HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Atlantic Division > Montreal Canadiens
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

Outlook for next season

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
06-09-2010, 12:14 AM
  #26
MathMan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 17,255
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Max Levine View Post
Let me tell you what is wrong with this picture: our top 6 shouldn't be the ones killing penalties. Not saying they should never be on the ice for a second of that full two-minute but guys like Lapierre, Moore, Pyatt and 4th liners should be the PK specialists and let the top 6 rest a little. When you look at it from that point of view and only compare the names mentioned based on their even-strength or PP performances, then you may see it as an upgrade to Plekanec or at the very least, equal value.
I'm not even talking about killing penalties. I agree with you that ideally the grinders would do it (but they weren't doing the job, so Martin replaced them with players that did) so as to free up top-six minutes for even-strength and PP time. But even if you remove Pleks' PK duties, he still has to deal with a big chunk of very tough five-on-five icetime, the toughest on the team, even before accounting for him starting most of his shifts in the defensive zone.

If you want to replace Plekanec, you need someone to take on this work -- remember, the toughest forward minutes on the Habs -- and a lesser player just wouldn't be able to do it. You could give those minutes to Gomez, but then you tax him more and you still need someone to handle Gomez's minutes, and they weren't easy either.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Max Levine View Post
This is the time to make a decision about Markov's future with the Habs. Either we extend his contract to make him a Habs til the end of his career or we consider trading him.
Then it's a no-brainer, you sign him. Or you rebuild over 3-4 years, but I don't think that's why Cammy, Gomez and co. were brought in to do. Trading Markov would represent a radical shift in the direction of the team, a clean break with the plan established a year ago.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Max Levine View Post
But we also need to realize that a Markov playing 60-65% of the schedule might not be worth a prolific top 6.
IIRC, at the beginning of last year, Markov was the Habs' reigning ironman. Two fluke injuries have not necessarily made him so injury-prone that we can only expect him to play 2/3rds of the game.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Max Levine View Post
Also, you can keep Markov for the next 6-7 years but if you can't add to the top 6 (and considering Avtsin and Kristo are pretty much the only prospects who might help us in the future, and not near), you're wasting your time.
6-7 years is a very long time. The Habs could crap out next year, get a top pick, and have a forward that could be useful right away and productive as early in 2012-2013. Or they could get an exceptional pick, a Subban at forward or a Patrice Bergeron, and get the same thing with the same timing. Top-six forwards are not THAT hard to find.

If, on the other hand, they do not have a Markov-type player, then they won't be competitive, period. They are immensely rarer than top-six forwards, and considerably more impactful.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Max Levine View Post
I'm not one to criticize a scouting team. I've always find it very difficult to determine a young guy's future development. I often consider it a gamble. But the fact remains that Montreal is not rich in prospects.
I think the world of Boucher, but he and Subban did not haul the 'Dogs to the top of the AHL by themselves. I think that familiarity may be breeding contempt here, and that the media reports blasting the state of the Habs' fans may be coloring perceptions (there is no love lost for Timmins among the press). I feel the Habs' prospect pool is pretty decent.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Max Levine View Post
I'd try my best to grab a good defenceman prospect through a trade and Markov could very well be the bait involving a top 6 and a young defenceman. If it means adding Halak, Leblanc or Kristo, so be it.
Replacing Markov by "a good defenseman" is like replacing Plekanec by Umberger. You might think the drop-off won't be too severe, but those guys handle the toughest minutes on the team. The replacements simply wouldn't be able to cut it. You'd hurt the team much more than the drop-off of talent might otherwise suggest.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Max Levine View Post
Keeping Markov without improving the top 6 would be a losing proposition.
Yet trading Markov is tantamount to throwing the towel on the next two to three seasons -- it would be worse than the alternative. So what do you do?

MathMan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-09-2010, 12:33 AM
  #27
maxpower2010*
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 279
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by OneSharpMarble View Post
This team isn't 2 players away and how much cap space do you think we have to sign 3 elite players? No we are not close to being contenders and with our current albatross contracts we couldnt sign them if we had the chance.

Pleks could get replaced with jokinen for all you know.
Not only that but some "fans" in this very thread are advocating holding on to a clearly busted Akost and his 3+ million dollar salary while reacting very nonchalantly about letting our #1 center walk.

