HFBoards

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

With Emelin in, who's out?

View Poll Results: Which Scenario?
Play Bouillon, Sit Murray 4 6.78%
Play Murray, Sit Bouillon 14 23.73%
Rotate Bouillon and Murray (Play 1 Game, Sit 1 Game) 21 35.59%
Call Up Tinordi, Sit Bouillon and Murray 20 33.90%
Voters: 59. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
11-14-2013, 10:55 AM
  #101
attachetatuque
un gros bonhomme!
 
attachetatuque's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: 514
Country: Canada
Posts: 501
vCash: 500
I feel like Murray is getting better every game. His position game is solid extremely valuable on the PK, and he rocks bodies and clears the front of the net. He's an offensive black hole and slow as a turtle though. Bouillon, although not as bad as this board makes him out to be, needs to be our 7th moving forward.

attachetatuque is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-14-2013, 11:06 AM
  #102
Sorinth
Registered User
 
Sorinth's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 2,191
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MathMan View Post
That's an important piece of context and there are many ways to deal with that, including looking at numbers with or without a given player. I don't have those numbers handy. But, when someone's possession numbers are 30%, well, you're not risking much by saying they've been awful.

Bouillon's numbers being higher than Murray's when they are frequently paired together strongly suggests Bouillon's been better away from Murray than Murray has been away from Bouillon. Bouillon does occasionally get Subban time, but otherwise he's been asked to shepherd the rookies.
But Bouillon's numbers are better because he played at the start of the year when the team was much better. Bouillon had Eller scoring 2pts per game to help drive possession numbers. Just look at Murray and Bouillon's Off ice corsi and you can see that the Bouillon's number benefited more from a team than Murray's.



Quote:
Originally Posted by MathMan View Post
I wouldn't. Bouillon is decidedly mediocre, but Murray is actively negative.

One of the key things that make a good team good is depth. Even bad teams have top-end players. One of the keys of last season's success was a fourth line that could take very defensive assignments and handle them reasonably well.
And even good teams have bad players as well. The bottom pairing guys aren't the ones that make or break the teams success. You implied that Murray is the reason we slumped and it makes no sense because his impact on the game is minimal. Good depth can help but the further down the depth chart you go the less it matters how good you are. The best you can get is your depth players to alleviate some of the responsibilities from your stars. Murray can do that better than Bouillon can even though neither are great at it.

Sorinth is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-14-2013, 11:14 AM
  #103
Rick16
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 1,942
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Saundies View Post
I think Bouillon and Murray split time, but right off the hop FB is the one that sits. Do you guys think Emelin FINALLY gets PP time when he comes back, or is that still going to be a thing?
What last year taught us is that MT prefers having Gorges on the PP rather than Emelin.

Rick16 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-14-2013, 11:34 AM
  #104
417
Registered User
 
417's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Ottawa
Country: Haiti
Posts: 19,232
vCash: 500
Ideally...Bouillon/Murray should be rotating in/out of the lineup depending on matchups.

417 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-14-2013, 12:09 PM
  #105
The Right Price
Registered User
 
The Right Price's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Country: Finland
Posts: 1,078
vCash: 500
Bouillon should sit, but he won't, and I'll be pissed.

Gorges-Subban
Markov-Emelin
Murray-Diaz

The Right Price is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-14-2013, 12:43 PM
  #106
MathMan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 16,891
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sorinth View Post
But Bouillon's numbers are better because he played at the start of the year when the team was much better.
The team was much better before Murray (and Parros) joined it. I don't think you can just dismiss guys with 30% possession based on the fact that the team was a better possession club without them than with. One of the reasons the team's possession game is trending down is because they've been replacing players with worse players - some due to injury, others because they've had to play the GM's new acquisitions.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sorinth View Post
And even good teams have bad players as well. The bottom pairing guys aren't the ones that make or break the teams success. You implied that Murray is the reason we slumped and it makes no sense because his impact on the game is minimal.
He and Parros play very little, this is true, but they've been so bad that they've been on for a really disproportionate number of chances and shots against relative to their usage.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sorinth View Post
The best you can get is your depth players to alleviate some of the responsibilities from your stars. Murray can do that better than Bouillon can even though neither are great at it.
That's actually precisely Murray's problem -- he can't alleviate the responsibilities. He's so awful that he manages to drag the team down on limited minutes.

