HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Atlantic Division > Montreal Canadiens
Notices

What would you guys think of Cam Barker in MTL?

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
11-04-2008, 10:44 AM
  #51
Maxpac
Registered User
 
Maxpac's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: hockey city
Posts: 13,461
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TopProspecT View Post
Cam Barker since being called up has 3 points in 4 games, 2 G 1 A. He has being playing GOOD, especially on the powerplay. He has a cannon of a shot. I would say he is starting to realize his potential.
If any team is going to trade for him now would be the time, because im guessing by the end of the year his value will sky rocket playing for a very offensive hawk team. I doubt he is traded though, the hawks have spent a while now developing him.
That' EXACTLY what the Habs need, a cannon shooter for the pp, at a reasonable price and untaped potential, i want him

Maxpac is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-04-2008, 01:59 PM
  #52
Fozz
Registered User
 
Fozz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 6,314
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Maxpac View Post
That' EXACTLY what the Habs need, a cannon shooter for the pp, at a reasonable price and untaped potential, i want him
I don't. Never liked Barker. He does have offensive potential but his defensive play makes Brisebois look like a wall out there.

Fozz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-04-2008, 02:21 PM
  #53
shao01
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Montreal
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,290
vCash: 500
Barker IMO is O'Bryne with a much higher offensive upside. Higgins for Barker+2nd is a interesting proposal that I would consider. Would definately do it for Barker+1st.

shao01 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-04-2008, 04:34 PM
  #54
Samuelson
 
Samuelson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Country: Canada
Posts: 226
vCash: 500
I dont think we should give up higgins
he's got leadership, scoring ability, adn he's a good guy overall
Why not get someone else thats older for cheaper?

Samuelson is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-04-2008, 04:48 PM
  #55
WJG
Running and Rioting
 
WJG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Country: Ireland
Posts: 12,736
vCash: 500
Pass.

If Higgins is going to be traded, I'd rather it be Seabrook or Keith coming back (although it would obviously take more than just Higgins to land either one)

WJG is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-04-2008, 05:26 PM
  #56
Dragon
Registered User
 
Dragon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 1,126
vCash: 500
Cam Barker? I doubt MTL will deal any roster player for him.

What I like about this season is that, over the years, I saw a lot of posters suggesting we should get this star for our crappy players. And this season, most of the posters are saying... Mmmm I don't want this guy called Gaborik, I don't want Shanahan, Sundin? screw him.
No more non-sense


Last edited by Dragon: 11-04-2008 at 06:29 PM. Reason: typo
Dragon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-04-2008, 06:24 PM
  #57
xeric716x
Born To Expire
 
xeric716x's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: New Jack City
Country: Antarctica
Posts: 10,921
vCash: 500
not for higgins

xeric716x is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-04-2008, 06:54 PM
  #58
Westcoasthabsfan
Registered User
 
Westcoasthabsfan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: In Pandoras Box
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,248
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Carey Price View Post
As much as Barker will be a good NHL d-man, right now we need a more experienced guy if we are to make a run at the cup.
Like whom?

Quote:
Originally Posted by 79 André Marcoux View Post
I would keep Higgins.

That said, if Barker for Latendresse was on the table, I think that I would do it.

Project vs Project

So would I....

Quote:
Originally Posted by Maxpac View Post
That' EXACTLY what the Habs need, a cannon shooter for the pp, at a reasonable price and untaped potential, i want him
Didnt they have that already but refused to pay Streit, the Habs dont need a PP specialist which is what he is


Last edited by Beakermania*: 11-04-2008 at 07:07 PM.
Westcoasthabsfan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-04-2008, 07:31 PM
  #59
Maxpac
Registered User
 
Maxpac's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: hockey city
Posts: 13,461
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Westcoasthabsfan View Post

Didnt they have that already but refused to pay Streit, the Habs dont need a PP specialist which is what he is
And look at our pp since he's gone, it was a big mistake not to sign Streit to that 2.5 milc and give him a D job, instead we have Dandenualt at 1.75, Bégin at 1.3 and Bouillon at 1.875, what a waste or precious cash

