HFBoards

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

The Center Pole : who are the futur 4 center!!

View Poll Results: What is your top 4 !
Plekanec 130 79.27%
Deshanais 99 60.37%
Eller 145 88.41%
Gomez 8 4.88%
White 26 15.85%
Nokelainen 2 1.22%
Leblanc 34 20.73%
Bournival 40 24.39%
Galchenyuk 136 82.93%
Dumont 7 4.27%
Vail 10 6.10%
Pribyl 1 0.61%
Cichy 2 1.22%
Nattinen 5 3.05%
Geoffrion 6 3.66%
Multiple Choice Poll. Voters: 164. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
11-03-2012, 07:37 PM
  #76
DAChampion
Registered User
 
DAChampion's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Canberra, Australia
Country: Australia
Posts: 6,367
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kriss E View Post
Richards was a supporting cast? He was a key player in their win being the third most used forward and scoring 15pts in 20gp.
Third most used forward might mean sixth or seventh most useful player overall, once you add Doughty, Scuderi, Quick, etc.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kriss E View Post
I guess we have different standards for supporting cast. Carter yes, Richards no.
Yes we do, for me primary cast are the three or four most useful players on the team, not the sixth, seventh, and eighth most useful players.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kriss E View Post
But the point still stands, they were in the Finals a few years ago as Flyers, and they won it last year. Philly has won nothing, yet, nor is it assured that they ever will.
The Flyers team that made the finals had Chris Pronger and Sergei Bobrovsky. Completely different team.

From wiki: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dustin_Penner
On February 28, 2011, Penner was traded from the Edmonton Oilers to the Los Angeles Kings in exchange for Colten Teubert, a first round draft pick in 2011, as well as a conditional second round pick in 2012.

By your logic, this is a bad trade for Edmonton. Penner did play well in the playoffs where they won the cup, 11 points in 20 games. He has a cup. Edmonton has won nothing yet and there is no guarantee they will ever win anything.

By the way Jeff Carter was never traded from Philadelphia to Los Angeles. The fact he won a cup in Los Angeles is a total non-sequitur as to the merits of the Philadelphia-Columbus trade, which is what I raised for discussion. He was traded from Philadelphia to Columbus for Sean Couturier and Jacub Voracek, where he was not going to win the cup. He was then traded from Columbus to Los Angeles for Jack Johnson and a 1st rounder, where he was actually very helpful to LA, with 15 goals and 25 points in 39 games, helping them make 8th place.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kriss E View Post
Sure, if you're a computer. If not, you follow the off season because you realize there's free agency, trade market, there's also progression of your players and possibly young rookies coming up to play an important role as well.

Otherwise, the team that finished 30th will always finish 30th. So, fact remains, you have no idea where we will be in 3years as changes as sure to occur.
Right, and most of the changes between the team that started last season and the team we have now are of downward changes.

We have replaced Cammalleri, AK46, Darche, and Gill with Prust, Armstrong, and Bouillon. Therefore we are to rationally expect a declining performance.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kriss E View Post
Wouldn't be interested in any trade unless it assures us of getting an elite top liner, or top 5 pick+ (maybe even top 3).
If you have more certainty, you have less potential. It's a simple value rule, you get more value from both more certainty or more potential, so you're unlikely to get both.

A good example is the Lars Eller trade. In that trade we gave up certainty (Halak) for potential (Eller). Eller was unproven, but he had the potential to be a 2nd line center with good two-way ability and size; i.e. the potential to be worth more than an excellent starting goalie.

I suspect you disliked that trade.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kriss E View Post
1) This was to show that it's not because your team finishes last that you have to trade away good players.
But that was only one of the arguments for trading Plekanec.

2013 Montreal trading is not analogous to 2006 Pittsburgh trading Crosby. You claim to be oblivious to this, but that's because you are in debate mode. I'm sure at some later point it will hit you that they're not the same.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kriss E View Post
What about PK? Price? MaxPac? DD? Eller? What about signing Emelin? Diaz?
Going through the young route is investing in the future no matter how you want to slice it. It's not because we don't have a superstar prospect down that we didn't invest in our future. We also stocked up on picks. We have four of them alone in the first two rounds in the next draft.
Subban, Price, MaxPac, Eller, Emelin, had roster spots because there was zero probability of getting better players at those costs on the UFA market. Subban, etc were being played because they were the best option for the present.

DD did not start the season as a 1st line center. He was the third line center last year, where he played better than we could ever get from the UFA market at comparable value. He then became 1st line center because Gomez was doing nothing.

You are correct about Diaz. In that case, they were giving a young player ice time even though they could get better short-term value on the trade or UFA market. This is an example of investing in the future. So you are right. Instead of saying Palushaj, Engvist, I should say Palushaj, Engvist, Diaz. Diaz has the potential to be a legitimate #6 dmen on an NHL team.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kriss E View Post
And those guys will need role models and good veterans on the team, guys like Plekanec.
There's very little evidence to support the players need a daddy theory.


