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
06-20-2011, 05:33 PM
  #126
Lafleurs Guy
Registered User
 
Lafleurs Guy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 20,633
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MathMan View Post
We'll be as much contenders next year as the Bruins were last year. Probably more so. I'm quite convinced that the organization is building towards a competitiveness window starting next year, and then consistent competitiveness from then on a la Red Wings or New Jersey.
So we're a dynasty in the making then? Starting next year we're a 100+ point team for the forseeable future?
Quote:
Originally Posted by MathMan View Post
I realize you haven't seen Markov lately, but you're woefully underestimating him. He's been facing the Habs' toughest minutes very effectively, and driving his pairing in doing so alongside Komisarek who just isn't as good. He's a heck of a lot more than merely "adequate". Wiz is "adequate". Markov is way better than that.
Markov is one of the best offensive blueliners in the game. He's not elite defensively though. If he was, he'd win the Norris every year.

He's never even been nominated and it's because he's not the all-around elite player that you're claiming he is. He's very good, so was Thomas Kaberle.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MathMan View Post
Clearing the net in front requires strength. It's in my list. It doesn't require hitting people, just pushing them. Gill can do that and he doesn't hit people.
Who cares?

I don't distinguish between pushing or whatever... the guy can't clear the net the way others do. He was great with Komisarek and they benefitted from each other. It wasn't a one way relationship. Komi provided Markov with protection and room to operate. He wasn't the parasite that you've argued he was. They were great together.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MathMan View Post
Like I said, here's a guy who's held the Habs defense together while Subban grew into a #1 D-man, and been effective doing it. But then he gets blamed because he makes turnovers (as all PMDs do) and he misses the net (though no more than anyone else really). He's getting much more flack than he deserves.
I hope we dump him.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kriss E View Post
But you didn't really respond to what I was saying.
If you agree that Gomez can improve his production, matter of fact you're expecting him to, then don't you also agree that the same can be said for Gionta and Cammy? Or are you expecting them both to score less than 50points again?
Don't you think Plekanec should likely reach his 60-70 pt mark as well?
A.Kost is the only guy I don't expect much of an improvement over. 20G mark, 40-50pts is probably what we'll get.
MaxPac, more than 24pts? I think we can agree on that right?
Eller, more than 17? I certainly hope so..
I don't see us with a great offense next year. I don't think our forwards are good enough.

As for all our forwards being better, it rarely works out that way.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kriss E View Post
So, if we can agree that our skilled players are all likely to improve their scoring, wouldn't that apply to our team? Not to mention, there's a chance we add Jagr, who's likely a safe bet for 50-60pts (but that's not done so I'm not counting it in).
If we add somebody else, then that's a different discussion. I'm not talking about Jagr or anyone else until it happens. The club we have right now though, doesn't have forwards that are going to scare anyone in this league. If we add Sidney Crosby, my opinion will change.

Jagr? Who knows? He could pull a Selanne and be a 50 goal guy... or he could be a shadow of his former self.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kriss E View Post
I said it's overrated not that there's no benefits. I also said grit is much more important.
I do feel size on the top 6 has its importance, but I don't think it's the be all of end all. But I feel we have it in MaxPac and AK, and possibly Eller. If we add Jagr, we would add some more again.
Just because he throws the odd big hit, it doesn't make AK gritty. He's not a pushover but he's hardly a power forward and he doesn't come close to making up for the lack of size from his linemates. He's never going to be a power forward. The only guy we have in the top six with that potential next year is MaxPac. The other guys are five foot nothing. It's all well and good to point to a couple of guys and say look we have some size, but compared to other clubs our primary scorers are very small esp our first line.

And I think MaxPac is good and has very good potential. But he's still very young and I worry that folks are going to put too much pressure on him next year.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozymandias View Post
FYI, Markov's GAA per 60 minutes over the last 6 seasons is very close to Lidstrom's. Lidstrom gets a better 5-on-5 +/- because he plays with Dats and Zets who produce a lot more than the forwards Markov had. But the goals allowed is about the same, for ES and PK and they both played top minutes, so their opposition is the same. Markov is one of the closest players to Lidstrom in defensive style of play. Markov isn't just really good with the puck, he's one the best positional dman in the league. Stop talking out of your hat. You run that mouth of yours like there's no tomorow but you have no idea how many fallacies you propagate as 'truth'. One-dimensional defensively
Wow, what a shock that Lidstrom gets all the Norris trophies Markov doesn't sniff it. He's never even received an all-star selection. I wonder why that is?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozymandias View Post
Go check their goals allowed stats. Next thing you'll say is that Markov has had better goalies, yet the Wings have had the best depth and talent in the league in the last 10 years. That's not what Markov had, yet their GAA is about the same.
The Wings have had pretty much the same goals against that we have for the past few years except this season when we didn't have Markov... and we let in 40 fewer goals.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozymandias View Post
Stop living in the cult of great men, get some perspective and put things into context, instead of always using a bygone past as the yardstick for the present. (such as yesterday's "cup winners all have 2-3-4 future HOF" I stopped reading there and understood it would be pointless to explain how ALL your comparisons are based on very different models that give much different results and can't be compared).
Stop using facts about the past? Okay...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozymandias View Post
BTW, if you want to question my view of Lidstrom, understand that I've been a huge fan of him since 92, have seen him play A LOT, and know what he is capable of. I've been also following #79's career since he started in the NHL, and Markov isn't far off from Lidstrom.
And yet... the other guys seem to win the trophies. The other guys get the all-star selections. You'd think that being so incredibly legendary that Markov would make it wouldn't you? I guess the whole league is just against him.