Markov-Komisarek
Hammer-O'byrne
Streit-Georges

that would of been a killer D core and helped us to our current lacks in alot of ways, our transition game has suffered this year and we're down from 1st to 18th on the pp. Now it's too late, with Barker, we not only have a good replacement for Streit but we have a D with huge potential to build on, as much as i love Mcdonagh, he's still not a sure thing, right now our only D with untaped potential is O'byrne, sorry to report that imo, that's not good enough

Maxpac is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-04-2008, 08:24 PM
  #60
le_sean
Registered User
 
le_sean's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Ottawa
Country: Vatican City State
Posts: 15,005
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Maxpac View Post
And look at our pp since he's gone, it was a big mistake not to sign Streit to that 2.5 milc and give him a D job, instead we have Dandenualt at 1.75, Bégin at 1.3 and Bouillon at 1.875, what a waste or precious cash

Markov-Komisarek
Hammer-O'byrne
Streit-Georges

that would of been a killer D core and helped us to our current lacks in alot of ways, our transition game has suffered this year and we're down from 1st to 18th on the pp. Now it's too late, with Barker, we not only have a good replacement for Streit but we have a D with huge potential to build on, as much as i love Mcdonagh, he's still not a sure thing, right now our only D with untaped potential is O'byrne, sorry to report that imo, that's not good enough
Streit is terrible defensively and had an awful playoff. And who says the Habs would have signed him at 2.5 million? Who is certain that the team could rid itself of those overpaid veterans? If not then it means we have Streit but no Lang, I'd much rather have Lang.

le_sean is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-04-2008, 09:04 PM
  #61
Maxpac
Registered User
 
Maxpac's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: hockey city
Posts: 13,461
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by le_sean View Post
Streit is terrible defensively and had an awful playoff. And who says the Habs would have signed him at 2.5 million? Who is certain that the team could rid itself of those overpaid veterans? If not then it means we have Streit but no Lang, I'd much rather have Lang.
2 things have to be very clear

1. 3 years of Streit > 1 year of Lang

2. Streit is not that bad defensively, he was simply put in a situation where he coudn't take any risk or else he was going back up front, He was mighty fine in his zone saturday, with Georges as a partner, Streit could of been to Josh what Markov is to Komisarek.With Barker, that would be one problem solved, Barker is only 22 and in 2 years he should become a top-2 defensmen

Maxpac is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-04-2008, 09:29 PM
  #62
Mike8
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 11,096
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lyle_Odelein View Post
This whole "we need a number 4 d" idea is beyond me.

The Wings won the cup with Lilja and Brad Stuart filling in as their 4th defenceman.

The Ducks won with O'Donnell as their 4th defenceman.

The Canes won with Mike Commodore or Aaron Ward as their 4th defenceman.

The Lightning won with Sarich as their 4th defenceman.

The Devils won with Colin White as their 4th defenceman.

The Habs D isn't perfect, but I don't really see how any of these guys were head and shoulders above Boullion or Gorges. All you need at this spot is a guy that can play fairly soundly defensively and make safe plays. Most good teams rely heavily on their top 3, and use the bottom 3 a lot less. The idea of giving up Higgins to get a fourth defenceman seems to be a little over the top as far as I'm concerned. You can't sacrifice a player of Higgins' quality, just in case there might be an injury down the road. If you do, you're creating huge gaps in other areas for the team.

Just because our offensive depth is a strongpoint on the team, doesn't mean that it should be sacrificed to improve in another area. Without Higgins, the Habs are one LW injury away from having Begin or Kostopolous or Pacioretty on the 2nd line.

Anybody that expects a Beuchemin or Ohlund at the trade deadline has played too much EA hockey. If Gainey does anything, it will be grabbing a veteran #6/7 guy for a pick or a lower tier prospect.
I don't understand. Ohlund and Beauchemin are of Brad Stuart calibre. Ohlund's taken a step back in his game and is no longer a #1, or even #2 defenseman.

Brad Stuart is a legitimate #3. He's big, strong, a good skater and has a good array of talents.

