the 4th line? First it was Murray/Downey, then Murray/Downey/Kosts, now it is Murray/Downey/Lapierre. The way I see it, that spot should be reserved for rookies trying to break in. Instead of holding on to Murray/Downey, make that line Begin - Pleks - [insert Rookie], or at least Begin - Pleks - Downey/[insert Rookie] and finally get rid of Murray. JMO Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mont Royale Posted November 16, 2006 Share Posted November 16, 2006 Come the return of all our injured players in early-to-mid December, we're going to have too many bodies. What I believe this indicates is a potential trade to address one of our needs: A solid #2 Center, an all-around defenseman, or a better suited 2-way RW player for the 4th line. One thing we need to keep in mind while we plan the Habs future is that there will always be injuries. They won't go away. If there's none between now and mid-December (an unlikelihood, if you will), there will be shortly after. Look at last year (hell, look at ANY year)... the first game, Zednik went down, later it was Kovalev, then Markov... Bonk and Saku missed time... and that's not counting the numerous other times when guys were gone a few games here and there. Only Dandenault and Rivet played the whole schedule. We've seen it this year already - Bouillon out from the start, Higgins, Dandenault, Downey... it will continue. I don't think we'll necessarily have too many bodies. If so, and we have to sit or send down a player who actually knows how to play the game, it will be OK. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colin Posted November 16, 2006 Share Posted November 16, 2006 How long are we going to expand the 4th line? First it was Murray/Downey, then Murray/Downey/Kosts, now it is Murray/Downey/Lapierre. The way I see it, that spot should be reserved for rookies trying to break in. Instead of holding on to Murray/Downey, make that line Begin - Pleks - [insert Rookie], or at least Begin - Pleks - Downey/[insert Rookie] and finally get rid of Murray. JMO "We" aren't expanding anything. That's the general practice most teams use. The fourth line is the utility line to roll different players and see different things. I suspect Lapierre will get his chance as well. Since the Habs have rotated Murray, Downey, Sammy, and Dandenault through the spot, there's no reason to think they'll stop there. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
huzer Posted November 17, 2006 Share Posted November 17, 2006 Well, I'll finally chime in. While I know Carbonneau has spoken of it in the past, I don't see Montreal moving Higgins to C to center the 2nd line. The Habs don't have a dearth of wingers that are strong on the boards, and that is something Higgins has excelled at. Higgins-Koivu should stay together, and I think having Kostitsyn play on that line could be quite something. Latendresse has done decently on the top line, but I don't think that's the answer for the long term this season. I'd still use him on the PP though. I still think rather than searching for solutions between Samsonov and Kovalev, that the staff should explore breaking them up. But that opens up a whole new can of worms as to who goes where. Argh! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KoZed Posted November 19, 2006 Share Posted November 19, 2006 Sammy and Kosty were both benched after Atlanta's goal in the third. Sooner or later, Carbo will be looking for last resort solutions to get the 2nd line going. Since the 1st line keeps going even without Higgins, Carbo might actually have no other choice than put Higgins with Sammy and Kovy. I dont know if it'll mean putting Higgins at C, but having Koivu and Higgins as a 1-2 C punch could maybe match Buffalo's Briere-Drury. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnnyhasbeen Posted November 19, 2006 Share Posted November 19, 2006 Lats Saku Mikey Sammy CH Kov Phog Bonk Johnson Beg Plek Kost I lIke that Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ch_nl Posted November 19, 2006 Share Posted November 19, 2006 It's a puzzle. The first line are working great even with Higgins injuried. Once Higgins is back there will be a question on who to play left winger on the first line. How about Samsonov? Latendresse is playing well in front of the net and Kovalev is the one who gets the puck there. Higgins at Center? I don't like but it could be worth trying. Samsonov-Koivu-Ryder Latendresse-Higgins-Kovalev Plekanec-Bonk-Johnson Perezhogin-Begin-Kostitsyn Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fanny Posted November 20, 2006 Share Posted November 20, 2006 (edited) It's a puzzle. The first line are working great even with Higgins injuried. Once Higgins is back there will be a question on who to play left winger on the first line. How about Samsonov? Latendresse is playing well in front of the net and Kovalev is the one who gets the puck there. Higgins at Center? I don't like but it could be worth trying. Samsonov-Koivu-Ryder Latendresse-Higgins-Kovalev Plekanec-Bonk-Johnson Perezhogin-Begin-Kostitsyn Maybe worth trying except why did you switch Plekanec and Perogie???? Don't do ANYTHING to the third line, they're perfect just the way they are. Samsonov-Koivu-Ryder Latendresse-Higgins-Kovalev Perezhogin-Bonk-Johnson Plekanec-Begin-Kostitsyn Try it for 2 or 3 games. If it's a collossal failure, go back to the 2nd line not working and let everyone else work as they have been. Edited November 20, 2006 by Fanny Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kaos Posted November 20, 2006 Share Posted November 20, 2006 Johnson and Ryder are our only two right-handed shots. No way they'll end up on the same line; and no way either one of them will play LW. What are you talking about? Samsonov is a right handed shot. And plays leftwing Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dark_faerie87 Posted November 20, 2006 Share Posted November 20, 2006 What are you talking about? Samsonov is a right handed shot. And plays leftwing Finally! Someone else seems to have realized this! