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

Bertrand Raymond Article: Realistic or Typical Habs Bashing?

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
06-15-2011, 04:22 PM
  #51
JackZap
Registered User
 
JackZap's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 4,084
vCash: 500
I hope Harper makes this guy Senator so he can stop writing articles

JackZap is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-15-2011, 04:23 PM
  #52
InglewoodJack
Registered User
 
InglewoodJack's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Châteauguay
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,504
vCash: 500
I refuse to read his article, but I agree with us not moving past the 2nd round. Maybe next year, if we have our whole team, but we had way too many holes this year.

InglewoodJack is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-15-2011, 04:30 PM
  #53
Monctonscout
Monctonscout
 
Monctonscout's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 31,235
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by nittany View Post
Agreed. Thinking Markov, Gorges, Eller and co are going be healthy all year after MAJOR injuries is simply foolish. It takes time to truely be back to 100% from reconstructive surgeries.

Also, the lack of size on this team leaves us susceptible to further injuries and guys have no problem taking liberties with our smaller forwards.
Vancouver is a lot bigger and they are very banged up and without Hamhuis, Raymond, Samuelsson etc

Monctonscout is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-15-2011, 04:38 PM
  #54
Teufelsdreck
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 14,646
vCash: 500
Bertie is right this time but it doesn't qualify him as an expert. He's no more knowledgeable than the man you randomly sit next to on the metro but he happens to have a column. Children shouldn't be allowed to play with dangerous weapons.

Teufelsdreck is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-15-2011, 04:43 PM
  #55
Teufelsdreck
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 14,646
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JackZap View Post
I hope Harper makes this guy Senator so he can stop writing articles
The Peter Principle: upward to (another) job he wouldn't be competent in.

Teufelsdreck is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-15-2011, 07:56 PM
  #56
Whitesnake
Habs of steel
 
Whitesnake's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Lorraine, QC
Country: Canada
Posts: 48,781
vCash: 500
Unfortunately for them, since they mostly are totally out of sync with reality (him and Tremblay) that whenever they are right or partially right, we don't even see it or want to acknowledge it.

I just don't believe he's that far off this time. Sorry. Our main argument is that "We will be great the day we're healthy". Fine.....can't wait to see when that's going to be. Unless we're the unluckiest team that have ever played the game....or maybe because we're often at the receiving end...., I guess we'll see in the near future.

But if you take his main point about people that thinks that we're Cup contender based on the fact that we were at 1 goal at beating the Cup Finalist and maybe winner....it makes no freakin sense. And he's totally right.

Then, obviously, Raymond tries very hard to look stupid and succeed by saying that the signings are not making that team a better team....as if what happens in June is indicative of what's really going on. I mean, that's makes just as much sense as Raymond believing we'd be better team if we would have signed in June a guy like....Scott Gomez. At that time, he would have mentioned that we would automatically have become a better team....we see where that takes us now. Raymond doesn't know Emelin, Diaz or Naatinen anyway. So he has good points and then succeed to look dumb.

But I can't say I don't agree with him as far as the identity I hope our team has. Sorry, I just can't. And his line that I agree the most with is that the "Habs don't believe in it". Well we did draft Tinordi. I guess there is some realization that a tougher team has to be in order, but you have to trust what this organization tells you, you actually believe they don't believe in having to deal with big and gritty teams...that speed kills and that's it....A speed that they actually think they have but then when you see other teams play, you realize that we're not the speediest team out there.

One other thing. Yes, we have dumb journalists and we have dumb fans. NO FREAKIN QUESTION ABOUT IT. But the organizatoin do not do the journalists, their fans or even themselves any service by being as secretive as they are. No need to be Brian Burke....but there is so many heresay and secrets amongst journalists and all, that by not talking, the Habs are provoking this. You'd hear less crap everywhere if Habs would talk more. Those journalists can say whatever they want, they'll never be confronted to it. And that's a real freakin shame.