Last edited by DAChampion: 11-03-2012 at 08:04 PM.
DAChampion is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-03-2012, 07:43 PM
  #77
Ginu
Registered User
 
Ginu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 3,680
vCash: 500
There is no reason to play Desharnais at center if you have Galchenyuk, Plekanec and Eller.

He can play on the wing and there are plenty of centers that have shifted to the wing successfully.

It would be stupid to continue this small-at-center strategy when we've proven again and again it doesn't work. This chez nous attitude of needing to trade one of those three to accommodate him at center is even dumber.

He's very valuable- play him on the wing with two scorers.

Ginu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-03-2012, 08:05 PM
  #78
Kriss E
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 22,747
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DAChampion View Post
Third most used forward might mean sixth or seventh most useful player overall, once you add Doughty, Scuderi, Quick, etc.
Sure, it could also mean the third most useful player, it could also mean the most useful one in many different games.
I doubt LA wins the cup without Richards, he played a very key role. Saying he only had a supporting role is really selling it short.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DAChampion View Post
Yes we do, for me primary cast are the three or four most useful players on the team, not the sixth, seventh, and eighth most useful players.
The guy that you use 20min a game to shutdown the opponents, manages to do so, and on top of it produce at a 75% rate, is what I consider primary role as well.
Looking only at ice time will give you a flawed observation.

Quote:
Originally Posted by DAChampion View Post
From wiki: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dustin_Penner
On February 28, 2011, Penner was traded from the Edmonton Oilers to the Los Angeles Kings in exchange for Colten Teubert, a first round draft pick in 2011, as well as a conditional second round pick in 2012.

By your logic, this is a bad trade for Edmonton. Penner did play well in the playoffs where they won the cup, 11 points in 20 games. He has a cup. Edmonton has won nothing yet and there is no guarantee they will ever win anything.

By the way Jeff Carter was never traded from Philadelphia to Los Angeles. The fact he won a cup in Los Angeles is a total non-sequitur as to the merits of the Philadelphia-Columbus trade. He was traded from Philadelphia to Columbus for Sean Couturier and Jacub Voracek, where he was not going to win the cup. He was then traded from Columbus to Los Angeles for Jack Johnson and a 1st rounder, where he was actually very helpful to LA, with 15 goals and 25 points in 39 games, helping them make 8th place.
How is that following my logic? Penner wasn't succeeding all that great in Edmonton.
By the way I didn't say the Philly trade was bad, just that moving those guys didn't necessarily make them better, at least not for now.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DAChampion View Post
Right, and most of the changes between the team that started last season and the team we have now are of downward changes.
Yes, they are. Not a reason as to why we should move Plekanec.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DAChampion View Post
We have replaced Cammalleri, AK46, Darche, and Gill with Prust, Armstrong, and Bouillon. Therefore we are to rationally expect a declining performance.
Yes. But again, those are changes.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DAChampion View Post
If you have more certainty, you have less potential. It's a simple value rule, you get more value from both more certainty or more potential, so you're unlikely to get both.

A good example is the Lars Eller trade. In that trade we gave up certainty (Halak) for potential (Eller). Eller was unproven, but he had the potential to be a 2nd line center with good two-way ability and size; i.e. the potential to be worth more than an excellent starting goalie.

I suspect you disliked that trade.
No I thought we got fair value in return. But most importantly, we didn't move Halak without knowing if Price could fill the #1 role, and we also needed a big center with good upside. Trade made sense.
Moving Plekanec for picks (unless it's top picks+) doesn't really make much sense at this point. Unless a full scale rebuild is the plan, which I don't think it is.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DAChampion View Post
But that was only one of the arguments for trading Plekanec.
The only argument to trade Plek is that you want to stock up on high picks/prospects.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DAChampion View Post
Subban, Price, MaxPac, Eller, Emelin, had roster spots because there was zero probability of getting better players at those costs on the UFA market. Subban, etc were being played because they were the best option for the present.

DD did not start the season as a 1st line center. He was the third line center last year, where he played better than we could ever get from the UFA market at comparable value. He then became 1st line center because Gomez was doing nothing.
So, I don't get it. We make them play, as they progress they earn higher roles. And this is not the way it's supposed to be?
We made them play and gave them roles.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DAChampion View Post
You are correct about Diaz. In that case, they were giving a young player ice time even though they could get better short-term value on the trade market. This is an example of investing in the future.
You don't know if we could have gotten better short-term value. We did the same with Emelin, and management opted not to re-sign certain players in order to make room for youngsters.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DAChampion View Post
There's very little evidence to support the players need a daddy theory.
Sure, other than it being the case for every job in the world. You always learn more when you have someone with a lot more experience giving you tips and pointers, and observing them do what you want to do.
You really gonna deny this...

Kriss E is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-03-2012, 08:19 PM
  #79
DAChampion
Registered User
 
DAChampion's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Canberra, Australia
Country: Australia
Posts: 6,367
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kriss E View Post
Sure, it could also mean the third most useful player, it could also mean the most useful one in many different games.
I doubt LA wins the cup without Richards, he played a very key role. Saying he only had a supporting role is really selling it short.
LA completely dominated their opponents, they didn't squeak. I think after Quick, Brown, Doughty, and Kopitar there were no essentials.