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KoZed Posted November 20, 2006 Share Posted November 20, 2006 Samsonov is a right handed shot. And plays leftwing Yeah dark_faerie pointed it out. I missed him because I was still thinking of Gainey's comments when he acquired Johnson (we got Sammy later), saying how he wanted a right-shooting RW because Ryder was the only one we had. Sammy is a rare expection. A right-shooting natural LW and never played anywhere else than LW. You're more likely to see a left shot play RW than a right shot play LW. Right-handed shots are like southpaws in baseball. It does play a role when coaches makes lines. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Habitforming Posted November 20, 2006 Share Posted November 20, 2006 Why not dump Kovalev and possibly a pick/prospect for a true #1 centre. I would say Defenseman but we already have $2.5M sitting in the box every night and Boullion is yet to return making even more money sit out. What centres are available or rumored to be (please not more forsberg thoughts. I like the guy but he is fragile) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KoZed Posted November 20, 2006 Share Posted November 20, 2006 Latendresse - Koivu - Ryder Samsonov - Higgins - Kovalev Perezhogin - Bonk - Johnson Begin - Plekanec - Kostitsyn Dont fix what ain't broken, so keep the 1st and 3rd intact. Just insert Higgins in the 2nd and keep Kosti on the roster for his intangibles. He's competitive enough to play 4th line and maybe get some PP ice time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Habitforming Posted November 20, 2006 Share Posted November 20, 2006 (edited) Latendresse - Koivu - Ryder Samsonov - Higgins - Kovalev Perezhogin - Bonk - Johnson Begin - Plekanec - Kostitsyn Dont fix what ain't broken, so keep the 1st and 3rd intact. Just insert Higgins in the 2nd and keep Kosti on the roster for his intangibles. He's competitive enough to play 4th line and maybe get some PP ice time. It sounds good in theory.....but that's all. There is no way in hell Carbo tells Higgins "after leading this team for the first part of the season Lats has played his way into your spot. Why not try the second line that can't score or give 100% effort to see how it feels?" What kind of message does that send. Higgins would lose it and might not want to stay when contract time comes around. Edited November 20, 2006 by Habitforming Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nilan Posted November 20, 2006 Share Posted November 20, 2006 It sounds good in theory.....but that's all. There is no way in hell Carbo tells Higgins "after leading this team for the first part of the season Lats has played his way into your spot. Why not try the second line that can't score or give 100% effort to see how it feels?" What kind of message does that send. Higgins would lose it and might not want to stay when contract time comes around. Its all in how Carbo sells it. How about - you've been the best player on our team, we want to give you more responsibility (center) and we need you to kick start two talented but slumping wingers. I think moving him to the second line makes a lot of sense, although he'll have to be more conservative on the forecheck which might hurt his effectiveness. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KoZed Posted November 20, 2006 Share Posted November 20, 2006 (edited) It sounds good in theory.....but that's all. There is no way in hell Carbo tells Higgins "after leading this team for the first part of the season Lats has played his way into your spot. Why not try the second line that can't score or give 100% effort to see how it feels?" What kind of message does that send. Higgins would lose it and might not want to stay when contract time comes around. You're kidding, right? The kid's just in his 2nd season in the NHL and you think he'd want to get out of town because his coach asked him to play on the 2nd line? You think he'll tell two proven vets like Sammy and Kovy "forget it guys, I dont want to play with you." ? If players would react that way, might as well fold the entire league. Higgins won't "lose it". If asked, he'll say "yes coach, I'll be glad to coach" and he'll do it. Because that's what players do, especially team players like Higgins; especially young players like Higgins. Come on, let's get real here. Edited November 20, 2006 by KoZed Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