Whitesnake is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-15-2011, 08:25 PM
  #57
MathMan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 17,055
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Whitesnake View Post
But if you take his main point about people that thinks that we're Cup contender based on the fact that we were at 1 goal at beating the Cup Finalist and maybe winner....it makes no freakin sense. And he's totally right.
While the point that the Habs would've had the same path as the Bruins if they'd won is silly, the point that they could've is valid. The Bruins, after all, are demonstrating that you don't actually need to be a great team to get to game 7 of the SCF, just good enough. Here's a club, not an elite club, a good club but certainly no better than the Habs, one win away from the Cup. It certainly could've been the Habs or pretty much any team in the playoffs in their position.

Mind you, the 2006 Oilers were within a win of a Cup, not to mention the Hurricanes themselves, so we really knew that already. It's just not something we like to talk about lest we dispel the Stanley Cup mystique.

One big problem with the article is that Raymond bought the Bruins hype and thinks that team is far above the Habs. In reality, they're not, but the media types certainly get caught up in their hype. Set that aside for a moment though, and look up and down the roster. I'm not even asking you to look at microstats, just the roster on paper. We see a pretty shallow set of forwards, with only Bergeron as a genuinely "very good" player, and no superstars. A very shallow D with a big drop from Chara to Seidenberg and another big drop from him to Ference-Boychuk (think about that for a second. Ference-Boychuk as the second pairing!) And a goalie who is absolutely lights out, but who is having the season of his life.

If anything, the Habs entered the playoffs as the better club over Boston, even WITH their multiple injuries. Yet the Bruins are in Game 7 of the SCF. Shows that if you're a decent playoff club, you really do have a chance.

MathMan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-15-2011, 08:26 PM
  #58
Kriss E
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 24,652
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MathMan View Post
Typical Habs-bashing, with plenty of baseless narrative mixed in. Even as an opinion piece from a media outlet, it's pretty bad.

I'm not sure why RDS hired Bertrand Raymond at all. They should really find an editorialist who understands the game and whose agenda isn't quite so transparent.
Do you know why they hire most of their employees anyways?...I don't..most of them suck hard.

As for the article, I think the idea is right on the money. I don't think we'd have reached the finals had we beaten the Bruins. I don't really know how far we would have gone. Really, there's no way of winning.

But when he says things like ''the team just lost yet again in the first round and everybody thinks all is peachy. Come on.'', I can't help but feel he's just doing is usual bashing.

Why I feel this is more of a bash, is because he aims the organization when speaking about it. Apparently the Habs are exploiting their clientele by encouraging this notion that we could have been in the Finals has we beaten the Bruins. As far as I know, I didn't hear anybody from the organization say anything of the sort.
Also, you can lose in the first round of the POs and be satisfied. What we accomplished this year+POs, despite our injuries is commendable. There's no reason for the players or organization to be dissatisfied with the PO performance this season.
So when he lashes out at them, it just makes it look like a typical bash.

The idea is right. We probably wouldn't have reached the Finals, but his comments are typical bashing.

The man is a farce anyways.

Kriss E is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
06-15-2011, 08:36 PM
  #59
Whitesnake
Habs of steel
 
Whitesnake's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Lorraine, QC
Country: Canada
Posts: 48,781
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MathMan View Post
While the point that the Habs would've had the same path as the Bruins if they'd won is silly, the point that they could've is valid. The Bruins, after all, are demonstrating that you don't actually need to be a great team to get to game 7 of the SCF, just good enough. Here's a club, not an elite club, a good club but certainly no better than the Habs, one win away from the Cup. It certainly could've been the Habs or pretty much any team in the playoffs in their position.

Mind you, the 2006 Oilers were within a win of a Cup, not to mention the Hurricanes themselves, so we really knew that already. It's just not something we like to talk about lest we dispel the Stanley Cup mystique.

One big problem with the article is that Raymond bought the Bruins hype and thinks that team is far above the Habs. In reality, they're not, but the media types certainly get caught up in their hype. Set that aside for a moment though, and look up and down the roster. I'm not even asking you to look at microstats, just the roster on paper. We see a pretty shallow set of forwards, with only Bergeron as a genuinely "very good" player, and no superstars. A very shallow D with a big drop from Chara to Seidenberg and another big drop from him to Ference-Boychuk (think about that for a second. Ference-Boychuk as the second pairing!) And a goalie who is absolutely lights out, but who is having the season of his life.