Look, Bouillon isn't great. He is at best a 6th defenseman, possibly not even that. Yet he's still head and shoulders above Murray.

MathMan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-14-2013, 01:29 PM
  #107
JLP
La Sainte-Flanelle
 
JLP's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 5,935
vCash: 500
People do realize that stats are reductive in that they take a large sample and reduce this for example to a GA/60 to get averages? The GA/60 stats is not a tool for evaluating a guy who has only played a total of ~100 minutes. For example if you want to assess the fuel efficiency of a car in MPG you don't drive just one or two miles then measure the fuel displacement, that is too small a sample. Data does not work that way.

Murray has poor stats we get it. But these are based on a small sample taken from an anomalous selection period. Also he's coming off an injury and playing with a new coach and a new team. People do realize this, right?

Sheesh for the first time in forever Habs have a wall-like D, a huge guy who can effortlessly clear the crease. A mean guy who can fight. And there are people who want to sit him so we can ice a Bouillon-Diaz pairing

JLP is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
11-14-2013, 02:05 PM
  #108
Sorinth
Registered User
 
Sorinth's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 2,191
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MathMan View Post
The team was much better before Murray (and Parros) joined it. I don't think you can just dismiss guys with 30% possession based on the fact that the team was a better possession club without them than with. One of the reasons the team's possession game is trending down is because they've been replacing players with worse players - some due to injury, others because they've had to play the GM's new acquisitions.
The team was playing better but it had little to do with Murray replacing Tinordi/Beaulieu. If it was all Murray's fault we would still be dominant when he was not on the ice which we aren't.


Quote:
Originally Posted by MathMan View Post
He and Parros play very little, this is true, but they've been so bad that they've been on for a really disproportionate number of chances and shots against relative to their usage.
Yet in 8 games Murray has been on the ice for 4 goals against. Bouillon has been on the ice for 13 goals in 19 games. And as I pointed out earlier the GA/60 is better when Murray is on the ice then when he's off the ice (Last couple of games have still not been tabulated by behindthenet).


Quote:
Originally Posted by MathMan View Post
That's actually precisely Murray's problem -- he can't alleviate the responsibilities. He's so awful that he manages to drag the team down on limited minutes.

Look, Bouillon isn't great. He is at best a 6th defenseman, possibly not even that. Yet he's still head and shoulders above Murray.
Murray can defend the net better which is one of our biggest weaknesses and he's a better PKer than Bouillon. The only guy we have besides Murray that can match up physically against bigger PWF type players is Subban. Murray is not good enough to go up against the 1st tier but against the lower end PWF guys he's way better than Bouillon.

Murray compliments the other 5 guys because he brings something that the rest don't really have (Size/Physicality). Bouillon doesn't bring anything that the others don't also bring so even if he's more "skilled" overall it's still better to go with Murray since he's specialized in something we lack.

Sorinth is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-14-2013, 02:46 PM
  #109
MathMan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 16,891
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sorinth View Post
The team was playing better but it had little to do with Murray replacing Tinordi/Beaulieu. If it was all Murray's fault we would still be dominant when he was not on the ice which we aren't.
More or less, it goes like this: we're dominant when Markov-Subban is on the ice, roughly even when Gorges-Diaz is on the ice (because they get tough defensive assignments), and getting pasted when Bouillon-Murray is on the ice. If Bouillon-Murray could just break even, Markov-Subban would pull the team ahead. As it is, Bouillon-Murray are getting creamed more than Markov-Subban can compensate.

