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

Spacek/Gill confirm Martin is garbage coach, Gauthier senile old man, Cunney a puppet

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
05-29-2012, 10:43 PM
  #426
Sports1131
Registered User
 
Sports1131's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Boston/Montreal
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,170
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Sports1131 Send a message via MSN to Sports1131
Quote:
Originally Posted by MathMan View Post
(Then again, I keep being told Muller was the Great Architect of the PP...)
Actually, I believe at that point Jarvis was controlling the powerplay and Muller was working the PK. It's hard to say how much is coaching and how much is the players though -- I have a hard time seeing any powerplay with the Markov to Kovalev connection and a powerful shot from the point struggling too much.

My main issues with Carbonneau were his usage of defensemen not only as forwards, but in the top six, and the way he handled Sergei Samsonov's outburst. He was placed on the fourth line once, in PRACTICE, and complained to the media, questioning his decision to sign with the Canadiens. Instead of showing who's in charge and leaving him on the fourth line or scratching him, he moved him back to the second line immediately and scratched Perezhogin instead.

Sports1131 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-29-2012, 10:46 PM
  #427
HCH
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: The Wild West
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,691
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by buddahsmoka1 View Post

Washington only got 38 shots in that game BTW.
Is that supposed to be an accomplishment by the Canadiens?

HCH is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-29-2012, 10:47 PM
  #428
guest1467
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 24,824
vCash: 500
Nevermind.

guest1467 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-29-2012, 10:49 PM
  #429
MathMan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 17,055
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sports1131 View Post
Actually, I believe at that point Jarvis was controlling the powerplay and Muller was working the PK. It's hard to say how much is coaching and how much is the players though -- I have a hard time seeing any powerplay with the Markov to Kovalev connection and a powerful shot from the point struggling too much.
There is that, but I can't hold him responsible for weak the 5-on-5 and not do the same for the strong PP. IMO he had the personnel to be successful at both and was directly responsible for the problem at evens.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sports1131 View Post
My main issues with Carbonneau were his usage of defensemen not only as forwards, but in the top six, and the way he handled Sergei Samsonov's outburst. He was placed on the fourth line once, in PRACTICE, and complained to the media, questioning his decision to sign with the Canadiens. Instead of showing who's in charge and leaving him on the fourth line or scratching him, he moved him back to the second line immediately and scratched Perezhogin instead.
My issue is a bit of the opposite -- Carbo butted heads with Samsonov because Sammy played a style that Carbo didn't like and happened to be in a classic cold spell. Carbo immediately assumed the problem was work ethic ("work harder" being his solution to every problem) when it was probably just transient variance, as is usually the case when a guy with a 13% career shooting percentage ends up shooting 4% for a while.

His situation, actually, was not unlike Cammy's when he first started with the Habs and could not buy a goal.

MathMan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-29-2012, 10:58 PM
  #430
guest1467
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 24,824
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stradale View Post
I purposely specify that the Caps got 32 shots after 2 periods. Yeah its not necessairly half game since i dont have the shot numbers at the 10min mark but after 2. We were being outshot 32-13. Its got even worse in the third.

Washington got 38 shots in game 5... But we were talking about game 6 aren't we.. And they got 54 shots in game 6.
Sorry, my google search mixed up game 5 and 6.

This is what happens when you look at games´ scoresheets and base opinions on shots.

The first period was complete and utter textbook hockey by the Habs, despite getting outshot 18-10. The second period started out the same, until about near the mid way mark, when Washington began to take over the game.

I have watched it two times in full since watching it live, the first period is Martin hockey played perfectly, just like game 1 and 2 against Boston two years ago were.

When the team played for each other and stuck to the system, they were freaking hard to play against. It was when they got away from that, and either got too fancy, or tried to sway away from their gameplan is when they bit the chomps, like in game 3 and 4 in Montreal.

guest1467 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-29-2012, 11:25 PM
  #431
Whitesnake
Habs of steel
 
Whitesnake's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Lorraine, QC
Country: Canada
Posts: 48,781
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by buddahsmoka1 View Post
Sorry, my google search mixed up game 5 and 6.

This is what happens when you look at games´ scoresheets and base opinions on shots.