Enough with Andrei. He's a failure and at this point no sacrifices should be made to keep him on the roster.

As for next season, the usual 7th or 8th place finish should be expected. Should Halak have another horseshoe up his ass we could maybe win a round but otherwise we'll get handled in the quarters.

maxpower2010* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-09-2010, 01:04 AM
  #28
Max Levine
Registered User
 
Max Levine's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Montreal
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,004
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MathMan View Post
Then it's a no-brainer, you sign him. Or you rebuild over 3-4 years, but I don't think that's why Cammy, Gomez and co. were brought in to do. Trading Markov would represent a radical shift in the direction of the team, a clean break with the plan established a year ago. IIRC, at the beginning of last year, Markov was the Habs' reigning ironman. Two fluke injuries have not necessarily made him so injury-prone that we can only expect him to play 2/3rds of the game.
Cammy, Gomez and Gionta were brought in to give us a chance at the Cup. If it is determined that the only way to improve the team and hit that target in the next four years would be to trade Markov, then that too is a no-brainer.

The scary part about Markov getting injured is the way it happens. Both Grabovski's and Cooke's hits were not only legal; they weren't that bad. Markov was simply not solid enough to take those hits. If we were only talking about Price's skate, would be a different story. But one has to wonder if our #1 defenceman can actually take a hit without risking missing 20 games. And you can be sure that from now on, he will be a target.



Quote:
Originally Posted by MathMan View Post
6-7 years is a very long time. The Habs could crap out next year, get a top pick, and have a forward that could be useful right away and productive as early in 2012-2013. Or they could get an exceptional pick, a Subban at forward or a Patrice Bergeron, and get the same thing with the same timing. Top-six forwards are not THAT hard to find.

If, on the other hand, they do not have a Markov-type player, then they won't be competitive, period. They are immensely rarer than top-six forwards, and considerably more impactful.
When planning the future, you don't postulate such negatives as "what about if we crap out". Management are planning to win. If Markov stays, it will be because PG and cie will have determined that they have a better chance of winning with him. Now, if the top 6 forwards were so easy to find through picks, we wouldn't have four of them off UFA and trades.



Quote:
Originally Posted by MathMan View Post
I think the world of Boucher, but he and Subban did not haul the 'Dogs to the top of the AHL by themselves. I think that familiarity may be breeding contempt here, and that the media reports blasting the state of the Habs' fans may be coloring perceptions (there is no love lost for Timmins among the press). I feel the Habs' prospect pool is pretty decent.
I think there is a misconception. Boucher did very well in Hamilton, building a team. The Bulldogs form an excellent team. But when it comes to individual talent that could help the Canadiens, it's pretty thin. But look into other teams prospects: some of them are rich with defencemen and forwards who could actually help the NHL team immediately or who already did. And I'm talking top 4 D and top 6 forwards.

What have we got? Carle, Weber, Belle; Trotter, White, Desharnais. Not one top 4 D; not one top 6 forward.


Quote:
Originally Posted by MathMan View Post
Replacing Markov by "a good defenseman" is like replacing Plekanec by Umberger. You might think the drop-off won't be too severe, but those guys handle the toughest minutes on the team. The replacements simply wouldn't be able to cut it. You'd hurt the team much more than the drop-off of talent might otherwise suggest.

Yet trading Markov is tantamount to throwing the towel on the next two to three seasons -- it would be worse than the alternative. So what do you do?
I don't think our defense without Markov is so bad. Add that solid defenceman... actually, replace Bergeron with a young defenceman who will become a top 4 in a couple years. Or pretend that young defenceman is Yemelin: suddenly trading Markov for him and a top 6 represents quite an improvement.

Look, you give me the choice, I'd rather keep Markov. But certainly not under any circumstances. As far as I'm concerned, Subban is an untouchable. Markov isn't.