On your list: Brad Stuart is an excellent #4. Lilja was not the #4. Colin White, in 2003, was an excellent young defenseman. He's lost a step, the rule changes hurt him, and he's got eye problems, so now he's more of a #5. But at that time, he was closer to what Komisarek is right now.

Mike8 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-04-2008, 09:50 PM
  #63
Lone Rogue
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Windsor, Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,506
vCash: 500
I know this is about Barker, but all of these threads end up going the same way, just tossing D-man names.

If anyone is willing to let Halak go, I say offer Halak for Jordan Leopold in Colorado. We'd most certainly lose Leopold in Free Agency, but if we wanted a D-man without losing our forward core, Leopold is the way to go.

Lone Rogue is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-04-2008, 10:18 PM
  #64
le_sean
Registered User
 
le_sean's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Ottawa
Country: Vatican City State
Posts: 15,005
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Maxpac View Post
2 things have to be very clear

1. 3 years of Streit > 1 year of Lang

2. Streit is not that bad defensively, he was simply put in a situation where he coudn't take any risk or else he was going back up front, He was mighty fine in his zone saturday, with Georges as a partner, Streit could of been to Josh what Markov is to Komisarek.With Barker, that would be one problem solved, Barker is only 22 and in 2 years he should become a top-2 defensmen
I think the Habs had a much bigger need for a Lang than they did a Streit. No Lang means Chipchura and Lapierre on the 3rd line, which brings down the offence this team focuses on. Streit had no room on this team, he's a 4th line, borderline 3rd liner. Gorges, Bouillon and O'Byrne are all better defensively. I just don't see the fit.

le_sean is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-05-2008, 09:55 AM
  #65
mcphee
Registered User
 
mcphee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 19,105
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lone Rogue View Post
I know this is about Barker, but all of these threads end up going the same way, just tossing D-man names.

If anyone is willing to let Halak go, I say offer Halak for Jordan Leopold in Colorado. We'd most certainly lose Leopold in Free Agency, but if we wanted a D-man without losing our forward core, Leopold is the way to go.
I can't bluff and say that I'm an authority on Leopold, that I lik ethe name, but with the tim ehe's missed , I wonder if he's a guy that never got to th elevel projected. Someone asked McGuire about him, and his take was that he has some nice ability, but isn't that strong in his own end, and the more I listened, I couldn't see any real difference between what he'd bring and Streit.

I know it's just talk right now, but Barker makes no sense. If he's what's advertised, Chicago doesn't deal him, if he isn't we don't want him. They aren't dealing young talent to make the playoffs this year. At least they shouldn't.

After Christmas, Gainey can evaluate what he has as opposed to what he needs.

Mike8 talked about being in between wanting size and strength or finesse, and I don't know which is best either, but I can't see that they've reached the point that they could possibly decide on a Leopold.

mcphee is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-05-2008, 01:20 PM
  #66
LyleOdelein
Registered User
 
LyleOdelein's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Renfrew
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,671
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike8 View Post
I don't understand. Ohlund and Beauchemin are of Brad Stuart calibre. Ohlund's taken a step back in his game and is no longer a #1, or even #2 defenseman.

Brad Stuart is a legitimate #3. He's big, strong, a good skater and has a good array of talents.

On your list: Brad Stuart is an excellent #4. Lilja was not the #4. Colin White, in 2003, was an excellent young defenseman. He's lost a step, the rule changes hurt him, and he's got eye problems, so now he's more of a #5. But at that time, he was closer to what Komisarek is right now.
You're right about Lilja, thanks for the correction. I think you're overestimating Brad Stuart a little bit here, but not by too much. I was mainly posting in response to the people that were saying that the Habs should give up one of Higgins or Lats to get another top 4 d-man. I think that it would be pointless for Gainey to sacrifice this team's scoring depth to improve the defence (unless a huge, huge upgrade was available for a low price).

Brad Stuart's acquisition is along the lines of what I think the Habs will do. They will acquire a depth defenseman for a low price. Stuart went for a 2nd rounder last year and a conditional 4th this year (which should give a good sense of his value). I would be perfectly happy if Gainey can acquire defensive depth in this way. If Beauchemin or Ohlund is available at the deadline for a 2nd and a 4th, by all means Gainey should grab one of them. However, the second that a GM asks for Higgins or Lats for a player to play this role, Gainey should hang up the phone and go eat a sandwich.