The first period was complete and utter textbook hockey by the Habs, despite getting outshot 18-10. The second period started out the same, until about near the mid way mark, when Washington began to take over the game.

I have watched it two times in full since watching it live, the first period is Martin hockey played perfectly, just like game 1 and 2 against Boston two years ago were.

When the team played for each other and stuck to the system, they were freaking hard to play against. It was when they got away from that, and either got too fancy, or tried to sway away from their gameplan is when they bit the chomps, like in game 3 and 4 in Montreal.
Unless we didn't have the team to play that style on a regular basis. I doubt that it's everybody together deciding to be now fancy. I feel it's more about a group who were fancy and were able, sometimes, to play the type of system Martin asked them to play. But what's the expression in english for "Chassez le naturel, il revient au galop".....

Whitesnake is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-30-2012, 12:08 AM
  #432
Kriss E
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 24,654
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Whitesnake View Post
Unless we didn't have the team to play that style on a regular basis. I doubt that it's everybody together deciding to be now fancy. I feel it's more about a group who were fancy and were able, sometimes, to play the type of system Martin asked them to play. But what's the expression in english for "Chassez le naturel, il revient au galop".....
I have a hard time understanding how a bunch of players used to playing a defensive system suddenly aren't made to play defensive.
Gionta-Gomez in NJ, Cammy in CGY, Plek one of the best two way players in the NHL.
So really, who are the players not fit to play that system? The Kost broz? Lats?? God knows how much the fans loved those guys after the hype faded away right..


Every forward that makes the top 6 in the NHL wants to attack and score goals, not retreat, be patient, and counter at the opportune time. That doesn't they can't play a defensive style. Problem is, it's a million time easier to rush up on attack, try to score a goal, be lazy on a back check, then to defend/counter attack.

I don't think we had the horses to pull our offense. This season was the only time since the remodeling of this team that I felt we had that. With a top 9 instead of a top 6, I felt we finally had enough depth to be good defensively and offensively.
Unfortunately, we started on a very bad streak, but not because we weren't outplaying opponents (we had more scoring chances than Buffalo had shots in one of our early losses). But we all know what happened after.

Kriss E is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-30-2012, 12:14 AM
  #433
Teufelsdreck
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 14,651
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Whitesnake View Post
Unless we didn't have the team to play that style on a regular basis. I doubt that it's everybody together deciding to be now fancy. I feel it's more about a group who were fancy and were able, sometimes, to play the type of system Martin asked them to play. But what's the expression in english for "Chassez le naturel, il revient au galop".....
The standard answer would be, "What's bred in the bone comes out in the flesh." However, that's a bit oconfusing, so I'd substitute a better known cliche, "A leopard can't change its spots."

Teufelsdreck is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-30-2012, 06:50 AM
  #434
Whitesnake
Habs of steel
 
Whitesnake's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Lorraine, QC
Country: Canada
Posts: 48,781
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kriss E View Post
I have a hard time understanding how a bunch of players used to playing a defensive system suddenly aren't made to play defensive.
Gionta-Gomez in NJ, Cammy in CGY, Plek one of the best two way players in the NHL.
So really, who are the players not fit to play that system? The Kost broz? Lats?? God knows how much the fans loved those guys after the hype faded away right..


Every forward that makes the top 6 in the NHL wants to attack and score goals, not retreat, be patient, and counter at the opportune time. That doesn't they can't play a defensive style. Problem is, it's a million time easier to rush up on attack, try to score a goal, be lazy on a back check, then to defend/counter attack.

I don't think we had the horses to pull our offense. This season was the only time since the remodeling of this team that I felt we had that. With a top 9 instead of a top 6, I felt we finally had enough depth to be good defensively and offensively.
Unfortunately, we started on a very bad streak, but not because we weren't outplaying opponents (we had more scoring chances than Buffalo had shots in one of our early losses). But we all know what happened after.
Problem is that you take specific players on specific teams here. That's not the problem. But maybe more the combination of them altogether in the same team. 'Cause if what you say is true, if players were used to it and had no problem doing it, how do you explain their stubborness of not doing it constantly and especially when you say that when they did it, it worked. Are they all stupid? So yes, maybe the players were used to it in their respecitve teams...but maybe were tired of doing it. Maybe wanted to try something else. Maybe wanted to finally express themselves offensively. Yet, I'd think that a bunch of smaller players reunite together will probably think that the only way to win games were not to play like Martin wanted them to play.