But I don't have a parallel reality machine :-)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kriss E View Post
Moving Plekanec for picks (unless it's top picks+) doesn't really make much sense at this point. Unless a full scale rebuild is the plan, which I don't think it is.
I don't think anybody is proposing Plekanec be traded for anything we can get. The idea is that he is a valuable chip, so we should try and get value. I'd say the minimum value for Plekanec might be two 1st rounders from a playoff team.

A good analogy might be Toronto and Kaberle. They held on to Kaberle until they could get Joe Colborne, a 1st rounder, and a 2nd rounder. A good risk.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kriss E View Post
So, I don't get it. We make them play, as they progress they earn higher roles. And this is not the way it's supposed to be?
We made them play and gave them roles.
If young players play because they're better than anything else available, i.e. Subban, it's because it's what's best for present. If Subban is your number one dman, don't pretend you're playing him because it's a long-term investment. It's not.

When young players are playing in spite of the fact that better players could be had elsewhere, because you're hoping they'll become great, then you're investing in the future.

DAChampion is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-04-2012, 03:07 AM
  #80
Kriss E
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 22,747
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DAChampion View Post
LA completely dominated their opponents, they didn't squeak. I think after Quick, Brown, Doughty, and Kopitar there were no essentials.

But I don't have a parallel reality machine :-)
Compelling argument I must say...

Quote:
Originally Posted by DAChampion View Post
I don't think anybody is proposing Plekanec be traded for anything we can get. The idea is that he is a valuable chip, so we should try and get value. I'd say the minimum value for Plekanec might be two 1st rounders from a playoff team.

A good analogy might be Toronto and Kaberle. They held on to Kaberle until they could get Joe Colborne, a 1st rounder, and a 2nd rounder. A good risk.
I have no interest in getting middle to late first rounders for Plekanec.

Quote:
Originally Posted by DAChampion View Post
If young players play because they're better than anything else available, i.e. Subban, it's because it's what's best for present. If Subban is your number one dman, don't pretend you're playing him because it's a long-term investment. It's not.

When young players are playing in spite of the fact that better players could be had elsewhere, because you're hoping they'll become great, then you're investing in the future.
If half your team is filled with young players including 4 rookies, I'll consider that investing in the future.

Kriss E is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-04-2012, 10:31 AM
  #81
Roulin
Registered User
 
Roulin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Montreal
Posts: 4,114
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DAChampion View Post
You shouldn't fabricate arguments without evidence, it makes you look ridiculous.
I included several quotes that had you assuming best-case-scenario development of prospects.

Quote:
Originally Posted by DAChampion View Post
I don't believe a bird in the bush is worth more than a bird in the hand, but I would take two birds in the bush over one bird in the hand. The idea is to do as Philadelphia did: to trade away good players for players who have the potential to become better.

By the way, you know what Tomas Plekanec's performance in 2015 and 2016 counts as? It counts as a bird in the bush.
You're right, no player's future performance is guaranteed, even Crosby and Ovechkin hit bumps in the road. But I believe projecting Plekanec's performance from age 30 to 33 is easier than projecting Teravainen's development from 18 to 21. Plekanec has to maintain performance to help win games. Teravainen has to acquire new skills.

As for Philly... IMO the Carter trade was excellent, the Richards trade was bad and the use of the gained cap space to sign Bryzgalov was terrible. Maybe Schenn becomes a better player than Richards and proves me wrong, but I doubt it.

Roulin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-04-2012, 10:53 AM
  #82
Dirty Danglez
Take it like a Man
 
Dirty Danglez's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 2,871
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ginu View Post
There is no reason to play Desharnais at center if you have Galchenyuk, Plekanec and Eller.

He can play on the wing and there are plenty of centers that have shifted to the wing successfully.

It would be stupid to continue this small-at-center strategy when we've proven again and again it doesn't work. This chez nous attitude of needing to trade one of those three to accommodate him at center is even dumber.

He's very valuable- play him on the wing with two scorers.
The size at center thing is a little overrated imo. Boston is big right? How about their centers? Pleks weighs more than all of them cept for campbell

Dirty Danglez is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-04-2012, 11:46 AM
  #83
MXD
Registered User
 
MXD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Ottawa
Posts: 20,411
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ginu View Post
There is no reason to play Desharnais at center if you have Galchenyuk, Plekanec and Eller.

He can play on the wing and there are plenty of centers that have shifted to the wing successfully.

It would be stupid to continue this small-at-center strategy when we've proven again and again it doesn't work. This chez nous attitude of needing to trade one of those three to accommodate him at center is even dumber.

He's very valuable- play him on the wing with two scorers.
And it would make no sense to ALREADY move to wing a guy who could very well end up being the better Center (and who's already better than two of them).