I know that that's all in the past and those facts don't back you up, but hey... that's been the case for a long time. He was more comparable to Thomas Kaberle in his prime than Lidstrom and that's how he'll be remembered across the league. He's an amazing PP guy (one of the very best in the league) but that's his strength.

He won't sniff the HOF and you can scream at the top of your lungs about the injustices of the world but it's never going to happen. Chara will be there. Pronger will be there. Lidstrom will be there but Markov won't sniff it. Why? Because he's not nearly as complete as they are. He's very good but he's not nearly as good as you think he is. He doesn't control the game the way those other guys do and there's a very good chance that his best days are well behind him at this point. One more injury to that knee and he's done.


Last edited by Lafleurs Guy: 06-20-2011 at 05:53 PM.
Lafleurs Guy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-20-2011, 08:46 PM
  #127
MathMan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 16,967
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lafleurs Guy View Post
So we're a dynasty in the making then? Starting next year we're a 100+ point team for the forseeable future?
There's no such thing as a dynasty in the multiple-consecutive-Cup sense. But Montreal should be a 100-ish team for the next few years, yes. They were of the right caliber this season and missed by two wins.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lafleurs Guy View Post
Markov is one of the best offensive blueliners in the game. He's not elite defensively though. If he was, he'd win the Norris every year.
The Norris is a popularity contest where reputation matters more than ability. Guys who hit and are big and are often on highlight reels therefore have a huge benefit. Dion Phaneuf got nominated for the Norris once. Souray got more votes than Markov in the last year they've played together. It's a good thing Lidstrom dominated the award because we'd have had some pretty laughable winners. A guy like Markov who isn't flashy and doesn't get a lot of reputation press has no chance.

What matters to me is that every coach who's had Markov has used him heavily against top lines, often babysitting much worse D-men, and he's been effective in the role. That's what makes him an elite D-man.

I'm surprised you can't see that. I'm afraid it casts the rest of your assessments into some doubt. Of course you'll think the Habs are terrible if you insist on undervaluing their best player that way (then again, he also was a lowly 6th-round pick). Your evaluations of other players (Spacek, Kostitsyn) are likewise below the mark. It almost sounds like you're trying your darndest to downplay the team's players because the team doesn't match your idea of how it should be built.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lafleurs Guy View Post
I don't distinguish between pushing or whatever... the guy can't clear the net the way others do. He was great with Komisarek and they benefitted from each other. It wasn't a one way relationship. Komi provided Markov with protection and room to operate. He wasn't the parasite that you've argued he was. They were great together.
Komi completed Markov not unlike the way Gill completes Subban. He was not a liability, he provided helpful skills, but let's not pretend he provided equal contribution.

Between Komisarek and Markov, Markov was by far the best defensive D-man. There's a reason Komi sank as soon as they were separated, and Markov didn't.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lafleurs Guy View Post
I hope we dump him.
You and a lot of people. I'm not sure the sentiment is shared by the Habs' brass.


Last edited by MathMan: 06-20-2011 at 08:55 PM.
MathMan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-20-2011, 09:16 PM
  #128
Kriss E
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 23,271
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MathMan View Post
The Norris is a popularity contest where reputation matters more than ability. Guys who hit and are big and are often on highlight reels therefore have a huge benefit. Dion Phaneuf got nominated for the Norris once. Souray got more votes than Markov in the last year they've played together. It's a good thing Lidstrom dominated the award because we'd have had some pretty laughable winners. A guy like Markov who isn't flashy and doesn't get a lot of reputation press has no chance.

What matters to me is that every coach who's had Markov has used him heavily against top lines, often babysitting much worse D-men, and he's been effective in the role. That's what makes him an elite D-man.

I'm surprised you can't see that. I'm afraid it casts the rest of your assessments into some doubt. Of course you'll think the Habs are terrible if you insist on undervaluing their best player that way (then again, he also was a lowly 6th-round pick). Your evaluations of other players (Spacek, Kostitsyn) are likewise below the mark. It almost sounds like you're trying your darndest to downplay the team's players because the team doesn't match your idea of how it should be built.
Agreed.
The incapability of seeing any slight improvement up front and not believing the Habs are capable of being 100pt team after missing by so little despite going through a lot of problems (no top 6, multiple career lows, key injuries, slow and aging blueline...) is pretty telling.