Whitesnake is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-30-2012, 09:18 AM
  #435
Kriss E
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 24,654
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Whitesnake View Post
Problem is that you take specific players on specific teams here. That's not the problem. But maybe more the combination of them altogether in the same team. 'Cause if what you say is true, if players were used to it and had no problem doing it, how do you explain their stubborness of not doing it constantly and especially when you say that when they did it, it worked. Are they all stupid? So yes, maybe the players were used to it in their respecitve teams...but maybe were tired of doing it. Maybe wanted to try something else. Maybe wanted to finally express themselves offensively. Yet, I'd think that a bunch of smaller players reunite together will probably think that the only way to win games were not to play like Martin wanted them to play.
Actually, I'm not the one that said that.

I don't think they were stubborn and decided not play that way. You don't win every game in hockey, you will lose games, you will look awful in certain games, you will lose games you dominate, etc. It's not always about the system.

Players can get tired of following the system, they can get tired of their own teammates as well. It happens. Doesn't mean the system was wrong and didn't fit them. Offensive coaches that preach full out attack also get fired, and some players get fed up of playing for them too. Does it always have to be about the system?

If you ask the players, they'll tell you they were all taken by surprise with Martin's firing. So, even if they might have been ''fed up'', they didn't expect him to go.
They also didn't show signs of not caring. They obviously enjoyed the PO run couple years back, no matter what you want to attribute it to.
Despite what many may say, the 7 games versus Boston was a solid performance by our team considering all our injuries. This year, we started on a bad streak, but as I mentioned, it wasn't one where we were getting dominated, we outchanced and outshot our opponents in most of those games (5 of those 8 games we outshot them by at least 10 shots). After that streak, things went back to normal with a 12-7-5 record.
So, it didn't appear like they didn't want to play for that system anymore.

People are quick to dismiss the injuries we've had because they like to go with the old cliche of ''every team has injuries''. While this may be true, it doesn't mean they don't affect the team. Martin has had to play without his best player for most of his time here. He had to deal with a very impressive number of injuries as well. I don't think we would have had better results with a coach that preaches offense.
As I also mentioned, Martin had the luxury to be more aggressive this year thanks to having a top 9. He stuck to it and it paid dividends with AK-Eller-Moen really dominating the weaker opposition. But RC screwed it all up once he took over.

I'm pretty convinced we'd have reach the POs had Martin been kept around, and looking at the way it all unfolded this year. I wouldn't have been surprised to see us pull upsets ourselves.

Kriss E is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-30-2012, 09:25 AM
  #436
Habsterix*
@Habsterix
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 13,475
vCash: 500
Been saying that for 3 years now, but I'm convinced that with the players on hand, while no top end offensive talent, the team would have been more successful with a more aggressive forecheck and by stretching the opponent's defense with a stretch pass once in a while, something Martin refused to do. That would be utilizing your strengths, in this case the team's speed, to generate something. It doesn't mean that you can't play the trap, but you'd use a different style of trap.

I'm glad that both Spacek and Gill saw the same thing from within, and I'm sure that the offensive gifted players on the team thought the same.

Habsterix* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-30-2012, 09:33 AM
  #437
MathMan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 17,055
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Habsterix View Post
Been saying that for 3 years now, but I'm convinced that with the players on hand, while no top end offensive talent, the team would have been more successful with a more aggressive forecheck and by stretching the opponent's defense with a stretch pass once in a while
It seems every fan on Earth thinks his team would be more successful with a more aggressive system, more forecheck, long passes. But there's a reason why practically every coach out there preaches defensive structure, short passes, and high-percentage plays: it works.

When he was first hired Cunneyworth actually tried the two-man forecheck with stretch passes (entirely too many stretch passes!), and had to abandon it because it failed -- the forecheckers would get caught low when the opposition transitioned the puck, leading to odd-man rushes, and the stretch pass would usually result in a turnover. He never got back to a structured transition scheme or puck possession system, advocating chip-and-chase instead, and this was a major contributor to the Habs ending up in the cellar.