Max Levine is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-09-2010, 01:09 AM
  #29
ruski17
Registered User
 
ruski17's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Montreal
Country: Canada
Posts: 855
vCash: 500
[QUOTE=maxpower2010;26199880]
Enough with Andrei. He's a failure and at this point no sacrifices should be made to keep him on the roster.
QUOTE]

Haha! A bust? I know many people are mad at him for his inconsistency, but two years ago he had 29 goals and last year he had 23 goals and would have been on pace for over 20 goals this year if it weren't for his injury just when things were starting to pick up. Andrei is a good player PERIOD. He is strong on the puck, has an incredible shot and does not shy away from the physical play as seen during the playoffs. Sergei is also a very good player. His only and major problem is his attitude. If it weren't for that, he could easily be a top 6 forward as he has the skill. All Sergei needs to do is grow up.

If the habs want to be successful, bring up the young guns like Desharnais, White, Trotter(maybe), Weber, Subban and Pacioretty and get rid of Halak or Price. Don't forget, Cederick Desjardins is extremely good down in the AHL and is definetly ready for a backup role behind a good goalie. We could get a David Backes type of player for one of them. Both have insanely high value.

Markov is an untouchable as he is our powerplay quaterback. I knw that Subban is good to do that job too, but quarterbacking a powerplay at 21 is a lot of pressure and we shouldn't overuse Subban if we don't want him to go crazy halfway through the season.

Plekanec should get a 4.5-5.5 mil deal max. Even 5.5 is pushing it considering he was a bust during these playoffs and was one of the reasons that cost us a spot in the Finals. Spacek needs to go because he was brought in to help our powerplay and failed miserably. Plus, his salary is too high and will help us re-sign Plekanec. Finally, sign Moore because he was very good during the playoffs.

ruski17 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-09-2010, 01:14 AM
  #30
maxpower2010*
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 279
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ruski17 View Post

Haha! A bust? I know many people are mad at him for his inconsistency, but two years ago he had 29 goals and last year he had 23 goals and would have been on pace for over 20 goals this year if it weren't for his injury just when things were starting to pick up. Andrei is a good player PERIOD. He is strong on the puck, has an incredible shot and does not shy away from the physical play as seen during the playoffs. Sergei is also a very good player. His only and major problem is his attitude. If it weren't for that, he could easily be a top 6 forward as he has the skill. All Sergei needs to do is grow up.

If the habs want to be successful, bring up the young guns like Desharnais, White, Trotter(maybe), Weber, Subban and Pacioretty and get rid of Halak or Price. Don't forget, Cederick Desjardins is extremely good down in the AHL and is definetly ready for a backup role behind a good goalie. We could get a David Backes type of player for one of them. Both have insanely high value.

Markov is an untouchable as he is our powerplay quaterback. I knw that Subban is good to do that job too, but quarterbacking a powerplay at 21 is a lot of pressure and we shouldn't overuse Subban if we don't want him to go crazy halfway through the season.

Plekanec should get a 4.5-5.5 mil deal max. Even 5.5 is pushing it considering he was a bust during these playoffs and was one of the reasons that cost us a spot in the Finals. Spacek needs to go because he was brought in to help our powerplay and failed miserably. Plus, his salary is too high and will help us re-sign Plekanec. Finally, sign Moore because he was very good during the playoffs.
Andrei has the hockey sense and awareness of a donkey. Combined with his total lack of heart and it's a simple case of having the tools but not the toolbox. Alexander Selivanov redux.

edit: What a surprise that someone with the username "Ruski" is tooting the Andrei Kostitsyn horn with such an off-point analysis.