If anything, the Habs entered the playoffs as the better club over Boston, even WITH their multiple injuries. Yet the Bruins are in Game 7 of the SCF. Shows that if you're a decent playoff club, you really do have a chance.
Which is why I believe that the point is solely would've 'cause could've, could be applied to everybody. What if Chicago wins? What if Philly just has a fine goalie and a healthy Pronger? What if Roloson just is the incredible Roloson he was before? And so on. And even for the teams who didn't face the actual finalists. You could "Could've" everybody. But the point was more about the people whi thinks that Boston being there, us being at 1 goal of beating them = Us making it. Some people think that.

Whitesnake is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-15-2011, 08:56 PM
  #60
MathMan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 17,055
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Whitesnake View Post
Which is why I believe that the point is solely would've 'cause could've, could be applied to everybody.
It absolutely could have. With the goaltending the Bruins faced after Price, any playoff team could've made the SCF.

This doesn't invalidate that the Habs could've as well.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Whitesnake View Post
But the point was more about the people whi thinks that Boston being there, us being at 1 goal of beating them = Us making it. Some people think that.
That is a good point, and I agree with it.

That was not, however, Raymond's point. Raymond's point is that the Habs are weak and it's futile to hope that they could possibly be as good as the Bruins or make the SCF. Which is a silly point.

MathMan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-15-2011, 08:59 PM
  #61
Miller Time
Registered User
 
Miller Time's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 8,293
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MathMan View Post
While the point that the Habs would've had the same path as the Bruins if they'd won is silly, the point that they could've is valid. The Bruins, after all, are demonstrating that you don't actually need to be a great team to get to game 7 of the SCF, just good enough. Here's a club, not an elite club, a good club but certainly no better than the Habs, one win away from the Cup. It certainly could've been the Habs or pretty much any team in the playoffs in their position.

Mind you, the 2006 Oilers were within a win of a Cup, not to mention the Hurricanes themselves, so we really knew that already. It's just not something we like to talk about lest we dispel the Stanley Cup mystique.

One big problem with the article is that Raymond bought the Bruins hype and thinks that team is far above the Habs. In reality, they're not, but the media types certainly get caught up in their hype. Set that aside for a moment though, and look up and down the roster. I'm not even asking you to look at microstats, just the roster on paper. We see a pretty shallow set of forwards, with only Bergeron as a genuinely "very good" player, and no superstars. A very shallow D with a big drop from Chara to Seidenberg and another big drop from him to Ference-Boychuk (think about that for a second. Ference-Boychuk as the second pairing!) And a goalie who is absolutely lights out, but who is having the season of his life.

If anything, the Habs entered the playoffs as the better club over Boston, even WITH their multiple injuries. Yet the Bruins are in Game 7 of the SCF. Shows that if you're a decent playoff club, you really do have a chance.

Hogwash...

wether or not you want to give them credit, the most important stats (playoff wins) places the bruins firmly as one of the 2 best teams in the league this year...

why ignore the hard facts now?

Playoffs are about depth, luck, and solid contributions both from a teams best players and their complimentary players.

both the bruins and the nucks have gotten just that over the course of the playoffs. Habs never had the depth, didn't get solid (not solid enough) contributions from either their best players nor their depth players, and ultimately didn't benefit from much luck... that's why we went out in the first round.

while it may make some sleep better at night by downplaying the bruins success, their roster GOING INTO THE SEASON, looked like one built for the playoffs... that they managed to get this far despite losing their best offensive player mid-season is a testament to their depth up front, and their GM made sure to add quality to their D depth heading into the playoffs.


when looking back, it is easy to breakdown any cup finalist and find the warts, especially when it isn't the top teams from each conference that get there. what you didn't point out about both the oliers and the canes, is that both teams had excellent defensive depth that they had to lean on as the playoffs went on.

we went into the playoffs with an aging and slow defensive group that no one in their right mind would've suggested was "built for the playoffs"...

had we gotten past Boston, how long do you think we would have lasted relying so heavily on a rookie to lead the defense? Subban was playing 27min/game IN THE FIRST ROUND!