DD at wing could make sense. Eventually. But I think it's unlikely that Plekanec is still here in three years. And Eller being an able #1 or 2 center isn't a absolute lock either. That being so, it's quite possible that DD ends up playing his whole career at C, and in an Habs uniform to boot.

And if we're actually rebuilding, keeping Plekanec doesn't make much sense. Use him to get a pick, and draft a C/W with it.

The kids need veteran inspiration? I'd rather have Gorges and Cole play that role than Plekanec.

MXD is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-04-2012, 12:11 PM
  #84
pine
Registered User
 
pine's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Montréal
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,864
vCash: 50
In 2-3 years...

MacKinnon
Galchenyuk
Eller
4th line C veteran with faceoff prowess and solid defensive skills

Plekanec and DD shipped off for wing upgrades.

pine is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
11-04-2012, 12:56 PM
  #85
Phil Parent
Is Watching The D
 
Phil Parent's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Sorel-Tracy, Quebec
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,948
vCash: 50
You'd hope some of these guys will be confortable on the wing...

Because we won't have enough spots on the roster to play them all.

I think we would all, eventually, want Pleks-Desharnais-Eller-Galchenyuk-Vail-Leblanc-White on the roster for what they can bring to the team. If the last 3 can play the wing, it solves the problem completely, because then some of the other centers, like Bournival, Geoffrion & Nattinen move up the depth chart and become the reserve guys on C.

The others not mentionned, hey, don't care about them.

Phil Parent is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-04-2012, 01:01 PM
  #86
Kriss E
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 22,747
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MXD View Post
And it would make no sense to ALREADY move to wing a guy who could very well end up being the better Center (and who's already better than two of them).

DD at wing could make sense. Eventually. But I think it's unlikely that Plekanec is still here in three years. And Eller being an able #1 or 2 center isn't a absolute lock either. That being so, it's quite possible that DD ends up playing his whole career at C, and in an Habs uniform to boot.

And if we're actually rebuilding, keeping Plekanec doesn't make much sense. Use him to get a pick, and draft a C/W with it.

The kids need veteran inspiration? I'd rather have Gorges and Cole play that role than Plekanec.
Gorges and Cole aren't centers.
Remember how PK said it's good for him to be able to watch Markov play? Same thing for MaxPac, remember how he said playing along side Cole helps his game?
Maybe you didn't notice, but Eller's game became more and more like Plekanec's (especially defensively) as the season went on.

Plekanec is a good presence for coming centers, and none of the ones we have demonstrated that they can fill in Plekanec's shoes.

Kriss E is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-04-2012, 01:20 PM
  #87
MXD
Registered User
 
MXD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Ottawa
Posts: 20,411
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pine View Post
In 2-3 years...

MacKinnon

Galchenyuk
Eller
4th line C veteran with faceoff prowess and solid defensive skills

Plekanec and DD shipped off for wing upgrades.
Don't bother. Won't happen. Habs aren't a last place team and would be extremely lucky win the draw if there's no season. At this point, drafting Drouin or Erne is much more likely.

Besides, DD could be a terrific upgrade at W. Same for Plekanec, though something tells me that Plekanec would prefer to continue playing center.

MXD is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-04-2012, 01:22 PM
  #88
Kriss E
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 22,747
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MXD View Post
Don't bother. Won't happen. Habs aren't a last place team and would be extremely lucky win the draw if there's no season. At this point, drafting Drouin or Erne is much more likely.

Besides, DD could be a terrific upgrade at W. Same for Plekanec, though something tells me that Plekanec would prefer to continue playing center.
Plekanec is 30, now would be a bad time for him to be moved on the wing. Wouldn't make sense at all actually.

Kriss E is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-04-2012, 01:33 PM
  #89
MXD
Registered User
 
MXD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Ottawa
Posts: 20,411
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kriss E View Post
Gorges and Cole aren't centers.
Remember how PK said it's good for him to be able to watch Markov play? Same thing for MaxPac, remember how he said playing along side Cole helps his game?
Maybe you didn't notice, but Eller's game became more and more like Plekanec's (especially defensively) as the season went on.

Plekanec is a good presence for coming centers, and none of the ones we have demonstrated that they can fill in Plekanec's shoes.
Yeah, I remember that. However, Eller had that kind of game in himself. Plekanec didn't have anything to do with that.

Besides, if we have a season, it's far from given that DD won't clearly outperform Plekanec. DD ending up being a PPG player is clearly in the realm of possibilities (however unlikely; ending up with a .85 or .9 PPG is more realistic). That (1 PPG) would make DD untradeable, and 0.9 PPG would make him virtually untradable, unless Plekanec ends up in the same "range" of points. And, let's be reality here : both ending up in 0.85/.9 PPG range is pretty much impossible, unless DD or TP is switched to wing next to the other. And that won't happen.

If anything, it might comes down to how much DD will want to get paid this summer... which will mainly depend on his play in 12-13 (if play there is).

MXD is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-04-2012, 01:34 PM
  #90
MXD
Registered User
 
MXD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Ottawa
Posts: 20,411
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kriss E View Post
Plekanec is 30, now would be a bad time for him to be moved on the wing. Wouldn't make sense at all actually.
Totally concur on that point.