Last edited by maxpower2010*: 06-09-2010 at 01:20 AM.
maxpower2010* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-09-2010, 05:48 AM
  #31
MathMan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 17,255
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Max Levine View Post
Cammy, Gomez and Gionta were brought in to give us a chance at the Cup. If it is determined that the only way to improve the team and hit that target in the next four years would be to trade Markov, then that too is a no-brainer.
...except that there's no way that's the case. You're making the assumption that trading Markov has any chance of helping the Habs win the Cup in the short term. Short of a fantasy scenario a la Markov-for-Crosby, it just doesn't. Teams that win Cups overwhelmingly have #1 D-men like Markov, and teams that don't have them often need to go to great lengths to acquire one.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Max Levine View Post
The scary part about Markov getting injured is the way it happens. Both Grabovski's and Cooke's hits were not only legal; they weren't that bad. Markov was simply not solid enough to take those hits.
Now you're just making excuses. They were freak occurences. Anyone can get hurt, even by a hit that looks like nothing.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Max Levine View Post
But look into other teams prospects: some of them are rich with defencemen and forwards who could actually help the NHL team immediately or who already did. And I'm talking top 4 D and top 6 forwards.
Err, teams that have guys who are ready to be top 4 D-men or top-6 forwards at the NHL level don't generally keep them in the minors. The fact that a call-up will sometimes get plugged in such a slot doesn't mean they can handle it on a regular basis. I think your expectations for a prospect pool are way too high; you just don't keep NHL-ready players of that caliber in the minors.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Max Levine View Post
I don't think our defense without Markov is so bad. Add that solid defenceman... actually, replace Bergeron with a young defenceman who will become a top 4 in a couple years. Or pretend that young defenceman is Yemelin: suddenly trading Markov for him and a top 6 represents quite an improvement.
No, it really doesn't. Without Markov the defense is going to be below average, even if you replace Bergeron with Weber or another such young D-man. It certainly won't be any kind of Cup-contending unit. I think you underestimate the importance and impact of a #1 D-man. The Habs scraping by without Markov (and make no mistake, they were scraping by) doesn't suddenly mean he's not critical to the team's success.

Now I've seen it all: Habs fans who are seriously suggesting to trade Markov.

MathMan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-09-2010, 08:34 AM
  #32
neofury*
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Montreal, PQ
Country: Canada
Posts: 20,277
vCash: 500
I actually think we'll be slightly better than last year and place anywhere from 5th to 7th, with the odd chance of placing higher depending on how the other teams in our division do.

I don't think we'll be fighting too hard for a spot, I think part 2 of the rebuild is going to happen right now. They know who was a fit and who wasn't, they'll make it work out nicely imo. I remember when Philly rebuilt their team via the UFA market, now they're in the finals.

neofury* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-09-2010, 08:35 AM
  #33
neofury*
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Montreal, PQ
Country: Canada
Posts: 20,277
vCash: 500
Give Spacek one year on his natural wing before you crucify him.

neofury* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-09-2010, 08:49 AM
  #34
MathMan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 17,255
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by neofury View Post
Give Spacek one year on his natural wing before you crucify him.
Nevermind that. There's no reason to crucify Spacek for the work he's done on his off-side. He was great for the Habs, possibly their best 5-on-5 D-man.

MathMan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-09-2010, 09:26 AM
  #35
Max Levine
Registered User
 
Max Levine's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Montreal
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,004
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MathMan View Post
...except that there's no way that's the case. You're making the assumption that trading Markov has any chance of helping the Habs win the Cup in the short term. Short of a fantasy scenario a la Markov-for-Crosby, it just doesn't. Teams that win Cups overwhelmingly have #1 D-men like Markov, and teams that don't have them often need to go to great lengths to acquire one.
You mean like Brian Campbell? or Glenn Wesley? Eric Desjardins maybe? or P.K. Subban? Teams that win Cups have much more than one top defenceman.


Quote:
Originally Posted by MathMan View Post
Err, teams that have guys who are ready to be top 4 D-men or top-6 forwards at the NHL level don't generally keep them in the minors. The fact that a call-up will sometimes get plugged in such a slot doesn't mean they can handle it on a regular basis. I think your expectations for a prospect pool are way too high; you just don't keep NHL-ready players of that caliber in the minors.
Well now, that's ridiculous. Plenty of young prospects of that caliber have spent some time in the minors: Subban, Wright, Alzner, Carlson, Sutter, Neal, Turris... all need(ed) a little bit more experience before making it to the Big Leagues. Not every talented youngster can play immediately in the NHL.



Quote:
Originally Posted by MathMan View Post
No, it really doesn't. Without Markov the defense is going to be below average, even if you replace Bergeron with Weber or another such young D-man. It certainly won't be any kind of Cup-contending unit. I think you underestimate the importance and impact of a #1 D-man. The Habs scraping by without Markov (and make no mistake, they were scraping by) doesn't suddenly mean he's not critical to the team's success.
Replace Markov with Niskanen, Carlson or Alzner and your defense is above average for years to come.


Quote:
Originally Posted by MathMan View Post
Now I've seen it all: Habs fans who are seriously suggesting to trade Markov.
Oh! But I've seen worse. Some poster for instance, going into a diatribe, using conjectures and contradictions to try to invalidate a system that generated success, and using mere statistics as opposed to in-game analysis to determine success being based on pure luck. You have got to see that one!