Kriss E is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-20-2011, 09:30 PM
  #129
Teufelsdreck
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 14,222
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kriss E View Post
But you didn't really respond to what I was saying.
If you agree that Gomez can improve his production, matter of fact you're expecting him to, then don't you also agree that the same can be said for Gionta and Cammy? Or are you expecting them both to score less than 50points again?
Don't you think Plekanec should likely reach his 60-70 pt mark as well?
A.Kost is the only guy I don't expect much of an improvement over. 20G mark, 40-50pts is probably what we'll get.
MaxPac, more than 24pts? I think we can agree on that right?
Eller, more than 17? I certainly hope so..

So, if we can agree that our skilled players are all likely to improve their scoring, wouldn't that apply to our team? Not to mention, there's a chance we add Jagr, who's likely a safe bet for 50-60pts (but that's not done so I'm not counting it in).

I said it's overrated not that there's no benefits. I also said grit is much more important.
I do feel size on the top 6 has its importance, but I don't think it's the be all of end all. But I feel we have it in MaxPac and AK, and possibly Eller. If we add Jagr, we would add some more again.
You presume, mon ami. AKost has already exceeeded 20 goals. Why can't he do it again?

Teufelsdreck is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-20-2011, 09:53 PM
  #130
Kriss E
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 23,271
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Teufelsdreck View Post
You presume, mon ami. AKost has already exceeeded 20 goals. Why can't he do it again?
It's definitely a possibility. I don't see why it wouldn't. However, I won't aim for his highest total which was 26, I'll take a lighter more reasonable expectation and say he should definitely hit 20G again.

I just think guys like Gomez, Gionta, Cammy are likely to have better improvements. But I could be wrong there. Especially if AK ends up playing on the 3rd line with Eller/DD, versus weaker opponents, I could definitely see them dominate.
If he ends up playing on that line though, I'm hoping it is because MaxPac+FA signing complete the top 6.
But even if we didn't and AK still played on the top 6, I don't see why he (and all our top 6 players in general) couldn't have better years.

Kriss E is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-20-2011, 10:58 PM
  #131
Lafleurs Guy
Registered User
 
Lafleurs Guy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 20,633
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MathMan View Post
There's no such thing as a dynasty in the multiple-consecutive-Cup sense. But Montreal should be a 100-ish team for the next few years, yes. They were of the right caliber this season and missed by two wins.
Okay, we'll see. I'm glad you're willing to be up front about this because others just run and hide when asked that question. Thanks for that. Personally, I see us having great goaltending and good offensive blueline. That's about all we can count on. In the pathetic East it might be good enough. Personally, I don't see us cracking 100 points but I think we'll make the playoffs somewhere behind Pitts, Philly, Boston, Washington at a minimum. Then the Rangers, TB, Hurricanes, Sabres, Devils will be in the mix. We'll see though, with the epic collapse the Division has had maybe Toronto will make it.

Believe me though, I really hope that you're right and I'm wrong. And I hope I'm wrong about what you've said in terms of us finishing with 100 points over the next few years too.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MathMan View Post
The Norris is a popularity contest where reputation matters more than ability. Guys who hit and are big and are often on highlight reels therefore have a huge benefit. Dion Phaneuf got nominated for the Norris once. Souray got more votes than Markov in the last year they've played together. It's a good thing Lidstrom dominated the award because we'd have had some pretty laughable winners. A guy like Markov who isn't flashy and doesn't get a lot of reputation press has no chance.
It's more than a popularity contest. Is it perfect? No, no award ever is (the year Theo won the Montreal writers refused to vote at all for Iggy.) But it's not completely random and lottery-ish the way you're suggesting it is.

But it's not surprising that he wasn't nominated. He's very good, but he's not in that class. If he was that great, somewhere along the way he'd be in there. And please don't tell me it's because he's not flashy, the guy plays in Montreal and gets tons more exposure than somebody like Shea Weber or Drew Doughty.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MathMan View Post
What matters to me is that every coach who's had Markov has used him heavily against top lines, often babysitting much worse D-men, and he's been effective in the role. That's what makes him an elite D-man.
So do we say the same with Kaberle too then? Or the number one blueliner on any other club? Please.

Quote:
Originally Posted by MathMan View Post
I'm surprised you can't see that. I'm afraid it casts the rest of your assessments into some doubt. Of course you'll think the Habs are terrible if you insist on undervaluing their best player that way (then again, he also was a lowly 6th-round pick). Your evaluations of other players (Spacek, Kostitsyn) are likewise below the mark. It almost sounds like you're trying your darndest to downplay the team's players because the team doesn't match your idea of how it should be built.
When did I say they were terrible? I think we've got great goaltending and a strong offensive blueline. We've got some skilled forwards but lack size and we have huge holes in our lineup. I don't see us among the league's elite but that doesn't make us terrible. It makes us middle of the pack which is what we've been.