MXD is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-04-2012, 02:04 PM
  #91
Whitesnake
Habs of steel
 
Whitesnake's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Lorraine, QC
Country: Canada
Posts: 47,151
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ginu View Post
There is no reason to play Desharnais at center if you have Galchenyuk, Plekanec and Eller.

He can play on the wing and there are plenty of centers that have shifted to the wing successfully.

It would be stupid to continue this small-at-center strategy when we've proven again and again it doesn't work. This chez nous attitude of needing to trade one of those three to accommodate him at center is even dumber.

He's very valuable- play him on the wing with two scorers.
Not sure what your point is. There are also no reasons to think that Eller is a better offensive player than he is. If we can keep this Cole-DD-MaxPac line together, it might end up a terrific line that will end up being great...why dismantle it? 'Cause right away we need to put Gally in a no win situation by putting him right away top 2? Point is that in a team, you need to see this as a team situation. DD will be destroyed on the wings and won't be able to do what he does best. If you want to move him to the wings, might as well move him period. Yet, the return will not be as great as it could be for a Pleks for example. So what's the bad in having a center line composed of Pleks-DD-Eller-Gally? Then in 2-3 years we'll see, Gally moves up and who goes or who is moved. But DD line works. Why change it? It also doesn't make any sense. For once we have a chance to have the greatest depth ever, and you wan't to change it. The only good thing we had last year?

And the "local" comment, not going there....been discussed in the past, can't believe we'll have to explain it again and again....

Whitesnake is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-04-2012, 02:08 PM
  #92
Kriss E
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 22,747
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MXD View Post
Yeah, I remember that. However, Eller had that kind of game in himself. Plekanec didn't have anything to do with that.

Besides, if we have a season, it's far from given that DD won't clearly outperform Plekanec. DD ending up being a PPG player is clearly in the realm of possibilities (however unlikely; ending up with a .85 or .9 PPG is more realistic). That (1 PPG) would make DD untradeable, and 0.9 PPG would make him virtually untradable, unless Plekanec ends up in the same "range" of points. And, let's be reality here : both ending up in 0.85/.9 PPG range is pretty much impossible, unless DD or TP is switched to wing next to the other. And that won't happen.

If anything, it might comes down to how much DD will want to get paid this summer... which will mainly depend on his play in 12-13 (if play there is).
First off, I disagree. PK and MaxPac both had the offensive Dman and PF style in them as well, doesn't mean watching Markov and Cole didn't help them. It did and they even admitted it themselves. Same is true of Eller. It's not because he had this two way game in him that watching someone like Plekanec who excels in that role didn't help him.

Second, sure, DD could be a very good offensive producer. However, that's still unknown. Last year he benefited from playing versus weaker opponents, and also given the two best wingers. He also got to play on the first PP unit, again with the best wingers and most offensive Dmen, at every opportunity once RC took over.
Would he produce as much if he'd have inconsistent players on his wing like AK, or Bourque versus tougher opponents? Unknown.
Also, offense isn't the only thing Plekanec brings into the equation. He's also our best PK player, one of the best in the league. He's also great at not only shutting down opponents's top players, but he also creates offensive chances while doing it.

So only looking at offensive production won't give you a good assessment of the situation really.

Kriss E is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-04-2012, 02:10 PM
  #93
Andy
Registered User
 
Andy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Montreal
Country: Canada
Posts: 17,702
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Whitesnake View Post
Not sure what your point is. There are also no reasons to think that Eller is a better offensive player than he is. If we can keep this Cole-DD-MaxPac line together, it might end up a terrific line that will end up being great...why dismantle it? 'Cause right away we need to put Gally in a no win situation by putting him right away top 2? Point is that in a team, you need to see this as a team situation. DD will be destroyed on the wings and won't be able to do what he does best. If you want to move him to the wings, might as well move him period. Yet, the return will not be as great as it could be for a Pleks for example. So what's the bad in having a center line composed of Pleks-DD-Eller-Gally? Then in 2-3 years we'll see, Gally moves up and who goes or who is moved. But DD line works. Why change it? It also doesn't make any sense. For once we have a chance to have the greatest depth ever, and you wan't to change it. The only good thing we had last year?

And the "local" comment, not going there....been discussed in the past, can't believe we'll have to explain it again and again....
What if Cole and Pacioretty produce even more with another centre? What if we still have the same problem of only one line scoring? Would you still insist on keeping them together?

They were our best line, but we also finished last. They were our best line, but they were also the only line that produced. If it continues that way, then yes there are reasons to break up the line.

I would also breakup the line for the simple fact of not wanting to move a centre. Desharnais can easily play wing. Boston showed how having many centres is not a bad thing in their cup run. Seguin, Bergeron, Krecji, Peverly and Kelly were all on one team. Peverely and Seguin had played wing. It gave Boston excellent depth when Bergeron missed a couple of games. The best part is that they still have that depth. They didn't have to trade Krejci or Bergeron or Peverely or Kelly.

