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

David Desharnais - Black or White Edition

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
03-25-2013, 04:24 PM
  #76
Et le But
Moderator
 
Et le But's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: New York
Country: Argentina
Posts: 18,019
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kjell Dahlin View Post
That said... why are you acting as if Carbonneau was clueless in regard of what is required to be a good NHL shutdown C?
Not clueless, but based on how terrible the teams he coached were at keeping possession, I'd take what he emphasizes with a grain of salt. Carbo probably considers Koulopoulos more valuable than Eller.

Being personally good at something and being able to recognize it in others isn't exactly the same thing. Not to mention the game has changed since Carbo's playing days.

Et le But is offline  
Old
03-25-2013, 04:25 PM
  #77
Milhouse40
Registered User
 
Milhouse40's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 2,580
vCash: 500
Kings: Kopitar (6'4") Richards (5'11")
Bruins: Bergeron (6'2") Krejci (6')
Hawks: Toews (6'2") Bolland (6')
Pens: Crosby (5'11') Malkin (6'3")
Wings: Datsyuk (5'11") Filpulla (6')
Ducks: Getzlaf (6'4") Mcdonald (5'10")
Canes: Staal (6'3") Stillman (6')

Those are the top 2 center of every Stanley Cup winners since the 2004-2005 Lockout.

In the end, that is why i will push hard for Galchenyuk or Eller taking DD's spot as fast as possible. Cause i firmly believe that, after 7 years of seeing the same thing, is not a coincidence that Stanley cups winners got big top 6 centers.

Nobody here can put an argument stating that we can win the cup, not with a small center, but with the smallest of them all as a top 6. Although everything is possible (and you can't imagine how i would love to be proven wrong on this....still want the Habs to win in the end) it is more than doubtful, and history showed the complete opposite.

It doens't mean that the Habs can't win the Cup with DD on the top 6, but it surely means that Habs will always be an underdog with him on the top 6. Even at almost the top of our conference, NOBODY described the Habs as a contender....why is that?

I don't wanna see DD traded
I don't even considered buying him out
I don't actually really hate DD

I'm just so tired of the Habs being this small and nice underdog team.
And that start with the small and nice little underdog player we just sign for another 4 years.

Milhouse40 is offline  
Old
03-25-2013, 04:27 PM
  #78
Kjell Dahlin
Registered User
 
Kjell Dahlin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Québec, Québec
Posts: 1,998
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Talks to Goalposts View Post
No, his teams were brilliant on special teams. If he wanted to talk about how to coach that people should listen.

Its actually quite amazing how good they were at everything but puck possession, where they were brutal.
It was not amazing imo: it should show you the limit of micro stats.

Kjell Dahlin is offline  
Old
03-25-2013, 04:28 PM
  #79
Et le But
Moderator
 
Et le But's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: New York
Country: Argentina
Posts: 18,019
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by thebinne4pres View Post
Kings: Kopitar (6'4") Richards (5'11")
Bruins: Bergeron (6'2") Krejci (6')
Hawks: Toews (6'2") Bolland (6')
Pens: Crosby (5'11') Malkin (6'3")
Wings: Datsyuk (5'11") Filpulla (6')
Ducks: Getzlaf (6'4") Mcdonald (5'10")
Canes: Staal (6'3") Stillman (6')

Those are the top 2 center of every Stanley Cup winners since the 2004-2005 Lockout.

In the end, that is why i will push hard for Galchenyuk or Eller taking DD's spot as fast as possible. Cause i firmly believe that, after 7 years of seeing the same thing, is not a coincidence that Stanley cups winners got big top 6 centers.

Nobody here can put an argument stating that we can win the cup, not with a small center, but with the smallest of them all as a top 6. Although everything is possible (and you can't imagine how i would love to be proven wrong on this....still want the Habs to win in the end) it is more than doubtful, and history showed the complete opposite.

It doens't mean that the Habs can't win the Cup with DD on the top 6, but it surely means that Habs will always be an underdog with him on the top 6. Even at almost the top of our conference, NOBODY described the Habs as a contender....why is that?

I don't wanna see DD traded
I don't even considered buying him out
I don't actually really hate DD

I'm just so tired of the Habs being this small and nice underdog team.
And that start with the small and nice little underdog player we just sign for another 4 years.
All I get from those examples is that there's no relationship between height and how someone plays. Maybe that centers are usually over 5'10" I guess.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kjell Dahlin View Post
It was not amazing imo: it should show you the limit of micro stats.
If anything the Carbo teams show the value of micro stats.

As soon as the power play slowed down, the wheels fell off that team. Meaning the numbers were showing an underlying problem being masked by special teams.

If anything that team convinced me why you should look at puck possession to compliment just looking at goals for and against.