I think Gainey is a lot more likely to pick up a guy closer to the caliber of Garnet Exelby than he is to pick up a player the caliber of J-Bo or Kaberle.

LyleOdelein is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-05-2008, 02:23 PM
  #67
Mike8
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 11,096
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lyle_Odelein View Post
You're right about Lilja, thanks for the correction. I think you're overestimating Brad Stuart a little bit here, but not by too much. I was mainly posting in response to the people that were saying that the Habs should give up one of Higgins or Lats to get another top 4 d-man. I think that it would be pointless for Gainey to sacrifice this team's scoring depth to improve the defence (unless a huge, huge upgrade was available for a low price).

Brad Stuart's acquisition is along the lines of what I think the Habs will do. They will acquire a depth defenseman for a low price. Stuart went for a 2nd rounder last year and a conditional 4th this year (which should give a good sense of his value). I would be perfectly happy if Gainey can acquire defensive depth in this way. If Beauchemin or Ohlund is available at the deadline for a 2nd and a 4th, by all means Gainey should grab one of them. However, the second that a GM asks for Higgins or Lats for a player to play this role, Gainey should hang up the phone and go eat a sandwich.

I think Gainey is a lot more likely to pick up a guy closer to the caliber of Garnet Exelby than he is to pick up a player the caliber of J-Bo or Kaberle.
I would think somewhere in between. Exelby isn't an impact player. Perhaps someone like Schneider, Havelid, Martinek, etc., basically a player accustomed to playing top three minutes. Montreal needs a player like that in case one of Markov, Komisarek, Hamrlik get injured.

I'm in agreement with the rest of what you've written.

Mike8 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-05-2008, 02:53 PM
  #68
LyleOdelein
Registered User
 
LyleOdelein's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Renfrew
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,671
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike8 View Post
I would think somewhere in between. Exelby isn't an impact player. Perhaps someone like Schneider, Havelid, Martinek, etc., basically a player accustomed to playing top three minutes. Montreal needs a player like that in case one of Markov, Komisarek, Hamrlik get injured.

I'm in agreement with the rest of what you've written.
I think that we're pretty close on the topic, actually. I would love for the Habs to send a pick or two for Schneider. He would be a great fit IMO. I just don't see the sense of urgency that others do. I think Gainey should wait until the deadline or shortly before.

LyleOdelein is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-05-2008, 03:36 PM
  #69
Mike8
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 11,096
vCash: 500
Right, I would like to see O'Byrne progress. He could wind up leapfrogging Bouillon on the depth chart.

Mike8 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-05-2008, 04:06 PM
  #70
mcphee
Registered User
 
mcphee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 19,105
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike8 View Post
Right, I would like to see O'Byrne progress. He could wind up leapfrogging Bouillon on the depth chart.
As talent challenged as Bouillon is, the team seems to have a bit more life when he's around. Little guy hitting big guy always provides a lift. I guess I'd be glad when the team's d corps is so strong that he can't make it, but I kind of like him there.

mcphee is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-05-2008, 04:43 PM
  #71
Mike8
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 11,096
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by mcphee View Post
As talent challenged as Bouillon is, the team seems to have a bit more life when he's around. Little guy hitting big guy always provides a lift. I guess I'd be glad when the team's d corps is so strong that he can't make it, but I kind of like him there.
Indeed, me too. It'd be disappointing to see him sit. But, when was the last time you saw Bouillon make a big hit anyway? He'll hit, but few big hits. He's gritty, but ... he's too exposed down low, and I'm starting to appreciate O'Byrne's size and skating. At times, I see O'Byrne dominating down low and winning scrambles for the puck to move it out...

Maybe I'm getting enthusiastic about a guy because I saw him as a bit of a slug before (not in terms of skating, but more thinking the game), but I'd like to see O'Byrne's progression this year. He could step up in the playoffs similarly to Komisarek's playoff debut.

Mike8 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:28 PM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. ©2014 All Rights Reserved.