Illustrative numbers: with Subban on the ice, 5-on-5, the Habs have outshot their opponents by 24, which is pretty good, especially given his matchups. But in less than a fourth of the icetime, with Murray on the ice, the Habs have been outshot by 28. Bouillon's numbers are grim, but not as grim.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sorinth View Post
Murray can defend the net better which is one of our biggest weaknesses and he's a better PKer than Bouillon. The only guy we have besides Murray that can match up physically against bigger PWF type players is Subban.
PWF types tend to be top-6ers of exactly the sort who feast on vulnerable, slow-footed defensemen with no puck skills, such as Murray. He's exactly the kind of guy you don't want Murray out against; he already has more than enough trouble dealing with fourth-liners.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sorinth View Post
Murray compliments the other 5 guys because he brings something that the rest don't really have (Size/Physicality).
It's too bad it ends up being undermined by the fact he can't play effective defense, but thankfully, with Emelin in the lineup who brings size and physicality in the package of an effective defenseman, that "hole" is much less of an issue.

As a side note though, I've never understood while it was okay to ice an objectively substandard player because he somehow "fills a role". I don't think NHL teams particularly need bad players of any sort.


Last edited by MathMan: 11-14-2013 at 02:57 PM.
MathMan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-14-2013, 03:35 PM
  #110
Sorinth
Registered User
 
Sorinth's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 2,191
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MathMan View Post
More or less, it goes like this: we're dominant when Markov-Subban is on the ice, roughly even when Gorges-Diaz is on the ice (because they get tough defensive assignments), and getting pasted when Bouillon-Murray is on the ice. If Bouillon-Murray could just break even, Markov-Subban would pull the team ahead. As it is, Bouillon-Murray are getting creamed more than Markov-Subban can compensate.

Illustrative numbers: with Subban on the ice, 5-on-5, the Habs have outshot their opponents by 24, which is pretty good, especially given his matchups. But in less than a fourth of the icetime, with Murray on the ice, the Habs have been outshot by 28. Bouillon's numbers are grim, but not as grim.
Since he's matched up against 3rd/4th liners those 28 shots against aren't the same quality as Subbans 24. So Subban/Markov should still pull the team ahead.


Quote:
Originally Posted by MathMan View Post
PWF types tend to be top-6ers of exactly the sort who feast on vulnerable, slow-footed defensemen with no puck skills, such as Murray. He's exactly the kind of guy you don't want Murray out against; he already has more than enough trouble dealing with fourth-liners.
I guess the term PWF means different things to different people. I don't want Murray going up against a Lucic, but I'd rather Murray go up against Neil than Bouillon.


Quote:
Originally Posted by MathMan View Post
It's too bad it ends up being undermined by the fact he can't play effective defense, but thankfully, with Emelin in the lineup who brings size and physicality in the package of an effective defenseman, that "hole" is much less of an issue.

As a side note though, I've never understood while it was okay to ice an objectively substandard player because he somehow "fills a role". I don't think NHL teams particularly need bad players of any sort.
Emelin might make it less of an issue, though even last year with a healthy Emelin it was an issue though not as bad.

As for players filling a role, I disagree. Having a worse "overall" player who is specialized in a certain aspect of the game can be better for the team overall. For example having someone who can be QB a power play whose bad defensively can be better for a team than a player simply ok both offensively and defensively. The coach has some control over matchups and can put players in situations that play to their strengths and minimize their weaknesses. A team isn't simply a sum of each individual players ability.

Sorinth is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-14-2013, 03:42 PM
  #111
Monctonscout
Monctonscout
 
Monctonscout's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 30,373
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MathMan View Post
More or less, it goes like this: we're dominant when Markov-Subban is on the ice, roughly even when Gorges-Diaz is on the ice (because they get tough defensive assignments), and getting pasted when Bouillon-Murray is on the ice. If Bouillon-Murray could just break even, Markov-Subban would pull the team ahead. As it is, Bouillon-Murray are getting creamed more than Markov-Subban can compensate.

Illustrative numbers: with Subban on the ice, 5-on-5, the Habs have outshot their opponents by 24, which is pretty good, especially given his matchups. But in less than a fourth of the icetime, with Murray on the ice, the Habs have been outshot by 28. Bouillon's numbers are grim, but not as grim.