Max Levine is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-09-2010, 09:44 AM
  #36
MathMan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 17,255
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Max Levine View Post
You mean like Brian Campbell? or Glenn Wesley? Eric Desjardins maybe? or P.K. Subban? Teams that win Cups have much more than one top defenceman.
None of those guys are actually true #1 D-men, except maybe Campbell. Subban may yet get there, and I do think he will... but he might not.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Max Levine View Post
Well now, that's ridiculous. Plenty of young prospects of that caliber have spent some time in the minors: Subban, Wright, Alzner, Carlson, Sutter, Neal, Turris... all need(ed) a little bit more experience before making it to the Big Leagues. Not every talented youngster can play immediately in the NHL.
But once they're able to get to the Show, they don't stick in the minors, either -- which was my point. You're acting as if the Habs have practically no talent in the pipeline. They do, they just need a bit more experience before making it to the Big Leagues.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Max Levine View Post
Replace Markov with Niskanen, Carlson or Alzner and your defense is above average for years to come.
Maybe. Four years from now.

In the meantime, your D is below average, and that means a non-competitive team. So really, you're doing a rebuild by doing that.

Honestly, I'm getting vibes of the HFBoards credo of "youth over proven NHL skill" from you. Do you realize that you can't have a prospect just walk in and do Markov's job, the toughest on the team, on a regular basis?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Max Levine View Post
Oh! But I've seen worse. Some poster for instance, going into a diatribe, using conjectures and contradictions to try to invalidate a system that generated success, and using mere statistics as opposed to in-game analysis to determine success being based on pure luck. You have got to see that one!
I fail to see how that is worse. What's worse is people that keep screaming "but that's not what happened" when presented with clear factual evidence that their perceptions are incorrect, or imagine a fluke Cinderella playoff run as repeatable "success" (those people are going to be sorely disappointed, methinks).

MathMan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-09-2010, 10:15 AM
  #37
bipolarhabfan
Registered User
 
bipolarhabfan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Burnaby, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,893
vCash: 500
I will be expecting much of the same as this season. We do not possess the top-end talent to be in the top-5 in East but are not bad enough for a 12th-15th place finish. I expect us to either squeak into the playoffs or be eliminated with a week left in the season.

This offseason the team needs to address our slow and aging defense core and find some depth on the forward lines so we can actually have some secondary scoring.

bipolarhabfan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-09-2010, 10:15 AM
  #38
NLHabsFan
Registered User
 
NLHabsFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Alberta
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,575
vCash: 500
IMO, the teams top priority should be to strengthen the defence. Defence wins championships. I hope they sign Markov to an extension and finally gets him a top pairing guy to play with. I like Hamrlik but I think it is time to try and move him, I don't know how or for who but it needs to be done. Unfortunately we need his cap space. I can also see O'Byrne being moved this summer, I'm not sure how much confidence Martin has in him. And I think Carle will be given every opportunity to succeed with Markov injured for the beginning of the season.
So I think they need to start the offseason with a top pairing defencemen, a strong two way guy that can complement Markov. Move Spacek back on the left side with Subban and a bottom pairing of Gorges and Gill. That's what I feel is the #1 improvement for them moving forward next season.

NLHabsFan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-09-2010, 10:31 AM
  #39
Max Levine
Registered User
 
Max Levine's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Montreal
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,004
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MathMan View Post
None of those guys are actually true #1 D-men, except maybe Campbell. Subban may yet get there, and I do think he will... but he might not.
Right. We're pretty much done with this discussion, MathMan. You seem tired. Those non-true #1 D-men were the #1 defenceman on their respective Stanley Cup winning team (assuming Campbell wins it this year while P.K. was a postulate).



Quote:
Originally Posted by MathMan View Post
But once they're able to get to the Show, they don't stick in the minors, either -- which was my point. You're acting as if the Habs have practically no talent in the pipeline. They do, they just need a bit more experience before making it to the Big Leagues.
No. I'm saying our pools of top 4 D defencemen and top 6 forwards is weak compared to many teams.



Quote:
Originally Posted by MathMan View Post
Maybe. Four years from now.