So yeah, there are many reasons to break up the line. Depth is one of them. Why trade any of the centres when we can easily make room for them? People are way too sensitive when it comes to moving Desharnais around, though I'm not surprised why.


Last edited by Andy: 11-04-2012 at 02:16 PM.
Andy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-04-2012, 03:01 PM
  #94
Whitesnake
Habs of steel
 
Whitesnake's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Lorraine, QC
Country: Canada
Posts: 47,151
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Andy View Post
What if Cole and Pacioretty produce even more with another centre? What if we still have the same problem of only one line scoring? Would you still insist on keeping them together?

They were our best line, but we also finished last. They were our best line, but they were also the only line that produced. If it continues that way, then yes there are reasons to break up the line.

I would also breakup the line for the simple fact of not wanting to move a centre. Desharnais can easily play wing. Boston showed how having many centres is not a bad thing in their cup run. Seguin, Bergeron, Krecji, Peverly and Kelly were all on one team. Peverely and Seguin had played wing. It gave Boston excellent depth when Bergeron missed a couple of games. The best part is that they still have that depth. They didn't have to trade Krejci or Bergeron or Peverely or Kelly.

So yeah, there are many reasons to break up the line. Depth is one of them. Why trade any of the centres when we can easily make room for them? People are way too sensitive when it comes to moving Desharnais around, though I'm not surprised why.
Well I am surprise to see how many people want to get rid of him while he was amongst the only good news we had. Yes, possible that those 2 wingers would work well with another center....but how about, for the depth reason, to find other wings that will complement these other centermen? We finished last, but not because of DD and Co but because of our lack of depth. Trading DD for a poor return or making him play wings instead of looking for a bigger guy to win those battles along the board does NOT help them team nor does it help the depth.

The sensitivity comes with the fact that he was often on the negative side of most posters while being one of the greatest news. Sorry but that's more disturbing to me than people coming to his defense. Not sure if it was noticeable, but he isn't in the lineup solely for the language he speaks. Yet, one day, people will wake up and realize where this team is located....And when you have great locals that DO contribute, you keep them.

But I guess people see what Pleks does in Europe and suddenly will mistake him for the next Gretzky or something. He's a very good player. But will not be the offensive force he is over there. And one day, real soon, he will be older and might start to decline....so the other of trading a guy is also predicting when it will be the best time to trade a guy, for the greatest return possible, while not losing his best years, hoping he had played them with your team.

I'm all for keeping the best players no matter the position they play in. I'm just with the idea that DD will not make a good winger. Nor will he make a good 3rd or 4th line centerman. So the idea is to trade him....but what kind of return will you have. In the end, you have a Pleks who we love his versatility. Rock defensively, could play PP, could play PK. Offensively good. But we've also determined that he, or his body, needs to take less charge. So maybe less PP, more PK and his regular shifts. But can Eller become that Pleks? Might not have the offensive touch Pleks has. And DD might take the offensive job. But what about the return for Pleks? Could you still get something significant in return that would STILL give you some depth? And something you are lacking with Pleks departure? As far as Boston is concerned, well not the greatest example as the guys you mentioned have either proved their worth at both positions and you're talking about a future and already NHL superstar.

As of NOW, I'm totally for the status quo. Needs to see the consistency of DD. Needs to see where Eller is offensively. But I will choose to believe that we will have to make some adjustments in 1 year or 2.

Whitesnake is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-04-2012, 03:09 PM
  #95
Andy
Registered User
 
Andy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Montreal
Country: Canada
Posts: 17,702
vCash: 500
So essentially what you are telling me is because Desharnais is one-dimension, because you don't think hed be a good winger, because you don't want him to play with other players, that we should re-organize the rest of the lineup in order to accomodate him? It's pretty ridiculous the lengths we are willing to go to ensure that Desharnais gets to play his game while trying to re-organize the rest of the team. If Desharnais can't fit in the long run, then he is the one that should be moved rather than others moving to accomodate him.

We won't know if he'll be a good winger until we try. We won't know if he'll be good with other wingers until we try. But we have to do this. Why is everyone so scared of moving Desharnais out of his sheltered role? I mean its really mind-boggling how people are just so adverse to playing him outside of his little shell, which I really do think has to do with him being a local guy.

There is aboslutely no reason why changes should be tried out and no reason we can't just keep Desharnais, Eller, Plekanec and Galchenyuk on one team.

Andy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-04-2012, 03:30 PM
  #96
Whitesnake
Habs of steel
 
Whitesnake's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Lorraine, QC
Country: Canada
Posts: 47,151
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Andy View Post
So essentially what you are telling me is because Desharnais is one-dimension, because you don't think hed be a good winger, because you don't want him to play with other players, that we should re-organize the rest of the lineup in order to accomodate him? It's pretty ridiculous the lengths we are willing to go to ensure that Desharnais gets to play his game while trying to re-organize the rest of the team. If Desharnais can't fit in the long run, then he is the one that should be moved rather than others moving to accomodate him.