There is no majic secret to playoff success... no stat formula that will predict the winnner... but the common thread is that you have to have depth, the kind of depth that allows you to deal with all the "bad luck" of injuries that are inevitable in a season that ends up over 100 games long, the last 20-30 of which are with very little rest and played at 100% intensity.

habs did not have comparable depth to the bruins this year, not even close.


there is a reason why Julien, had the bruins lost in the 1st round, was a good bet to lose his job, whereas Martin, after losing in the first round, is generally regarded to have done an great job... realistic expectations... from fans, media, management...

despite the fact that we "regressed" from our final result last year, most people are fairly optimistic about the team and it's direction, Raymond simply pointed out that as long as the fanbase is content with this level of mediocrity and willing to continue paying through the nose, ownership seems to be perfectly satisfied.


Last edited by Miller Time: 06-15-2011 at 09:05 PM.
Miller Time is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-15-2011, 09:07 PM
  #62
MathMan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 17,055
vCash: 500
Miller Time, unless you think "luck" (which you mentioned yourself!) is a component of team strength, it's a plain fact that hockey games, especially on a small sample as a playoff run is, are sometimes won by weaker clubs. It's not the way to bet, but it happens frequently.

As for the Bruins being "built for the playoffs", please do the exercise I suggested and look at the roster of the Bruins without considering the hype. This is just not a very strong club outside of the crease. It's decent, but it's not great. They have Ference-Boychuk as their second pairing, that's not "building for the playoffs", that's not building for much of anything at all.

"Building for the playoffs", IMO, in the sense of loading up on big guys and grinders, is a load of crock. Neither Chicago, nor Pittsburgh, nor Detroit, nor Carolina were "built for the playoffs" in that sense. Skill wins Cups. The grinders just get the credit.

MathMan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-15-2011, 11:00 PM
  #63
Teufelsdreck
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 14,646
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MathMan View Post
Miller Time, unless you think "luck" (which you mentioned yourself!) is a component of team strength, it's a plain fact that hockey games, especially on a small sample as a playoff run is, are sometimes won by weaker clubs. It's not the way to bet, but it happens frequently.

As for the Bruins being "built for the playoffs", please do the exercise I suggested and look at the roster of the Bruins without considering the hype. This is just not a very strong club outside of the crease. It's decent, but it's not great. They have Ference-Boychuk as their second pairing, that's not "building for the playoffs", that's not building for much of anything at all.

"Building for the playoffs", IMO, in the sense of loading up on big guys and grinders, is a load of crock. Neither Chicago, nor Pittsburgh, nor Detroit, nor Carolina were "built for the playoffs" in that sense. Skill wins Cups. The grinders just get the credit.
The Habs have neither the skill nor the brute strength to win a championship. The only category in which they're on a par with the leading contenders is goaltending, emphasizing the importance of the #5 overall pick in the 2005 draft. Picking Anze Kopitar and riding on Jaro Halak instead wouldn't have made the slightest difference in 2011 and wouldn't in future years either. The Canucks thought they had the right man but they didn't. They probably wouldn't have won with Price in goal but Luongo, who had the Sedins, Burrows, and Kesler to support him, was inadequate.

Teufelsdreck is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-15-2011, 11:09 PM
  #64
Whitesnake
Habs of steel
 
Whitesnake's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Lorraine, QC
Country: Canada
Posts: 48,781
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MathMan View Post
Miller Time, unless you think "luck" (which you mentioned yourself!) is a component of team strength, it's a plain fact that hockey games, especially on a small sample as a playoff run is, are sometimes won by weaker clubs. It's not the way to bet, but it happens frequently.

As for the Bruins being "built for the playoffs", please do the exercise I suggested and look at the roster of the Bruins without considering the hype. This is just not a very strong club outside of the crease. It's decent, but it's not great. They have Ference-Boychuk as their second pairing, that's not "building for the playoffs", that's not building for much of anything at all.