PWF types tend to be top-6ers of exactly the sort who feast on vulnerable, slow-footed defensemen with no puck skills, such as Murray. He's exactly the kind of guy you don't want Murray out against; he already has more than enough trouble dealing with fourth-liners.



It's too bad it ends up being undermined by the fact he can't play effective defense, but thankfully, with Emelin in the lineup who brings size and physicality in the package of an effective defenseman, that "hole" is much less of an issue.

As a side note though, I've never understood while it was okay to ice an objectively substandard player because he somehow "fills a role". I don't think NHL teams particularly need bad players of any sort.
The thing with Murray is, he missed a lot of time, including training camp, so it's like he is in preseson stage. Not being fsat to begin with it's a harder adjustment for him to get back up to speed.

I think he is definitely worth keeping around if we are a sure playoff team, at playoff time guys like that have value, otherwise trade him for a good pick(2nd or 3rd) at the deadline. He's on a 1 year deal at low cap hit so even if he plays half the games he's not a bad guy to have around.

Parros is in a similar situation, he played half of one game and went out for a month, put him in a tough spot in terms of timing. Again, a guy that's worth having on your roster for tough games.

Monctonscout is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-14-2013, 03:45 PM
  #112
overlords
Global Moderator
Jack Arse
 
overlords's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Trolling Brian Wilde
Posts: 26,088
vCash: 500
A lot of you are missing the fact that his current play is pretty much consistent with his play last year. Banking on him just being rusty is optimistic, to put it lightly.

__________________



"overlords is one of my favorite people on this entire site." - Hfboards
overlords is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-14-2013, 03:49 PM
  #113
JLP
La Sainte-Flanelle
 
JLP's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 5,935
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MathMan View Post
...
As a side note though, I've never understood while it was okay to ice an objectively substandard player because he somehow "fills a role". I don't think NHL teams particularly need bad players of any sort.
If I may no disrespect intended but maybe your difficulty in understanding is in part because stats micro-quantify players at a particular position, for example they try to determine who is the better goalie, the better centre or the better defenceman. But this may not be not the best way to compare between the sub-categories of a position, eg stay-at-home defenceman, or physical defenceman, or offensive defenceman, etc, or the subtle distinctions within such sub-categories. Or the look of the team they'll play with.

For example "Diaz is better than Murray" can be proven in stats-based performance analysis. And so if a team's D-corps were to be selected on the basis of an "objective" stats-based performance analysis, a GM would hypothetically want six Diaz defencemen and zero Murray defencemen in his lineup. But I'm sure you'll agree that a real GM would probably select a combination of the two types, for example three or four Diaz Defencemen and two or three Murray defencemen, or anyway at least one Murray defenceman. Especially a team playing in the Atlantic division.

IMHO at some point an objective performance-based analysis can deliver diminishing returns and role is simply more important. That's why, given the look of rest of the Habs' defence, I'd prefer Murray over Bouillon as our #6.

JLP is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
11-14-2013, 03:50 PM
  #114
Monctonscout
Monctonscout
 
Monctonscout's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 30,373
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Right Price View Post
Bouillon should sit, but he won't, and I'll be pissed.

Gorges-Subban
Markov-Emelin
Murray-Diaz
It should not be one or the other always sitting but some kind of 50-50 60-40 split depending on opposition. It's best to keep 7 guys ready than have a guy get rusty and struggle coming back in the lineup. Dresssing 7 for a few games wouldn't be the end of the world if a forward or two is out.