In the meantime, your D is below average, and that means a non-competitive team. So really, you're doing a rebuild by doing that.

Honestly, I'm getting vibes of the HFBoards credo of "youth over proven NHL skill" from you. Do you realize that you can't have a prospect just walk in and do Markov's job, the toughest on the team, on a regular basis?
Oh! Most definitely not youth over established players. Which is why I'd prefer we trade our future prospects for top 6 forwards. But the Carlson, Alzner, Niskanen, Subban have already shown what they can do at the NHL level. And don't underestimate Subban's performance during the playoffs. Certainly not beginner's luck. Four years is unrealistic.



Quote:
Originally Posted by MathMan View Post
I fail to see how that is worse. What's worse is people that keep screaming "but that's not what happened" when presented with clear factual evidence that their perceptions are incorrect, or imagine a fluke Cinderella playoff run as repeatable "success" (those people are going to be sorely disappointed, methinks).
As much as I enjoyed our playoff run, in which luck was not much of a factor against the Penguins, it's obvious to me that this team needs more help. Again, one or two top 6 and a solid defenceman. But to get there, sacrifices may have to be considered. Again, for the best of the team.

I am not asking the management to trade our best defenceman. I'm asking them to consider it if we don't have enough assets to take this team to the next level and avoid having people talking about a "fluke Cinderella run".

Max Levine is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-09-2010, 10:43 AM
  #40
gillyguzzler
Registered User
 
gillyguzzler's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,812
vCash: 500
The outlook for next year is very good.

Goaltending

Halak proved to be a world class goalie this year and Price played well but mostly he matured and seemed to have resolved some off ice and attitude problems. If we both, wow, what a pair. However, keeping either one and trading the other will bring a very solid player back our way and our goaltending will still be top notch.

Defense

Just the addition of PK Subban for the whole season makes us better. Add to that the chemistry that Gorges and Gill developed, another year of experience for OB, Spacek looking more and more confortable on the right side and Markov hopefully healthy once he comes back.

Offense

It took most of the year for the players to gel and they finally did in the playoffs. Gionta, Gomez and Pouliot should be better and healthier. Plek (assuming he resigns) with Cammy are a top notch duo. A healthy AK46 should contribute more (especially with his brother gone). Lapierre will be better. A full year with Moore as well as the way Pyatt played in the playoffs and we have a very solid third line. Pacioretty should be better. White might be ready. Desharnais might be ready. There is cap room to sign a solid Colby Armstrong type player.

Coaching

In took a while, but Jacques Martin got his message across and the players bought into it.

So, the wildcards are Plek, AK46 and who they can get for either Price or Halak. If they resign Plek, if Andrei plays close to his potential, and if they get a Backes-Carter type player for Price... they will be much improved.

gillyguzzler is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-09-2010, 11:53 AM
  #41
Frozenice
the random dude
 
Frozenice's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,725
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by bipolarhabfan View Post
I will be expecting much of the same as this season. We do not possess the top-end talent to be in the top-5 in East but are not bad enough for a 12th-15th place finish. I expect us to either squeak into the playoffs or be eliminated with a week left in the season.

This offseason the team needs to address our slow and aging defense core and find some depth on the forward lines so we can actually have some secondary scoring.
As long as everyone is healthy and ready to go from Day 1 of the season I think we will do a little better than that, say battle it out for 5th, 6th and 7th place for most of the season. If not, yes, we could really struggle all season long. Arduous.

Frozenice is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-09-2010, 12:07 PM
  #42
MathMan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 17,255
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Max Levine View Post
Those non-true #1 D-men were the #1 defenceman on their respective Stanley Cup winning team (assuming Campbell wins it this year while P.K. was a postulate).
Um, about that, you do realize that the 'Hawks #1 D-man is Duncan Keith, right?