"Building for the playoffs", IMO, in the sense of loading up on big guys and grinders, is a load of crock. Neither Chicago, nor Pittsburgh, nor Detroit, nor Carolina were "built for the playoffs" in that sense. Skill wins Cups. The grinders just get the credit.
They made their mistakes, I just believed we're stuck with a concept that both Ference and Boychuk were pretty bad when they actually didn't go out of their zone and played a great defensive game. They are not great defensive players themselves but in a strong game plan, did a great job. McQuaid who's seen solely as thug was pretty surprising as well.

Yes skill wins Cups. Yet, you can show your skills when you are surrounded by something that makes you express it. Unless you are terribly skilled but in an era when it is absolutely difficult with this number of teams, with this parity, to have a team filled with stars, you need those gritty players to makes up for the skills that sometimes might not work out. At one point, even those gritty players have some skills and that's about the only type of players we want on our team. Nobody wants 20 McGratton. But even a Max Talbot who was a big reason why the Pens will their Cup when they did, and especially in that game 7, is a gritty guy with his own type of skills.

Boston won their Cup with their skills in net. Their skills at winning faceoff after faceoff. Their skills at shutting down the opposition and hitting them without committing themselves too much. Skills can be interpreted in a whole lot of ways.

Whitesnake is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-15-2011, 11:17 PM
  #65
jlgib21*
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 620
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Miller Time View Post
Hogwash...

wether or not you want to give them credit, the most important stats (playoff wins) places the bruins firmly as one of the 2 best teams in the league this year...

why ignore the hard facts now?

Playoffs are about depth, luck, and solid contributions both from a teams best players and their complimentary players.

both the bruins and the nucks have gotten just that over the course of the playoffs. Habs never had the depth, didn't get solid (not solid enough) contributions from either their best players nor their depth players, and ultimately didn't benefit from much luck... that's why we went out in the first round.

while it may make some sleep better at night by downplaying the bruins success, their roster GOING INTO THE SEASON, looked like one built for the playoffs... that they managed to get this far despite losing their best offensive player mid-season is a testament to their depth up front, and their GM made sure to add quality to their D depth heading into the playoffs.


when looking back, it is easy to breakdown any cup finalist and find the warts, especially when it isn't the top teams from each conference that get there. what you didn't point out about both the oliers and the canes, is that both teams had excellent defensive depth that they had to lean on as the playoffs went on.

we went into the playoffs with an aging and slow defensive group that no one in their right mind would've suggested was "built for the playoffs"...

had we gotten past Boston, how long do you think we would have lasted relying so heavily on a rookie to lead the defense? Subban was playing 27min/game IN THE FIRST ROUND!


There is no majic secret to playoff success... no stat formula that will predict the winnner... but the common thread is that you have to have depth, the kind of depth that allows you to deal with all the "bad luck" of injuries that are inevitable in a season that ends up over 100 games long, the last 20-30 of which are with very little rest and played at 100% intensity.

habs did not have comparable depth to the bruins this year, not even close.


there is a reason why Julien, had the bruins lost in the 1st round, was a good bet to lose his job, whereas Martin, after losing in the first round, is generally regarded to have done an great job... realistic expectations... from fans, media, management...

despite the fact that we "regressed" from our final result last year, most people are fairly optimistic about the team and it's direction, Raymond simply pointed out that as long as the fanbase is content with this level of mediocrity and willing to continue paying through the nose, ownership seems to be perfectly satisfied.
No one who knows anything about hockey thinks this team is built for a 4 series grind. look at our roster close,fer chrissakes

jlgib21* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-15-2011, 11:27 PM
  #66
MathMan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 17,055
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Whitesnake View Post
They made their mistakes, I just believed we're stuck with a concept that both Ference and Boychuk were pretty bad when they actually didn't go out of their zone and played a great defensive game.
They're not good. They're a low-end third pairing masquerading as the second pairing on a Cup winner. Boychuk would be the 7th defenseman on the Habs, and Ference the fifth, even with Markov and Gorges out.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Whitesnake View Post
Yes skill wins Cups. Yet, you can show your skills when you are surrounded by something that makes you express it. Unless you are terribly skilled but in an era when it is absolutely difficult with this number of teams, with this parity, to have a team filled with stars, you need those gritty players to makes up for the skills that sometimes might not work out.
Grinders are there to fill out the roster and not get destroyed when they are on the ice. They do not have some ultimate purpose that more skilled players do not have. They are there solely because teams are not capable of loading up on good players. They are, in a sense, filler.