Monctonscout is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-14-2013, 03:51 PM
  #115
MathMan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 16,891
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sorinth View Post
Since he's matched up against 3rd/4th liners those 28 shots against aren't the same quality as Subbans 24. So Subban/Markov should still pull the team ahead.
Allowing that shot quality between first- and fourth-liner is a real thing, yes. But being unable to outshoot fourth-liners to the extent that you undo the positive impact of four PK Subbans? Not a good sign.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sorinth View Post
I guess the term PWF means different things to different people. I don't want Murray going up against a Lucic, but I'd rather Murray go up against Neil than Bouillon.
A power forward is a bit of a mythical creature, but I wouldn't classify a guy like Neil, who doesn't score much, as being one. He's more of an agitator.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sorinth View Post
Emelin might make it less of an issue, though even last year with a healthy Emelin it was an issue though not as bad.
It really wan't much of an issue at all.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sorinth View Post
As for players filling a role, I disagree. Having a worse "overall" player who is specialized in a certain aspect of the game can be better for the team overall. For example having someone who can be QB a power play whose bad defensively can be better for a team than a player simply ok both offensively and defensively.
Okay, but here you have two players who are about the same value, just distributed differently. But Murray is awful offensively and awful defensively. His value is pretty much negative, to the point where he hurts the team practically every time he's on the ice. You could call up someone from the AHL and expect them to do better.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Monctonscout View Post
The thing with Murray is, he missed a lot of time, including training camp, so it's like he is in preseson stage. Not being fsat to begin with it's a harder adjustment for him to get back up to speed.
I'll grant that he can improve. He still has some room to do so before I label him "as bad as I feared".

Quote:
Originally Posted by Monctonscout View Post
Parros is in a similar situation, he played half of one game and went out for a month, put him in a tough spot in terms of timing. Again, a guy that's worth having on your roster for tough games.
Parros is essentially Georges Laraque with better PR. He's about as effective on the ice, outside of fighting.

MathMan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-14-2013, 04:01 PM
  #116
MathMan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 16,891
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JLP View Post
If I may no disrespect intended but maybe your difficulty in understanding is in part because stats micro-quantify players at a particular position, for example they try to determine who is the better goalie, the better centre or the better defenceman.
Sure, I can get that you might want to pick a player who's a slightly worse all-arounder because he has better specialist skills that you're short of, like penalty-killing. The problem with a guy like Murray is that he's not merely "slightly worse".

And for a guy whose role is to play 12 minutes a game in a bottom-pairing and kill penalties, you could do a lot better than Murray for the same price. Bouillon certainly would.

Also: hitting people is a tool. Potentially, a valuable tool. But it is not a role and it is not an end in itself.

MathMan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-14-2013, 04:09 PM
  #117
habdynasty
Registered User
 
habdynasty's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,747
vCash: 500
I would take Murray any day over Boullion, size and reach are something the hab d need more of.

habdynasty is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-14-2013, 04:14 PM
  #118
ECWHSWI
P.K. is perfect.
 
ECWHSWI's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 14,901
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by habdynasty View Post
I would take Murray any day over Boullion, size and reach are something the hab d need more of.
Murray is easily our worst D 5 vs 5...

ECWHSWI is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
11-14-2013, 04:18 PM
  #119
Monctonscout
Monctonscout
 
Monctonscout's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 30,373
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by overlords View Post
A lot of you are missing the fact that his current play is pretty much consistent with his play last year. Banking on him just being rusty is optimistic, to put it lightly.
I watched him a lot after the trade and he was better than he's shown so far, playing 18:30 a game.

Monctonscout is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-14-2013, 04:23 PM
  #120
Monctonscout
Monctonscout
 
Monctonscout's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 30,373
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MathMan View Post
Parros is essentially Georges Laraque with better PR. He's about as effective on the ice, outside of fighting.
I don't see the comparison. Parros is a decent skater for an enforcer and he is usually in good position. Skillwise he isn't anything special, but he is miles ahead of the liabily BGL was his last season here.

Laraque was a pretty effective player before joining the Habs, he had 48 goals and 148 career points.

Monctonscout is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-14-2013, 04:27 PM
  #121
Runner77
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 3,254
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by habdynasty View Post
I would take Murray any day over Boullion, size and reach are something the hab d need more of.
Murray comes with a lot of warts (and would likely not be a 6th D on most teams), however, we don't have an imposing puck-clearing type and he's the best we've got to do the job, late in games.

Bouillon is an MT infatuation that only a voluntary retirement can cure. Or an MT firing.