I don't see a 100 point season as impossible either. I don't expect it but if things go right for us, sure it could happen. We could also miss the playoffs if Price isn't awesome. That's the kind of team we have. The first half of the season, we'll be on pace for 1000 points and then we just drop off a cliff for no reason...
Quote:
Originally Posted by MathMan View Post
Komi completed Markov not unlike the way Gill completes Subban. He was not a liability, he provided helpful skills, but let's not pretend he provided equal contribution.

Between Komisarek and Markov, Markov was by far the best defensive D-man. There's a reason Komi sank as soon as they were separated, and Markov didn't.
Markov was the better blueliner for sure. But Komisarek addressed his weaknesses. Again, it wasn't the one way relationship that you're claiming that it is. Markov is a very good blueliner but if he's your best player, you probably won't win a cup. Those other guys are good enough to be the best player on a cup winning team.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MathMan View Post
You and a lot of people. I'm not sure the sentiment is shared by the Habs' brass.
I doubt it. But that's the team's loss. The Habs brass is the same group that likes to have smurf centers so, I differ with them on that too.

Lafleurs Guy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-20-2011, 11:12 PM
  #132
Iwishihadacup
Registered User
 
Iwishihadacup's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Quebec City
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,713
vCash: 500
ugh ugh toughness rabble rabble rabble toughness ugh ugh ugh

Iwishihadacup is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-20-2011, 11:32 PM
  #133
vokiel
#NoTradesWithEDM
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Montréal
Country: Martinique
Posts: 6,464
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by bcv View Post
With a relatively healthy line-up, this team is a contender.
If that's the case, the other 15 teams who make it to the playoffs are as well.

Define contender

vokiel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-21-2011, 12:24 AM
  #134
MathMan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 16,967
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lafleurs Guy View Post
It's more than a popularity contest. Is it perfect? No, no award ever is (the year Theo won the Montreal writers refused to vote at all for Iggy.) But it's not completely random and lottery-ish the way you're suggesting it is.
It's absolutely a reputation vote. It's not random, the people who vote aren't completely clueless, and D-men who get good reputations are generally good. But without the ability to watch every game and every team, the voters are going to be heavily influenced by player reputations.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lafleurs Guy View Post
But it's not surprising that he wasn't nominated. He's very good, but he's not in that class. If he was that great, somewhere along the way he'd be in there. And please don't tell me it's because he's not flashy, the guy plays in Montreal and gets tons more exposure than somebody like Shea Weber or Drew Doughty.
You think he gets lots of exposure because you're exposed to the Montreal media. There the media glare is massive. Outside of the city, though, Montreal is this vaguely good team that's utterly uninteresting except when those whacky French Canadian media blow up some silly story out of proportion, which makes for a good story. Unless a Hab is a flashy North American with WJC credentials, such as Subban or Price, he's not going to get a lot of exposure outside of the city, even on TSN, let alone the US media. Markov is, perenially, "the underrated Markov". He's not helped by his quiet demeanor, mind you. And now that he plays alongside Subban, he's probably never going to get the press he needs to win a Norris.

Despite this, the last time Markov played something resembling a full season, he was tied for 7th, alongside Duncan Keith, for Norris votes. He was getting some good press at the time, because he was second to Green in points by D-men. Green, of course, got a lot more votes despite his reputed defensive issues and was nominated.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lafleurs Guy View Post
So do we say the same with Kaberle too then? Or the number one blueliner on any other club? Please.
I suppose I should've specified he needs to perform at an elite level. Kaberle hasn't been a top 5-on-5 defenseman for a while not.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lafleurs Guy View Post
I don't see a 100 point season as impossible either. I don't expect it but if things go right for us, sure it could happen. We could also miss the playoffs if Price isn't awesome. That's the kind of team we have. The first half of the season, we'll be on pace for 1000 points and then we just drop off a cliff for no reason...
Just consider. Montreal was two wins away from 100 points last season. Don't you think that the things that went wrong (even if you don't buy the shooting bit, there's all the injuries) outweighed the things that went right?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lafleurs Guy View Post
Markov was the better blueliner for sure. But Komisarek addressed his weaknesses. Again, it wasn't the one way relationship that you're claiming that it is. Markov is a very good blueliner but if he's your best player, you probably won't win a cup. Those other guys are good enough to be the best player on a cup winning team.
Markov is good enough to be the best skater on a Cup winning team; of course, there can't be a huge gap between him and the next best player, but while there was before there isn't anymore. With your emphasis on top players you often seem to forget it's a team game. I think he's a slightly better all-around player than Chara anyway (Chara is good, but I think his size and aggression gets him overrated; Markov is also the best PP quarterback on Earth) and Chara was arguably the Bruins' best skater (I'd make a case for Bergeron).