This is not to mean they aren't important. I like to call them "masonry". Having depth is helpful both because the low end of you lineup can beat the other guys and because they can fill in in case of injury. Not because grinders have some special quality, but because teams match lines and it is an advantadge at any point in the game to have stronger players on the ice than your opponent.

Which is why I'd rather fill my fourth-line with guys like Desharnais than guys like Shawn Thornton.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Whitesnake View Post
Boston won their Cup with their skills in net. Their skills at winning faceoff after faceoff. Their skills at shutting down the opposition and hitting them without committing themselves too much. Skills can be interpreted in a whole lot of ways.
And most importantly, their amazing skill at running into cold goalies.

MathMan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-15-2011, 11:50 PM
  #67
Melvin Udall
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Canada
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,304
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by FrankMTL View Post
http://www.rds.ca/canadien/chroniques/321282.html

Sorry to our anglo friends, I don't have time to translate. Basically he just writes that Habs management and fans are dreaming if they think they would have gotten any farther had they beaten the Bruins in the 7th game...

Is Bertrand Raymond .......Habs Bashing?

No, shame on Bertrand Raymond for telling it like it is.

Anyone who honestly believes the HABS could have done any real damage in the 2011 playoffs is - as Red Fisher would say - dreaming in technicolour - OR - IMHO, they know squat about hockey!



What if this is...as good as it gets?

Quote:
Originally Posted by habtastic View Post
he should be

a LOT of great moves by PG, i'm impressed. Just wait and see how little tweaks are going to make us a bigtime threat. And all the moves that came before will have been a big part of that.

Arguably, Gauthier's body of work as Habs GM is incomplete.

However, he has been Gainey's assistant GM and right hand man since 2006 - I am confident that he has had a significant 'say' in how the current Habs team was put together; undersized, overpaid, anemic in scoring and (as Mr.Bertrand noted) lacking the ability to inspire fear in their opponents!

Looking at Gauthier's track record as GM with previous NHL teams....I doubt that he has the vision or savvy to build a Cup competitor!

Now that Molson is taking over as Habs president, if he keeps Gauthier on as Habs GM for any length of time, I will be inclined to believe that Molson is in it for the money - not to win a Cup!





And what if this is...as good as it gets?

Melvin Udall is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-16-2011, 12:17 AM
  #68
Lafleurs Guy
Registered User
 
Lafleurs Guy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 22,747
vCash: 500
Without getting into the specifics of the article (because I didn't read it) I'd say that it was a really strange year in the East. Pittsburgh was the odds on favourite and then their two star (one of whom was just turning into an absolute generational player) players fell off the map with injuries.

Washington decided to completely scrap what had made them great and experimented with a new way of playing and got bounced.

That left a whole bunch of mediocre teams and the one with the best goaltending and defense got through. It reminds me of the '86 and '93 Habs who went through the East with easy competition and got to the finals and won. Once Pittsburgh and Washington go down, it's a total crapshoot in our conference. The East sucks really, really badly right now. I don't think we would've made the finals but I'm shocked at how bad our conference has become.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Whitesnake View Post
They made their mistakes, I just believed we're stuck with a concept that both Ference and Boychuk were pretty bad when they actually didn't go out of their zone and played a great defensive game. They are not great defensive players themselves but in a strong game plan, did a great job. McQuaid who's seen solely as thug was pretty surprising as well.

Yes skill wins Cups. Yet, you can show your skills when you are surrounded by something that makes you express it. Unless you are terribly skilled but in an era when it is absolutely difficult with this number of teams, with this parity, to have a team filled with stars, you need those gritty players to makes up for the skills that sometimes might not work out. At one point, even those gritty players have some skills and that's about the only type of players we want on our team. Nobody wants 20 McGratton. But even a Max Talbot who was a big reason why the Pens will their Cup when they did, and especially in that game 7, is a gritty guy with his own type of skills.