Et le But is offline  
Old
03-25-2013, 04:35 PM
  #80
Talks to Goalposts
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Edmonton
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,643
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kjell Dahlin View Post
It was not amazing imo: it should show you the limit of micro stats.
These numbers are all about what is sustainable versus short term success.

And Carbo's teams were the definition of short term success.

Ignoring shot differentials, I don't now how you can possibly look at 07-08 in retrospect and not see a team that was glaringly weak 5 on 5 beyond goaltending Plekanec and the Kostitsyn's really were the only ones scoring at a decent clip there, Koivu and Higgins were effectively scoring like 3rd liners outside the powerplay. This was simply a team that couldn't win without top level goaltending and top level special teams. Remove either and they would collapse.

Talks to Goalposts is offline  
Old
03-25-2013, 04:35 PM
  #81
Kjell Dahlin
Registered User
 
Kjell Dahlin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Québec, Québec
Posts: 1,998
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Et le But View Post

(...)



If anything the Carbo teams show the value of micro stats.

As soon as the power play slowed down, the wheels fell off that team. Meaning the numbers were showing an underlying problem being masked by special teams.
Oh please... Gainey shipped away, just before the deadline, all star Huet and then Biron outplayed rookie Price. I sure don’t blame Price but Gainey screwed it for us big time in 2008.

Kjell Dahlin is offline  
Old
03-25-2013, 04:40 PM
  #82
Talks to Goalposts
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Edmonton
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,643
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kjell Dahlin View Post
Oh please... Gainey shipped away, just before the deadline, all star Huet and then Biron outplayed rookie Price. I sure don’t blame Price but Gainey screwed it for us big time in 2008.
Ironically they lost a team with the same strengths of special teams and goaltending and weaknesses of 5 on 5 play in the Flyers.

Although they were inept at defense rather than offense like the Habs. The perrils of Dany Briere as your top center and having the likes of Randy Jones on the blueline.


Adding Pronger completely transformed the Flyers.

Talks to Goalposts is offline  
Old
03-25-2013, 04:47 PM
  #83
Kjell Dahlin
Registered User
 
Kjell Dahlin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Québec, Québec
Posts: 1,998
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Talks to Goalposts View Post
These numbers are all about what is sustainable versus short term success.

And Carbo's teams were the definition of short term success.

Ignoring shot differentials, I don't now how you can possibly look at 07-08 in retrospect and not see a team that was glaringly weak 5 on 5 beyond goaltending Plekanec and the Kostitsyn's really were the only ones scoring at a decent clip there, Koivu and Higgins were effectively scoring like 3rd liners outside the powerplay. This was simply a team that couldn't win without top level goaltending and top level special teams. Remove either and they would collapse.
Why should I suddenly ignore shot differentials?

Vs PHI, we clearly were outflanking their slow D and, as a result, we had more scoring opportunities. Biron played better than Price in 2007-08.

At this point, I need to ask you: “What are the limitations of micro stats”?

Kjell Dahlin is offline  
Old
03-25-2013, 04:58 PM
  #84
Talks to Goalposts
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Edmonton
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,643
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kjell Dahlin View Post
Why should I suddenly ignore shot differentials?

Vs PHI, we clearly were outflanking their slow D and, as a result, we had more scoring opportunities. Biron played better than Price in 2007-08.

At this point, I need to ask you: “What are the limitations of micro stats”?
You were talking about the limitations of micros, so I was giving you the benefit of not bringing them up here.

Against the Flyers the Habs were clearly the far superior puck possession team. The thing was, this is less impressive than it could be because the Flyers were a terrible puck possession squad in their own right.

The main overall limit to micros is that they are all about long-term rather than short-term performance. That and they only measure current talent level which should reveal itself if things remain constant and not potential talent. For example, micros would have shown Plekanec to be the Habs best 5 on 5 forward in 07-08, but would not have predicted that he'd become the two-way force he was under Martin.

Talks to Goalposts is offline  
Old
03-25-2013, 04:58 PM
  #85
DAChampion
Registered User
 
DAChampion's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Canberra, Australia
Country: Australia
Posts: 7,602
vCash: 500
Carbonneau was a terrible coach.

In 2008 he was lucky. No injuries on the team, and Kovalev showed up.

In 2009, lapierre latendresse kostopoulos was the 1st line, because he would not try a combination of koivu Kovalev tanguay kostitsyn until his last game.

After being fired by the habs, carbo coached team Canada to 7th place at the world juniors, lol.

DAChampion is offline  
Old
03-25-2013, 05:07 PM
  #86
Et le But
Moderator
 
Et le But's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: New York
Country: Argentina
Posts: 18,019
vCash: 500
How much emphasis did Carbo have on special teams?