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lafleurs Guy View Post
I doubt it. But that's the team's loss. The Habs brass is the same group that likes to have smurf centers so, I differ with them on that too.
They probably think that the size issue is overblown and that it's more important to get good players than big players. I certainly agree with them on that point.

MathMan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-21-2011, 03:43 AM
  #135
ECWHSWI
5M? insulting!!!
 
ECWHSWI's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 15,213
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lafleurs Guy View Post
He won't sniff the HOF and you can scream at the top of your lungs about the injustices of the world but it's never going to happen. Chara will be there. Pronger will be there. Lidstrom will be there but Markov won't sniff it. Why? Because he's not nearly as complete as they are. He's very good but he's not nearly as good as you think he is. He doesn't control the game the way those other guys do and there's a very good chance that his best days are well behind him at this point. One more injury to that knee and he's done.
And yet, there was a time, not very long ago, where winning two in a row without him in the line-up would have been a miracle...

ECWHSWI is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-21-2011, 09:45 AM
  #136
Lafleurs Guy
Registered User
 
Lafleurs Guy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 20,633
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MathMan View Post
It's absolutely a reputation vote. It's not random, the people who vote aren't completely clueless, and D-men who get good reputations are generally good. But without the ability to watch every game and every team, the voters are going to be heavily influenced by player reputations.

You think he gets lots of exposure because you're exposed to the Montreal media. There the media glare is massive. Outside of the city, though, Montreal is this vaguely good team that's utterly uninteresting except when those whacky French Canadian media blow up some silly story out of proportion, which makes for a good story. Unless a Hab is a flashy North American with WJC credentials, such as Subban or Price, he's not going to get a lot of exposure outside of the city, even on TSN, let alone the US media. Markov is, perenially, "the underrated Markov". He's not helped by his quiet demeanor, mind you. And now that he plays alongside Subban, he's probably never going to get the press he needs to win a Norris.
Montreal gets far more exposure (even if you just count Canada) than any of those Southern state teams. It's a huge advantage.

And again, look at the Theo example. There's no way he should've beaten Iggy and he wouldn't have except he played for Montreal.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MathMan View Post
Despite this, the last time Markov played something resembling a full season, he was tied for 7th, alongside Duncan Keith, for Norris votes. He was getting some good press at the time, because he was second to Green in points by D-men. Green, of course, got a lot more votes despite his reputed defensive issues and was nominated.
He was at the peak of his powers and he still couldn't get nominated. He's very good but he's not awesome. As for Green, guys who get points will usually get more votes than they deserve, but you could make the same argument against Markov in that respect if you wanted to. His value is higher because he's amazing on the PP.

Quote:
Originally Posted by MathMan View Post
I suppose I should've specified he needs to perform at an elite level. Kaberle hasn't been a top 5-on-5 defenseman for a while not.
They WERE comparable players. Kaberle has slipped and Markov hasn't managed a complete season in two years.

Quote:
Originally Posted by MathMan View Post
Just consider. Montreal was two wins away from 100 points last season. Don't you think that the things that went wrong (even if you don't buy the shooting bit, there's all the injuries) outweighed the things that went right?
I think that this team has been inconsistent for a long time and until this changes, I'm not going to sit here and view them as a 100 point team. And if Price isn't amazing last season, we aren't close to even getting the points we did. It's all in how you spin it. You assume everything is going to be better, I don't. Some things will be better and some won't. That's usually the way it works.

And if we don't re-sign Wiz then I think we're setting ourselves up for problems because I don't think we can rely on Markov to play a full season anymore. I've been hearing from you for a long time that we're a good team. I've been hearing from you for a long time that we were going to crack 100 points. And yet we squeaked in two years ago with 88 points despite spectacular goaltending and last season finished in 6th despite facing the worst Conference in history. I don't think we're that good and I think we can thank our lucky stars that we're not having to compete in the West because there's a ton of teams that are infinitely better than we are over there.

Quote:
Originally Posted by MathMan View Post
Markov is good enough to be the best skater on a Cup winning team; of course, there can't be a huge gap between him and the next best player, but while there was before there isn't anymore. With your emphasis on top players you often seem to forget it's a team game. I think he's a slightly better all-around player than Chara anyway (Chara is good, but I think his size and aggression gets him overrated; Markov is also the best PP quarterback on Earth) and Chara was arguably the Bruins' best skater (I'd make a case for Bergeron).
Go post this in the HF history boards. I don't think you'll get many folks who agree with you. And I didn't say skater, I said player.

Quote:
Originally Posted by MathMan View Post
They probably think that the size issue is overblown and that it's more important to get good players than big players. I certainly agree with them on that point.
I don't. And it's been proven out over the years. You keep trying to separate good vs big. You can get good players with size too you know.