We won't know if he'll be a good winger until we try. We won't know if he'll be good with other wingers until we try. But we have to do this. Why is everyone so scared of moving Desharnais out of his sheltered role? I mean its really mind-boggling how people are just so adverse to playing him outside of his little shell, which I really do think has to do with him being a local guy.

There is aboslutely no reason why changes should be tried out and no reason we can't just keep Desharnais, Eller, Plekanec and Galchenyuk on one team.
The day we decided to move some d-men to the other side was the start of a big mess for us. As pros those guys are, some are just unable to move. Dixit Spacek and Co. First, people who think DD is solely one-dimensional are just blinded by his lack of size. What DD can be good at owerpowering his opponent, he often outwit them. So he knows where his defensive zone is. Of course, it won't be his forte, he is mostly an offensive player....

Reason why I want him to stick there it's because it is succesful. And because in 1-2-3 years if he stays the same, while DD is younger, and while Pleks will be getting older, chances are the return for Pleks might still be greater for the versatility he brings so the TEAM, our team, will end up being better by keeping 1 guy who does the job, and 1 or 2 others and/or picks that will eventually make us a better team. Like I did say, I would keep the status quo for now, there is NO WAY I want Pleks out this year, and maybe not even the next one. It is pretty clear as far as I'm concerned.

Oh and test him on the wings all you want. I'm not here saying that the day Therrien tries him on the wings, I'll call Gabriel Nadeau-Dubois and start a manifestation.....Just saying, I don't believe it will work and we will have to go back to square one. Hey, they can still, again, test Eller on the wings if they like. Yet, don't believe in that either. But to me, it has a better chance of working than DD. Which small players are great offensively and are small? The ones that are either incredibly fast or incredibly strong. Or Incredibly good. Don't believe DD is any of that....AND on top of they are all taller than him. Maybe not Gerbe, yet, still waiting to see if he'll ever be great offensively in the NHL.

Whitesnake is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-04-2012, 03:31 PM
  #97
Kriss E
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 22,747
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Whitesnake View Post
Well I am surprise to see how many people want to get rid of him while he was amongst the only good news we had. Yes, possible that those 2 wingers would work well with another center....but how about, for the depth reason, to find other wings that will complement these other centermen? We finished last, but not because of DD and Co but because of our lack of depth. Trading DD for a poor return or making him play wings instead of looking for a bigger guy to win those battles along the board does NOT help them team nor does it help the depth.

The sensitivity comes with the fact that he was often on the negative side of most posters while being one of the greatest news. Sorry but that's more disturbing to me than people coming to his defense. Not sure if it was noticeable, but he isn't in the lineup solely for the language he speaks. Yet, one day, people will wake up and realize where this team is located....And when you have great locals that DO contribute, you keep them.

But I guess people see what Pleks does in Europe and suddenly will mistake him for the next Gretzky or something. He's a very good player. But will not be the offensive force he is over there. And one day, real soon, he will be older and might start to decline....so the other of trading a guy is also predicting when it will be the best time to trade a guy, for the greatest return possible, while not losing his best years, hoping he had played them with your team.

I'm all for keeping the best players no matter the position they play in. I'm just with the idea that DD will not make a good winger. Nor will he make a good 3rd or 4th line centerman. So the idea is to trade him....but what kind of return will you have. In the end, you have a Pleks who we love his versatility. Rock defensively, could play PP, could play PK. Offensively good. But we've also determined that he, or his body, needs to take less charge. So maybe less PP, more PK and his regular shifts. But can Eller become that Pleks? Might not have the offensive touch Pleks has. And DD might take the offensive job. But what about the return for Pleks? Could you still get something significant in return that would STILL give you some depth? And something you are lacking with Pleks departure? As far as Boston is concerned, well not the greatest example as the guys you mentioned have either proved their worth at both positions and you're talking about a future and already NHL superstar.

As of NOW, I'm totally for the status quo. Needs to see the consistency of DD. Needs to see where Eller is offensively. But I will choose to believe that we will have to make some adjustments in 1 year or 2.
I think the problem comes from people seeing Plekanec as the top centerman, yet DD is the one who gets the two best wingers.

I personally think splitting MaxPac and Cole is a necessity if we want to see our offensive be better balanced. Plekanec needs a PF that is consistent on his wing, especially if Gionta is the other winger. If Plek plays with Gionta and Bourque, I guarantee you it'll only be a matter of time before they look completely flat because I doubt Bourque will become a consistent driving force, and he has a tough time versus tougher opponents.

You can reunite MaxPac-DD-Cole on the PP.

I agree with you that people should be happy over DD, kid is an inspiring success story and I still think his ceiling is unsure. He has exceeded expectations at every level, so I don't see why he wouldn't be able to surpass them once again. At least we can hope so. But yes, definitely one of the few bright spots in our dark season last year.
However, I don't think we should keep the same recipe as I feel Plekanec has put enough sweat into this team that he deserves to play with the better wingers of this team, or at the very least one of them. I think that's pretty much why we always say Plekanec should get a smaller work load, it's because he doesn't get much help.
He often gets stuck with problem wingers. It would be an interesting change for him to have good strong wingers for once. Plekanec didn't look tired the year he played along side a hot Kovy and AK.