Runner77 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-14-2013, 04:32 PM
  #122
Sorinth
Registered User
 
Sorinth's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 2,191
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MathMan View Post
Allowing that shot quality between first- and fourth-liner is a real thing, yes. But being unable to outshoot fourth-liners to the extent that you undo the positive impact of four PK Subbans? Not a good sign.
Are you saying there's no difference in shot quality between Subban and a 4th liner like White? Of course it would be better if our 4th line could out-shoot the opposing 4th line, but that's not all on Murray and in the end has minimal impact on whether we win or not. You win/lose based on your top players. If the shot distribution for our team was 20/10/5/5 (1st through 4th lines) the opposing team had 5/5/10/20 then we are more likely to win the game even though the shot totals are equal. Being dominated by 4th liners is not the same as being dominated by 1st liners.


Quote:
Originally Posted by MathMan View Post
A power forward is a bit of a mythical creature, but I wouldn't classify a guy like Neil, who doesn't score much, as being one. He's more of an agitator.
I use the term to reference style of play rather than skill level. Neil goes to the front of the net and makes the goalies life difficult. Bouillon can't do much to help his goalie out, Murray can.


Quote:
Originally Posted by MathMan View Post
It really wan't much of an issue at all.


Okay, but here you have two players who are about the same value, just distributed differently. But Murray is awful offensively and awful defensively. His value is pretty much negative, to the point where he hurts the team practically every time he's on the ice. You could call up someone from the AHL and expect them to do better.
Disagree about last season but don't feel like going through the postmortem again in this thread.

They both hurt the team more than they help it. They wouldn't be #6s if they were better. The difference is Murray brings something unique to the table, Bouillon doesn't. If used properly Murray can be help the team. Bouillon's best case is that he doesn't hurt you. I'll take the chance of getting something positive even if the worst case situation is a little worse (Which is debatable anyways).

Sorinth is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-14-2013, 06:12 PM
  #123
MathMan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 16,891
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Monctonscout View Post
I don't see the comparison. Parros is a decent skater for an enforcer and he is usually in good position. Skillwise he isn't anything special, but he is miles ahead of the liabily BGL was his last season here.
They're both awful hockey players who hurt their team whenever they're on the ice. Parros's ability to attract goals against would lead a guy to start believing in the supernatural. He's been unlucky, but it wasn't just bad luck that he ended up -5 in 21 minutes of total icetime.

Yep, he was on the ice for as long as Josh Gorges' average game, total, and was on the ice for five goals against and zero goals for. Nuts. Some of that is bad luck but that's harsh.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sorinth View Post
Are you saying there's no difference in shot quality between Subban and a 4th liner like White?
There is, but it's probably smaller than you think.

More importantly, I don't find "it's okay to get horribly outshot by fourth-liners because they can't shoot straight" to be very persuasive.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sorinth View Post
They both hurt the team more than they help it. They wouldn't be #6s if they were better.
A strong #6 defenseman can help his team. He might hurt it if he was slotted in the #1 role, but a cheap guy who can outplay, or at least hold against, the bottom of opposing lineups has real value. And frankly, at 1.5 mil you ought to be able to find someone of that caliber.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sorinth View Post
The difference is Murray brings something unique to the table, Bouillon doesn't.
Bouillon does bring something Murray can't: defense approaching bottom-pairing level.

MathMan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-14-2013, 07:47 PM
  #124
Lafleurs Guy
Registered User
 
Lafleurs Guy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 20,287
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by overlords View Post
A lot of you are missing the fact that his current play is pretty much consistent with his play last year. Banking on him just being rusty is optimistic, to put it lightly.
Is anyone saying this guy is good?

For me its just a question of who's worse. It's like trying to choose between which testicle you want to get tazered.

Lafleurs Guy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-14-2013, 07:51 PM
  #125
overlords
Global Moderator
Jack Arse
 
overlords's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Trolling Brian Wilde
Posts: 26,088
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lafleurs Guy View Post
Is anyone saying this guy is good?

For me its just a question of who's worse. It's like trying to choose between which testicle you want to get tazered.
Yeah, neither option is ideal, but when one testicle has a tumor on it, it's a pretty easy choice.

overlords 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 04:17 AM.

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.