There's a reason nobody wants him as a head coach, he might make a good assistant someday if he's willing.

Et le But is offline  
Old
03-25-2013, 05:13 PM
  #87
Milhouse40
Registered User
 
Milhouse40's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 2,580
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Et le But View Post
All I get from those examples is that there's no relationship between height and how someone plays. Maybe that centers are usually over 5'10" I guess.
But there's a relationship between height and how to build a contender for the cup

Milhouse40 is offline  
Old
03-25-2013, 05:22 PM
  #88
Talks to Goalposts
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Edmonton
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,643
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by thebinne4pres View Post
But there's a relationship between height and how to build a contender for the cup
The top sixes of cup winners and finalists in recent years aren't significantly bigger than average. They tend not to have much more than a couple players clearing 200 pounds.

The Bruins for example had a pair of monsters in Horton and Lucic, but the rest of their top six was largely average. Flyers, Blackhawks, Penguins and Wings weren't particularly large either.

They are however, significantly better hockey players than average, which should tell you were the focus should actually be on.


Last edited by Talks to Goalposts: 03-25-2013 at 05:46 PM.
Talks to Goalposts is offline  
Old
03-25-2013, 05:33 PM
  #89
overlords
Hfboards
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Trolling Brian Wilde
Posts: 26,411
vCash: 500
bergeron is 6'2? No ****ing way.

Always thought he was like...6 feet or something.

overlords is offline  
Old
03-25-2013, 05:35 PM
  #90
Et le But
Moderator
 
Et le But's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: New York
Country: Argentina
Posts: 18,019
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by overlords View Post
bergeron is 6'2? No ****ing way.

Always thought he was like...6 feet or something.
I've heard 6'2" before but he's pretty slight for his height...he has good reach (which helps his FO's...among other things) but I think he weights the same as Plekanec.

Et le But is offline  
Old
03-25-2013, 05:41 PM
  #91
Milhouse40
Registered User
 
Milhouse40's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 2,580
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Et le But View Post
I've heard 6'2" before but he's pretty slight for his height...he has good reach (which helps his FO's...among other things) but I think he weights the same as Plekanec.
Actually, Plekanec is at 196 pouind...and Bergeron 194

Milhouse40 is offline  
Old
03-25-2013, 05:44 PM
  #92
Milhouse40
Registered User
 
Milhouse40's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 2,580
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Talks to Goalposts View Post
The top sixes of cup winners and finalists in recent years are significantly bigger than average. They tend not to have much more than a couple players clearing 200 pounds.

The Bruins for example had a pair of monsters in Horton and Lucic, but the rest of their top six was largely average. Flyers, Blackhawks, Penguins and Wings weren't particularly large either.

They are however, significantly better hockey players than average, which should tell you were the focus should actually be on.
Talent and size is the perfect mix.

Milhouse40 is offline  
Old
03-25-2013, 05:55 PM
  #93
Talks to Goalposts
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Edmonton
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,643
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by thebinne4pres View Post
Talent and size is the perfect mix.
Well people need to have a better understanding that talent drives the bus and size is secondary.

But I'm using talent in the all-encompassing sense, including all abilities and strengths rather than just who can make flashy moves. So its not necessarily the best scorers that help winning but the best overall players. I.e., Bergeron is far from the top of the scoring charts but he's an incredibly talent overall.

The main differnence in the playoff than the regular season is not that its more physical, its that the quality of competition goes up heavily. So guys with more limited skill sets that feast on lesser lights will tend to get either shutdown or lit up.

Talks to Goalposts is offline  
Old
03-25-2013, 06:04 PM
  #94
Mrb1p
Registered User
 
Mrb1p's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Citizen of the world
Country: Canada
Posts: 17,639
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by thebinne4pres View Post
Kings: Kopitar (6'4") Richards (5'11")
Bruins: Bergeron (6'2") Krejci (6')
Hawks: Toews (6'2") Bolland (6')
Pens: Crosby (5'11') Malkin (6'3")
Wings: Datsyuk (5'11") Filpulla (6')
Ducks: Getzlaf (6'4") Mcdonald (5'10")
Canes: Staal (6'3") Stillman (6')

Those are the top 2 center of every Stanley Cup winners since the 2004-2005 Lockout.

In the end, that is why i will push hard for Galchenyuk or Eller taking DD's spot as fast as possible. Cause i firmly believe that, after 7 years of seeing the same thing, is not a coincidence that Stanley cups winners got big top 6 centers.

Nobody here can put an argument stating that we can win the cup, not with a small center, but with the smallest of them all as a top 6. Although everything is possible (and you can't imagine how i would love to be proven wrong on this....still want the Habs to win in the end) it is more than doubtful, and history showed the complete opposite.