Boston won their Cup with their skills in net. Their skills at winning faceoff after faceoff. Their skills at shutting down the opposition and hitting them without committing themselves too much. Skills can be interpreted in a whole lot of ways.
Good point.

As I said recently in another thread, most cup teams have a balance of good offense and defense. Some (NJ) Skew one way or the other but are usually better than average in the other area.

Boston's numbers this regular season showed great defense and a pretty decent offense. Once Savard went down though, I figured that they wouldn't be a real factor in winning a cup.

But they made up for it in other ways. They are huge and have tons of grit. They have arguably the best defenseman in the game right now. And they've got a goalie who is arguably coming off the best season of all time for any netminder in history.

If you're going to skew one way that hard, you'd better be extremely dominant in your areas of strength and Boston played their strengths to a tee. Granted they got lucky in that the refs didn't seem interested in calling any penalties but their grit, defense and netminding was good enough to carry them through a very weak conference and into the finals. They deserve credit for doing what they did. They played their system to a tee and it seemed that whenever the Canucks had the puck there were three or four Bruins surrounding them.

Boston skewed more one way than probably any other team in cup history but when you've got a goalie with the best season ever and a Norris winner who's 7 feet tall, I guess you can get away with it.


Last edited by Lafleurs Guy: 06-16-2011 at 12:30 AM.
Lafleurs Guy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-16-2011, 12:19 AM
  #69
MathMan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 17,055
vCash: 500
Boston was actually a terrible defensive club. Second-worst in the entire league in shots against.

MathMan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-16-2011, 12:20 AM
  #70
jlgib21*
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 620
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lafleurs Guy View Post
Without getting into the specifics of the article (because I didn't read it) I'd say that it was a really strange year in the East. Pittsburgh was the odds on favourite and then their two star (one of whom was just turning into an absolute generational player) players fell off the map with injuries.

Washington decided to completely scrap what had made them great and experimented with a new way of playing and got bounced.

That left a whole bunch of mediocre teams and the one with the best goaltending and defense got through. It reminds me of the '86 and '93 Habs who went through the East with easy competition and got to the finals and won. Once Pittsburgh and Washington go down, it's a total crapshoot in our conference. The East sucks really, really badly right now. I don't think we would've made the finals but I'm shocked at how bad our conference has become.
We had deeper,tougher teams that was built to go deep into the playoffs.We got lucky to avoid Edm. in 86,and Pitt in 93

jlgib21* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-16-2011, 08:23 AM
  #71
Freaky Habs Fan
Registered User
 
Freaky Habs Fan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: New-Brunswick
Posts: 9,505
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Carey Price View Post
With the East not having a powerhouse team, I don't think it's far fetched to say that with a win over Boston we had a shot at going to round 3 or 4. We did it last year. Obviously playing 7 games and being banged up makes it hard, but Boston dispatched Phillie pretty quick given their lack of goaltending so that game them a lot of rest.
You're right. Every team in the East had some question marks surrounding them. Boston won because of THomas...we have Price. He can win games by himself.

Also, in the article, he said that Gill-Kostitsyn-Darche-Diaz-Emelin don't make us a better team. He's right...but having Markov, Goerges and Pacioretty will make us a better team. We had Markov for 7 games last season...and he's a top 20 d-man in the league.

I think we have the right to believe what we want.

Freaky Habs Fan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-16-2011, 09:23 AM
  #72
AraGOHABSGO
Registered User
 
AraGOHABSGO's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 181
vCash: 500
Lets take a minute and imagine this:

Chara,Horton and Sidenberg were injured against Habs but Pactchs,Markov and Gorges were not.

Would you serisouly believe that Bruins would have beaten us? Seriously?

With Markov and Gorges, we woudnt' of needed Sopel and Spacek.

With less key injuries and a hot Price, and we can go all the way...

In PK I believe!
In Price I Believe!
IN HABS I BELEIVE!