Or that Glen Wesley was not the top D-man on the 'Canes (not by a long shot, more like a bottom-pairing D-man, actually)?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Max Levine View Post
No. I'm saying our pools of top 4 D defencemen and top 6 forwards is weak compared to many teams.
I don't agree.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Max Levine View Post
But the Carlson, Alzner, Niskanen, Subban have already shown what they can do at the NHL level. And don't underestimate Subban's performance during the playoffs. Certainly not beginner's luck. Four years is unrealistic.
Four years to have a NHL impact is unrealistic. Four years to get to Markov's level (if ever) is entirely realistic. The job of a #1 D-man is arguably the toughest in hockey, and D-men are not as fast-developping as forwards.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Max Levine View Post
As much as I enjoyed our playoff run, in which luck was not much of a factor against the Penguins, it's obvious to me that this team needs more help. Again, one or two top 6 and a solid defenceman. But to get there, sacrifices may have to be considered. Again, for the best of the team.
I don't see how you're actually helping your team if you trade away Markov. Like I said, he's a critical piece, the kind of guy teams tear up their roster to acquire. I repeat myself, but if the Habs trade him, their #1 need instantly becomes a guy just like him.

There's simply no way you can bring enough short-term help via a Markov trade to make up the loss of Markov himself. So trading Markov has to be a move made with a view towards the longer-term... eg, an admission that you don't plan to be competitive for a few years while your youth matures.

MathMan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-09-2010, 01:02 PM
  #43
ruski17
Registered User
 
ruski17's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Montreal
Country: Canada
Posts: 855
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by maxpower2010 View Post
Andrei has the hockey sense and awareness of a donkey. Combined with his total lack of heart and it's a simple case of having the tools but not the toolbox. Alexander Selivanov redux.

edit: What a surprise that someone with the username "Ruski" is tooting the Andrei Kostitsyn horn with such an off-point analysis.
Off-point? The numbers don't lie, this guy can play on a second-line and provide good scoring if he stays consistent. Both brothers have good value, but they lack good attitude to really ahieve their potential and my username is irrelevant. If Andrei was good enough to be picked in the first round, then his awareness and hockey sense have to be somewhat good, right? And without his injury, he would have easily passed the 20 goal mark because he was starting to play well with Cammalleri and Plekanec. Then, he would be a player who scores 20 goals or more in his first three complete seasons. Not bad for someone as dumb as a donkey!

ruski17 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-09-2010, 03:46 PM
  #44
montreal
Moderator
Go Habs Go
 
montreal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Country: Sark
Posts: 24,840
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ruski17 View Post
two years ago he had 29 goals and last year he had 23 goals and would have been on pace for over 20 goals this year if it weren't for his injury just when things were starting to pick up. Andrei is a good player PERIOD. He is strong on the puck, has an incredible shot and does not shy away from the physical play as seen during the playoffs. Sergei is also a very good player. His only and major problem is his attitude. If it weren't for that, he could easily be a top 6 forward as he has the skill. All Sergei needs to do is grow up..
Kostitsyn had 26 goals not 29. He's gones from 26 to 23 to 15 (yes injuries really hurt him this year) but you can understand why fans are pissed, after his impressive 1st full season 78-26-27-53 +15 29 pims, he has not been the same since. 74-23-18-41 -7 50 pims last year to 59-15-18-33 +1 32 pims this year. Add to that his disappearance in the playoffs and you will find a lot of fans calling for his head.

I don't know what the team can do with him, clearly he's skilled and clearly he lacks intensity at times. We don't have anyone to replace him and I don't think PG can get fair value for him.

If Kostitsyn can turn into a 30 goal 50+ point guy, I think more would be willing to live with his lack of desire at times, but the show in the playoffs really ticks me off.

montreal is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-15-2010, 11:59 AM
  #45
ruski17
Registered User
 
ruski17's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Montreal
Country: Canada
Posts: 855
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by montreal View Post
Kostitsyn had 26 goals not 29. He's gones from 26 to 23 to 15 (yes injuries really hurt him this year) but you can understand why fans are pissed, after his impressive 1st full season 78-26-27-53 +15 29 pims, he has not been the same since. 74-23-18-41 -7 50 pims last year to 59-15-18-33 +1 32 pims this year. Add to that his disappearance in the playoffs and you will find a lot of fans calling for his head.

I don't know what the team can do with him, clearly he's skilled and clearly he lacks intensity at times. We don't have anyone to replace him and I don't think PG can get fair value for him.

If Kostitsyn can turn into a 30 goal 50+ point guy, I think more would be willing to live with his lack of desire at times, but the show in the playoffs really ticks me off.
Finally! A sensible analysis of AK!

ruski17 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 02:51 PM.

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

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2015 All Rights Reserved.