Last edited by Lafleurs Guy: 06-21-2011 at 10:04 AM.
Lafleurs Guy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-21-2011, 09:55 AM
  #137
otto bond
Registered User
 
otto bond's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,851
vCash: 500
I was under the impression that Bertrand Raymond had retired. An other terrible article IMO and he should retire.

otto bond is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-21-2011, 10:03 AM
  #138
MathMan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 16,967
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lafleurs Guy View Post
Montreal gets far more exposure (even if you just count Canada) than any of those Southern state teams. It's a huge advantage.
I think you overestimate the amount of exposure Montreal gets in English-language media outside of Montreal. It's more than most of the southern teams, but only because most of those teams are terrible. TSN talks about Montreal only because they kind of have to. The US media don't treat them as any more relevant than those non-playoff southern clubs.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lafleurs Guy View Post
And again, look at the Theo example. There's no way he should've beaten Iggy and he wouldn't have except he played for Montreal.
Theo took a weak Montreal club to the playoffs with a .931 save percentage; 50 goals from Iggy or not, the Flames missed the playoffs and it wasn't close. Stupid as it is, team success matters in the voters' minds; if the Flames had made the playoffs, Iggy would've won.

Yet another reason why awards voting is terrible. It gets you a lot of press and it gets you in the HoF but it's a lousy way to determine who's better.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lafleurs Guy View Post
They WERE comparable players. Kaberle has slipped and Markov hasn't managed a complete season in two years.
Markov has always been better than Kaberle, but the two were comparable: quiet, non-physical types who'd never have gotten the credit they deserve because of their playstyle and a weird notion that being a good offensive defenseman necessarily means you are weaker at defense.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lafleurs Guy View Post
I think that this team has been inconsistent for a long time and until this changes, I'm not going to sit here and view them as a 100 point team. And if Price isn't amazing last season, we aren't close to even getting the points we did.
Well, you also have to factor in that the average goalie facing the Habs was significantly better than Price. That's much less likely to happen again than Price suddenly becoming league-average.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lafleurs Guy View Post
Go post this in the HF history boards. I don't think you'll get many folks who agree with you. And I didn't say skater, I said player.
Well, then the Habs are set right? If Price is going to be their best player a la Tim Thomas, they could win a Cup like the Bruins just did.

I'm not putting any question about the strength of any Habs player to the general HFBoards population. Too much enmity against the Habs; you'll never see them get the credit they deserve.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lafleurs Guy View Post
I don't. And it's been proven out over the years.
No. It's been blamed over the years because it's the easy explanation. Sometimes to the breaking point (see the Philly series in 2008). It's never actually been the real problem.

MathMan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-21-2011, 10:19 AM
  #139
Kriss E
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 23,271
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lafleurs Guy View Post
He was at the peak of his powers and he still couldn't get nominated. He's very good but he's not awesome. As for Green, guys who get points will usually get more votes than they deserve, but you could make the same argument against Markov in that respect if you wanted to. His value is higher because he's amazing on the PP.
But you already recognized Markov's offensive abilities. The issue is you're saying he's not that great defensively, which is ridiculous.
I don't really understand how you could say he was weak defensively after having seen him play all these years.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lafleurs Guy View Post
I think that this team has been inconsistent for a long time and until this changes, I'm not going to sit here and view them as a 100 point team. And if Price isn't amazing last season, we aren't close to even getting the points we did. It's all in how you spin it. You assume everything is going to be better, I don't. Some things will be better and some won't. That's usually the way it works.
But what exactly won't be better? You already said we should be getting good goaltending again. You said our blueline should improve, but have your doubts about our offense, although you did mention Gomez should go back to 55pt mark. So, envisioning an improvement up front is rather easy to do, but you refuse to believe so. You don't have much of an argument to counter it however, you base your notion on ''some things go good, others bad''. Considering you think defense/Goaltending will improve, you have to stick with the offense being bad.
But even if it is. It can't possibly be worse than last year, and if our D+G improve altogether, then why is it hard to believe they couldn't reach 100pts?

Kriss E is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-21-2011, 10:32 AM
  #140
Lafleurs Guy
Registered User
 
Lafleurs Guy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 20,633
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MathMan View Post
I think you overestimate the amount of exposure Montreal gets in English-language media outside of Montreal. It's more than most of the southern teams, but only because most of those teams are terrible. TSN talks about Montreal only because they kind of have to. The US media don't treat them as any more relevant than those non-playoff southern clubs.
No matter how you slice it, the Habs are followed by more people than arguably any other team in the league. There's a huge advantage to being here. Nobody pays attention to Nashville, including most of the folks who actually live there.

This shouldn't even be up for debate man...
Quote:
Originally Posted by MathMan View Post
Theo took a weak Montreal club to the playoffs with a .931 save percentage; 50 goals from Iggy or not, the Flames missed the playoffs and it wasn't close. Stupid as it is, team success matters in the voters' minds; if the Flames had made the playoffs, Iggy would've won.

Yet another reason why awards voting is terrible. It gets you a lot of press and it gets you in the HoF but it's a lousy way to determine who's better.
Actually, Iggy would've won but a Quebec sportswriter left Iggy completely off the ballot so that Theo could win. That's why Iggy lost.