AraGOHABSGO is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-16-2011, 09:32 AM
  #73
Melvin Udall
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Canada
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,304
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lafleurs Guy View Post
Without getting into the specifics of the article (because I didn't read it) I'd say that it was a really strange year in the East. Pittsburgh was the odds on favourite and then their two star (one of whom was just turning into an absolute generational player) players fell off the map with injuries.

Washington decided to completely scrap what had made them great and experimented with a new way of playing and got bounced.

That left a whole bunch of mediocre teams and the one with the best goaltending and defense got through. It reminds me of the '86 and '93 Habs who went through the East with easy competition and got to the finals and won. Once Pittsburgh and Washington go down, it's a total crapshoot in our conference. The East sucks really, really badly right now. I don't think we would've made the finals but I'm shocked at how bad our conference has become.

As I said recently in another thread, most cup teams have a balance of good offense and defense. Some (NJ) Skew one way or the other but are usually better than average in the other area.

Boston's numbers this regular season showed great defense and a pretty decent offense. Once Savard went down though, I figured that they wouldn't be a real factor in winning a cup.

But they made up for it in other ways. They are huge and have tons of grit. They have arguably the best defenseman in the game right now. And they've got a goalie who is arguably coming off the best season of all time for any netminder in history.

If you're going to skew one way that hard, you'd better be extremely dominant in your areas of strength and Boston played their strengths to a tee. Granted they got lucky in that the refs didn't seem interested in calling any penalties but their grit, defense and netminding was good enough to carry them through a very weak conference and into the finals. They deserve credit for doing what they did. They played their system to a tee and it seemed that whenever the Canucks had the puck there were three or four Bruins surrounding them.

Boston skewed more one way than probably any other team in cup history but when you've got a goalie with the best season ever and a Norris winner who's 7 feet tall, I guess you can get away with it.


Lafleur,


All great points!




And what if this is....as good as it gets (for the Habs)?

Quote:
Originally Posted by MathMan View Post
Boston was actually a terrible defensive club. Second-worst in the entire league in shots against.


L O L !


Are you forgetting that goaltending is (arguably) the single biggest defensive part of any team?

Of course Thomas' stats speak for themselves and the fact is: Thomas just he won the Conn Smythe and is the odds on favourite to win the Vezina.

Not to mention that the Bruins in GF vs GA Differential was 2nd best in the NHL at +51 - while the Habs
was +7 ( L O L)!

Are you forgetting that the HABS made it to round #3 in 2010 by being badly out shot ie every playoff game they played on their way to round #3 (but of course that was good defense - right)?




And what if this is...as good as it gets (for the HABS)?

Melvin Udall is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-16-2011, 09:53 AM
  #74
25th
Registered User
 
25th's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Aylmer beach, Qc
Posts: 802
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MathMan View Post
Typical Habs-bashing, with plenty of baseless narrative mixed in. Even as an opinion piece from a media outlet, it's pretty bad.

I'm not sure why RDS hired Bertrand Raymond at all. They should really find an editorialist who understands the game and whose agenda isn't quite so transparent.
He was hired to stir the poop. We should just ignore him. Same with Réhan.

25th is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-16-2011, 10:17 AM
  #75
Chris Nilan
Registered User
 
Chris Nilan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 273
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by neofury View Post
More-so they have the mentality that regardless of it being a new cap world where we don't get to hand pick Quebec born players we should be going after Quebec born players despite the picks we've been making being heavily favored over them. (Even if it means trading a ton of assets like Subban, Plekanec, Cammy for a guy like Lecavalier who is overpaid and overrated)

They expect us to take the draft rankings of any other team and give each Quebecois a +10 on the list.

Either that or just take all the best Quebecois players and list them 1-7 even if it means those 7 guys this year aren't even top 20 worthy. Obviously hypothetical but it's true. They'd rather see the team be **** with loads of Quebecois than succeed with just a few. It's a real shame honestly.

They're so blinded by their own political agenda that they couldn't even give two ***** about the success of the team, it's more about the success of the language itself.
Moderator, please direct this person to the appropriate FAQ regarding the myth of being able to hand pick players.

Chris Nilan 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 08:44 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.