It doens't mean that the Habs can't win the Cup with DD on the top 6, but it surely means that Habs will always be an underdog with him on the top 6. Even at almost the top of our conference, NOBODY described the Habs as a contender....why is that?

I don't wanna see DD traded
I don't even considered buying him out
I don't actually really hate DD

I'm just so tired of the Habs being this small and nice underdog team.
And that start with the small and nice little underdog player we just sign for another 4 years.
This list is wrong and it doesnt show much You should emphasize on how NO team in the NHL except the bottom feeding TBL have 4 players under 5'8 in their regular lineup.


This thread is not about DD anymore

Mrb1p is online now  
Old
03-25-2013, 06:15 PM
  #95
Et le But
Moderator
 
Et le But's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: New York
Country: Argentina
Posts: 18,019
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Talks to Goalposts View Post
Well people need to have a better understanding that talent drives the bus and size is secondary.

But I'm using talent in the all-encompassing sense, including all abilities and strengths rather than just who can make flashy moves. So its not necessarily the best scorers that help winning but the best overall players. I.e., Bergeron is far from the top of the scoring charts but he's an incredibly talent overall.

The main differnence in the playoff than the regular season is not that its more physical, its that the quality of competition goes up heavily. So guys with more limited skill sets that feast on lesser lights will tend to get either shutdown or lit up.
If anything size can breed talent, and not all size is created equal. Being 6'4" is a part of Kopitar's game, it helps him see over other players and extends his reach. On the other hand, being smaller tends to have a benefit on balance and accelaration, so if you don't have the talent that Kopitar has, being 6'4" is rather useless.

On the other hand, "small" Mike Richards is built like a tank, among other things. Being 3 inches taller wouldn't necessarily make him a better player.

To those who think there's a winning formula when it comes to center size - would Crosby and Richards be a disadvantage? How about Crosby and Datsyuk?

Et le But is offline  
Old
03-25-2013, 06:20 PM
  #96
Mrb1p
Registered User
 
Mrb1p's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Citizen of the world
Country: Canada
Posts: 17,639
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Et le But View Post
If anything size can breed talent, and not all size is created equal. Being 6'4" is a part of Kopitar's game, it helps him see over other players and extends his reach. On the other hand, being smaller tends to have a benefit on balance and accelaration, so if you don't have the talent that Kopitar has, being 6'4" is rather useless.

On the other hand, "small" Mike Richards is built like a tank, among other things. Being 3 inches taller wouldn't necessarily make him a better player.

To those who think there's a winning formula when it comes to center size - would Crosby and Richards be a disadvantage? How about Crosby and Datsyuk?
But what is small though? 5'11 is not small. It's the average height of a NHL player. 6'4 is big and 5'5 is tiny. There lies the difference.

Mrb1p is online now  
Old
03-25-2013, 06:21 PM
  #97
overlords
Hfboards
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Trolling Brian Wilde
Posts: 26,411
vCash: 500
Lets keep the thread on Desharnais, guys. If there's nothing left to discuss about him, leave the thread and start another one about whatever it is you'd like to discuss. When there's something to discuss about DD again, this thread will still be here.

overlords is offline  
Old
03-25-2013, 06:23 PM
  #98
Bloumeister
Blou Christmas
 
Bloumeister's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Under the mistletoe
Posts: 6,681
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mrb1p View Post
This list is wrong and it doesnt show much You should emphasize on how NO team in the NHL except the bottom feeding TBL have 4 players under 5'8 in their regular lineup.

This thread is not about DD anymore
That genuinely makes me sad. All this work for nothing...





Quote:
Originally Posted by overlords View Post
Lets keep the thread on Desharnais, guys. If there's nothing left to discuss about him, leave the thread and start another one about whatever it is you'd like to discuss. When there's something to discuss about DD again, this thread will still be here.
That's exactly what I'm trying to do here, milord

Bloumeister is offline  
Old
03-25-2013, 06:27 PM
  #99
Mrb1p
Registered User
 
Mrb1p's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Citizen of the world
Country: Canada
Posts: 17,639
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bloumeister View Post
That genuinely makes me sad. All this work for nothing...
He's so tiny, my cat tried to swallow him and choked... Pretty sure he did it on purpose.

Mrb1p is online now  
Old
03-25-2013, 06:30 PM
  #100
overlords
Hfboards
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Trolling Brian Wilde
Posts: 26,411
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bloumeister View Post
That genuinely makes me sad. All this work for nothing...







That's exactly what I'm trying to do here, milord
I lol'd irl.

Sometimes, I really do love you Blou.


TBH, I'm glad for Mrb1p and Binne4press (sp?) and some others. I was the one always getting called an anti-DDite. Now I look like a moderate.

overlords is offline  
Closed Thread

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

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

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



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:42 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.