Quote:
Originally Posted by MathMan View Post
Markov has always been better than Kaberle, but the two were comparable: quiet, non-physical types who'd never have gotten the credit they deserve because of their playstyle and a weird notion that being a good offensive defenseman necessarily means you are weaker at defense.
I think he's better than Kaberle too, but he's a lot closer to Kaberle than he is to the elite blueliners in the league. They are, or at least were, similar players.


Quote:
Originally Posted by MathMan View Post
Well, you also have to factor in that the average goalie facing the Habs was significantly better than Price. That's much less likely to happen again than Price suddenly becoming league-average.
I think Price is a star. I think he's going to lead us to great things one day. And I think that we'd have been better off not chasing the quick fixes that we did two years ago because we'd be in a better position to win in the future.

Price may stay the same but again... you keep thinking everything is going to be better. I don't. There will be injuries, there will be slumps, we may drop off a cliff in the 2nd half... good teams overcome this stuff to post 100 point seasons. We haven't.

We'll see.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MathMan View Post
Well, then the Habs are set right? If Price is going to be their best player a la Tim Thomas, they could win a Cup like the Bruins just did.
I think he's good enough to lead us to a cup someday, yes. But we need to support him.

I truly believe that Price will be good enough to win a cup and I've believed this for a long time. I believe he is going to be the best netminder in the league at some point and I think that we should give him the best support that we can. Subban has been as good (probably a whole lot better) as we could have hoped for and there's two guys with superstar potential we can build around. With his emergence, I am optimistic for the future for sure. I believe they are strong enough to build a legitimate contender around. However, I don't believe that we've done a good job of this and I don't believe that we're going to be contending as soon as next year.

I think we took shortcuts at the expense of long term success and it bothers me that we've got a bunch of smurfs up front now and we're waiting on Gomez to play out his contract... it was counter productive to what we should've done a few years back and it's unfortunate that we didn't take more of a long term view instead of trying to build via overpriced small free agents. I'm going to be sick if McD turns out to be anywhere near the blueliner he was forecasted to be.

Even though I thought we shoud've gotten a better return than Eller for Halak, at least it was a younger prospect coming back. And the way our scouting seems to be hitting homeruns with later picks it leads me to believe that they know what we're doing from that standpoint and we should have been making more of those kinds of moves. Gorges and Maxpac came to us this way, Eller came to us this way... I'd like to have seen more of those kinds of moves instead of the quick fixes that we saw two years ago. Maxpac looks good (not elite but good) Eller we'll have to wait and see on but that's about it for the forwards. I'd feel a lot better about our future if we had somebody up there that we could build around and if that prospect had at least some size.

As for this year, we'll be okay. We'll make the postseason and maybe we'll be better than hoped. But I'm expecting us to finish in the middle to bottom of the pack again. And that's against poor competition. I don't see us as contenders right now, there are too many holes.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MathMan View Post
I'm not putting any question about the strength of any Habs player to the general HFBoards population. Too much enmity against the Habs; you'll never see them get the credit they deserve.
That's a cop out. I'm not even talking about the general thread... I'm talking about the history thread. Folks over there will give you an honest answer. They're all about numbers over there and I'm sure they'd listen to your Sabremetric stats to back it up.

I think you're just worried that you'll be laughed off the board if you ask the question. If he's that good, you should be able to make a convincing argument to them though, so go try it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MathMan View Post
No. It's been blamed over the years because it's the easy explanation. Sometimes to the breaking point (see the Philly series in 2008). It's never actually been the real problem.
I don't agree with you. I don't think many folks outside the Hab forum would agree with you either. Let's just leave this one alone dude.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kriss E View Post
But you already recognized Markov's offensive abilities. The issue is you're saying he's not that great defensively, which is ridiculous.
I don't really understand how you could say he was weak defensively after having seen him play all these years.
Weak? No. Great defensively? Also no. Unlike the truly elite, he has limitations to his game.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kriss E View Post
But what exactly won't be better? You already said we should be getting good goaltending again. You said our blueline should improve, but have your doubts about our offense, although you did mention Gomez should go back to 55pt mark. So, envisioning an improvement up front is rather easy to do, but you refuse to believe so. You don't have much of an argument to counter it however, you base your notion on ''some things go good, others bad''. Considering you think defense/Goaltending will improve, you have to stick with the offense being bad.
But even if it is. It can't possibly be worse than last year, and if our D+G improve altogether, then why is it hard to believe they couldn't reach 100pts?
I don't think a 100 point season is impossible at all. I just don't expect it to happen.

Lafleurs Guy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-21-2011, 12:19 PM
  #141
MathMan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 16,967
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lafleurs Guy View Post
No matter how you slice it, the Habs are followed by more people than arguably any other team in the league.
Most of whom are French-Canadian fans without awards votes. The vast majority of awards voters don't follow the French-language media that represents the majority of Habs coverage.