umpalumpa55 Posted November 20, 2006 Share Posted November 20, 2006 You all make good points....lets just go smoke a duub Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Habitforming Posted November 21, 2006 Share Posted November 21, 2006 (edited) You're kidding, right? The kid's just in his 2nd season in the NHL and you think he'd want to get out of town because his coach asked him to play on the 2nd line? You think he'll tell two proven vets like Sammy and Kovy "forget it guys, I dont want to play with you." ? If players would react that way, might as well fold the entire league. Higgins won't "lose it". If asked, he'll say "yes coach, I'll be glad to coach" and he'll do it. Because that's what players do, especially team players like Higgins; especially young players like Higgins. Come on, let's get real here. Obviously he can't get out of town ...until his contract is up. If you think for one second that players don't remember you are horribly mistaken. What kind of reward system is that? "You are the best (most consistent) player on the team so to reward you for your efforts we will put you on a line that can't work with anyone we have in the system" Why would Higgins want to play with sammy and Kovalev when his production determines his payscale? Every player says "yes coach" , "I'll be glad to help" but that is not what they are thinking at all. Ask Mike Ryder last season and a few Bulldogs that have not been happy with coaching decisions of where and when they play even after being "the go to guy" for their coaches. It costs the coaching staff the respect they have earned; and considering Carboneau's short coaching resume it is something he can't take a chance on. The players feel slighted and it does come into play during contract negotiations. Let's face it, it isn't about the money anymore, it's all about the role, respect and opportunities a team gives you that sells the player on signing or returning. I'm not saying it is the case everytime, but is that a chance you want to take on a gut that hasn't hit his full potential. Watching it happen on another team is painfull. All this being said, IF Higgins gets moved to the second line I hope he can do enough to get them going night in and night out. How Higgins sees it though, is all that matters. Edited November 21, 2006 by Habitforming Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mont Royale Posted November 21, 2006 Share Posted November 21, 2006 Why would Higgins want to play with sammy and Kovalev when his production determines his payscale? Just reminiscing back to before the start of the season, when this sentence would have seemed preposterous... I do think it's a bit of stretch to say that Higgins will carry a lasting grudge if he's assigned to the second line, with (horrors!) Samsonov and Kovalev. As a professional committed to winning, he'd probably look at it as an exciting challenge, an opportunity to be part of the solution in turning that line around. Higgins strikes me as being a team-first, not me-first, kind of guy. Hopefully that's true. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kaos Posted November 22, 2006 Share Posted November 22, 2006 Yeah dark_faerie pointed it out. I missed him because I was still thinking of Gainey's comments when he acquired Johnson (we got Sammy later), saying how he wanted a right-shooting RW because Ryder was the only one we had. Sammy is a rare expection. A right-shooting natural LW and never played anywhere else than LW. You're more likely to see a left shot play RW than a right shot play LW. Right-handed shots are like southpaws in baseball. It does play a role when coaches makes lines. Only because right handed shots are realtively rare as comepared to left handed shots. They are about as rare as lefties in baseball. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Chicoutimi Cucumber Posted November 22, 2006 Share Posted November 22, 2006 (edited) Just reminiscing back to before the start of the season, when this sentence would have seemed preposterous... I do think it's a bit of stretch to say that Higgins will carry a lasting grudge if he's assigned to the second line, with (horrors!) Samsonov and Kovalev. As a professional committed to winning, he'd probably look at it as an exciting challenge, an opportunity to be part of the solution in turning that line around. Higgins strikes me as being a team-first, not me-first, kind of guy. Hopefully that's true. Agreed. Higgins is just a 2nd-year kid, NOT Jaromir Jagr; he hasn't proven a thing; he also hasn't proven that he can succeed without Koivu, which should make this a challenge, not an insult; and I doubt that even a crybaby like Jagr would whine about being shifted to a second line with that much talent, as long as he got substantial ice time. Even moody Kovalev is content to be on that line, for God's sake. The whole idea that Higgins will go ballistic and hate the Habs for life because they try him on 'line 2' is bizarre (unless, as someone points out, it's presented to him as 'sorry, Lats took your spot, you suck, go play with those pathetic dopes Samsonov and Kovalev, cause you suck.'). It's a non-issue. Edited November 22, 2006 by The Chicoutimi Cucumber Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CoRvInA Posted November 25, 2006 Share Posted November 25, 2006 Absolutely... Non issue! I'll even add ...Even if plek and the two russians do click before higgy comes back... carbo still will have to at least try a few games with Higgins on that line 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.