Over the fact of who we should trade, as I said, the first thing we have to make sure of is that whoever is left to fill the void, can actually do it. Plekanec has big shoes to fill, it may need more than one center to fill them. Maybe DD can take over the offensive duties, while Eller takes the defensive ones, but again, we'd be right back in trouble land if either one gets injured. Now, Eller might turn out to be very similar to what Plekanec has become, only bigger, but that remains to be seen.
The other option of course is that we package Plek in order to get someone better. That would be a different situation.


For the time being, as you said, we need to stay put and see how DD-Eller progress.

Kriss E is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-04-2012, 04:00 PM
  #98
DAChampion
Registered User
 
DAChampion's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Canberra, Australia
Country: Australia
Posts: 6,367
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roulin View Post
I included several quotes that had you assuming best-case-scenario development of prospects.
No, you did not.

The closest thing to that would be me saying Schenn and Couturier would become 60-70 point players, which is not equivalent to saying they will reach their potential. Go to the Flyers boards and try to tell them that 65 points is "best-case scenario" for Couturier.

Their potential for both is to be 80-90 point players, I deliberately lowered the threshold to 60-70 points to account for uncertainty. I guess I could have specified that, but I thought it was obvious.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Roulin View Post
You're right, no player's future performance is guaranteed, even Crosby and Ovechkin hit bumps in the road. But I believe projecting Plekanec's performance from age 30 to 33 is easier than projecting Teravainen's development from 18 to 21. Plekanec has to maintain performance to help win games. Teravainen has to acquire new skills.

As for Philly... IMO the Carter trade was excellent, the Richards trade was bad and the use of the gained cap space to sign Bryzgalov was terrible. Maybe Schenn becomes a better player than Richards and proves me wrong, but I doubt it.
You're ignoring Wayne Simmonds.

He's 6'2", 24 years-old, he fights, and he just came off a 28 goal, 21 assist season which he produced with second line minutes.

Schenn doesn't need to reach his potential for the Flyers to win the Richards trade, not even close.

DAChampion is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-04-2012, 04:01 PM
  #99
DAChampion
Registered User
 
DAChampion's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Canberra, Australia
Country: Australia
Posts: 6,367
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kriss E View Post
Gorges and Cole aren't centers.
Remember how PK said it's good for him to be able to watch Markov play? Same thing for MaxPac, remember how he said playing along side Cole helps his game?
Maybe you didn't notice, but Eller's game became more and more like Plekanec's (especially defensively) as the season went on.

Plekanec is a good presence for coming centers, and none of the ones we have demonstrated that they can fill in Plekanec's shoes.
When has Subban benefited from playing with Markov?

By the way, that's the sort of thing you expect players to say. If a journalist asks Pacioretty about Cole, he's not going to answer "I just do my own thing", he's going to say the cliche thing people want to hear, if he deviates from the cliche script he risks being traded and booed.

The last time Pacioretty said the truth about anything was when he said he's rather play first line minutes in Hamilton than third line minutes in Montreal. Half the fanbase and the entire media was out to get him.


Last edited by DAChampion: 11-04-2012 at 04:09 PM.
DAChampion is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-04-2012, 04:06 PM
  #100
DAChampion
Registered User
 
DAChampion's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Canberra, Australia
Country: Australia
Posts: 6,367
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MXD View Post
Yeah, I remember that. However, Eller had that kind of game in himself. Plekanec didn't have anything to do with that.

Besides, if we have a season, it's far from given that DD won't clearly outperform Plekanec. DD ending up being a PPG player is clearly in the realm of possibilities (however unlikely; ending up with a .85 or .9 PPG is more realistic). That (1 PPG) would make DD untradeable, and 0.9 PPG would make him virtually untradable, unless Plekanec ends up in the same "range" of points. And, let's be reality here : both ending up in 0.85/.9 PPG range is pretty much impossible, unless DD or TP is switched to wing next to the other. And that won't happen.

If anything, it might comes down to how much DD will want to get paid this summer... which will mainly depend on his play in 12-13 (if play there is).
Actually, Desharnais becomes a lot more tradeable if he increases his production.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Andy View Post
So essentially what you are telling me is because Desharnais is one-dimension, because you don't think hed be a good winger, because you don't want him to play with other players, that we should re-organize the rest of the lineup in order to accomodate him? It's pretty ridiculous the lengths we are willing to go to ensure that Desharnais gets to play his game while trying to re-organize the rest of the team. If Desharnais can't fit in the long run, then he is the one that should be moved rather than others moving to accomodate him.
Players like Joe Thornton, Evgeni Malkin, and Henrik Sedin, who can give you 100 point seasons, are worth reorganizing your lineup around.

The same is not true of 60-point players. It might be true of 80 point players, but that's a tough call.

DAChampion 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 05:52 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.