I don't deny that the Habs are up there in total media coverage; it just isn't the type of coverage that attracts attention from the right people.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lafleurs Guy View Post
Actually, Iggy would've won but a Quebec sportswriter left Iggy completely off the ballot so that Theo could win. That's why Iggy lost.
If the Flames had made the playoffs he'd have gotten enough votes that the one stupid Quebec sportswriter wouldn't have been able to make the difference.

Still -- doesn't your own story tell you exactly how worthwhile awards voting is to evaluate players?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lafleurs Guy View Post
I think he's better than Kaberle too, but he's a lot closer to Kaberle than he is to the elite blueliners in the league. They are, or at least were, similar players.
In style. So is Lidstrom. It's a matter of degrees.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lafleurs Guy View Post
Price may stay the same but again... you keep thinking everything is going to be better. I don't. There will be injuries, there will be slumps, we may drop off a cliff in the 2nd half... good teams overcome this stuff to post 100 point seasons. We haven't.
I expect Price to regress a tad. I expect shooting percentage to regress more simply because it was the more extreme deviation. Except for their shooting percentage, the Habs have been smack dab where I expected them to be given their talent level, just a year late.

As for this year, we'll be okay. We'll make the postseason and maybe we'll be better than hoped. But I'm expecting us to finish in the middle to bottom of the pack again. And that's against poor competition. I don't see us as contenders right now, there are too many holes.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lafleurs Guy View Post
I think you're just worried that you'll be laughed off the board if you ask the question. If he's that good, you should be able to make a convincing argument to them though, so go try it.
I wouldn't say "worried"; I expect to be. Just as I expect to get laughed at if I say the Bruins were the 5th-best club in the East this year. That wouldn't change my opinion. Appeal to popularity has never been more than a logical fallacy.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lafleurs Guy View Post
I don't agree with you. I don't think many folks outside the Hab forum would agree with you either. Let's just leave this one alone dude.
Apparently the Habs brass agrees with me.

Size has been blamed for every Habs playoff loss there has been since the lockout. I'm hard-pressed to think of one time where it would have been in the top 5 of factors.

MathMan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-21-2011, 02:23 PM
  #142
Lafleurs Guy
Registered User
 
Lafleurs Guy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 20,633
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MathMan View Post
Most of whom are French-Canadian fans without awards votes. The vast majority of awards voters don't follow the French-language media that represents the majority of Habs coverage.

I don't deny that the Habs are up there in total media coverage; it just isn't the type of coverage that attracts attention from the right people.
The voters are sportswriters. If you're the Montreal Canadiens, you already attract more attention from the Canadian media to begin with. Plus you'll get more exposure in the States in places like Boston. The Habs are a high profile team. C'mon man... how can you deny that it helps being here vs. Nashville or LA? Those aren't hockey towns. And nobody pays them much attention.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MathMan View Post
If the Flames had made the playoffs he'd have gotten enough votes that the one stupid Quebec sportswriter wouldn't have been able to make the difference.

Still -- doesn't your own story tell you exactly how worthwhile awards voting is to evaluate players?
It's the most stark example of somebody from Montreal being awarded something he otherwise wouldn't have won. It's an advantage. Was it a close race? Sure. But somebody threw the fix in because he was a Hab fan.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MathMan View Post
In style. So is Lidstrom. It's a matter of degrees.
No. Lidstrom is an all-time great hockey player who doesn't shy away from playing physical. He's not Pronger but you're not going to push him around the way you can with the other two. He's truly elite and will go down as one of the all-time best. Markov and Kaberle will have to buy a ticket to get into the HOF and that's how it should be.

Again, you're stretching this to extremes and the comparison isn't a good one. If you put Markov in the same sentence as Lidstrom you'll be laughed at and deservedly so. But if you put Markov in the same sentence as Kaberle, you might even wind up with a bit of a debate on your hands as to who's better. I'd take Markov, but it's not that huge a stretch.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MathMan View Post
I expect Price to regress a tad. I expect shooting percentage to regress more simply because it was the more extreme deviation. Except for their shooting percentage, the Habs have been smack dab where I expected them to be given their talent level, just a year late.
We shouldn't have made the playoffs two years ago at all. This year we finished 6th. I don't see us passing the top four clubs and then there's TB, Devils and others to contend with. We'll see I guess.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MathMan View Post
I wouldn't say "worried"; I expect to be. Just as I expect to get laughed at if I say the Bruins were the 5th-best club in the East this year. That wouldn't change my opinion. Appeal to popularity has never been more than a logical fallacy.
Yeah, might as well stay in the Hab forum where everyone is so objective...

The guys over there are more than fair for the most part. It has nothing to do with popularity, they're all about numbers. Who knows, you just might convince somebody of something.

Anyways, this is going in circles... you can have the last word again, I've said what I've got to say here.

Lafleurs Guy 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 03:17 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.