MathMan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-30-2012, 09:57 PM
  #438
Habsterix*
@Habsterix
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 13,475
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MathMan View Post
It seems every fan on Earth thinks his team would be more successful with a more aggressive system, more forecheck, long passes. But there's a reason why practically every coach out there preaches defensive structure, short passes, and high-percentage plays: it works.
I really don't care what every fan on earth thinks to tell you the truth. What I do know, is that the Habs have one of the fastest teams in the NHL (up front) and that system would work for them, not necessarily with every other NHL team.

Quote:
Originally Posted by MathMan View Post
When he was first hired Cunneyworth actually tried the two-man forecheck with stretch passes (entirely too many stretch passes!), and had to abandon it because it failed -- the forecheckers would get caught low when the opposition transitioned the puck, leading to odd-man rushes, and the stretch pass would usually result in a turnover. He never got back to a structured transition scheme or puck possession system, advocating chip-and-chase instead, and this was a major contributor to the Habs ending up in the cellar.
That's the quick, short-sighted, statistical way of looking at it. But if someone pays attention to the game, they will have noticed that the aggressive forecheck created scoring opportunities and activating the defensemen also generated more scoring chances. If you have a chance, you should read Dave Stubbs' last two interviews with two former d-men, Spacek and Gill, guys who know a thing or two about systems and the NHL.

Habsterix* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-30-2012, 10:45 PM
  #439
Talks to Goalposts
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Edmonton
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,637
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Habsterix View Post
I really don't care what every fan on earth thinks to tell you the truth. What I do know, is that the Habs have one of the fastest teams in the NHL (up front) and that system would work for them, not necessarily with every other NHL team.


That's the quick, short-sighted, statistical way of looking at it. But if someone pays attention to the game, they will have noticed that the aggressive forecheck created scoring opportunities and activating the defensemen also generated more scoring chances. If you have a chance, you should read Dave Stubbs' last two interviews with two former d-men, Spacek and Gill, guys who know a thing or two about systems and the NHL.
Create scoring chances sure. But if you keep track of all the scoring chances you'd know that their scoring chance differential was much better in Martin's system than the aggressive style.

Talks to Goalposts is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-30-2012, 11:03 PM
  #440
Habsterix*
@Habsterix
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 13,475
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Talks to Goalposts View Post
Create scoring chances sure. But if you keep track of all the scoring chances you'd know that their scoring chance differential was much better in Martin's system than the aggressive style.
The problem with that is that you're comparing stats between Martin and Cunneyworth, who was thrown into a no-win situation, language debate, team basically out of contention considering that many players had packed it in, with very, very bizarre decisions by Gauthier. I don't think it's a fair comparison. Let's say you put a solid 2-1-2 forcheck/trap with puck support by the defensemen, I'm convinced that it would result into many more goals, more wins. Especially that next year, guys like Emelin, Diaz and Subban will have more experience.

Habsterix* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-30-2012, 11:34 PM
  #441
Kriss E
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 24,654
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Habsterix View Post
The problem with that is that you're comparing stats between Martin and Cunneyworth, who was thrown into a no-win situation, language debate, team basically out of contention considering that many players had packed it in, with very, very bizarre decisions by Gauthier. I don't think it's a fair comparison. Let's say you put a solid 2-1-2 forcheck/trap with puck support by the defensemen, I'm convinced that it would result into many more goals, more wins. Especially that next year, guys like Emelin, Diaz and Subban will have more experience.

So, in one post you tell a poster to read Gill's interview, in another you disregard what Gill said. Way to go.

Gill said that even at the moment of his trade (3 months after RC took over), he still believed that they could make it.
But apparently, according to you, the team had already packed it in.

RC took over a team that went 12-7-5 in last 24 games, they were now playing for .500.

You blame others of being short-sighted, but all you do is give out subjective opinions and disregard facts that go against your views. It's become quite comical.

Kriss E is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-31-2012, 08:57 AM
  #442
habsfanatics
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 3,930
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kriss E View Post
So, in one post you tell a poster to read Gill's interview, in another you disregard what Gill said. Way to go.

Gill said that even at the moment of his trade (3 months after RC took over), he still believed that they could make it.
But apparently, according to you, the team had already packed it in.

RC took over a team that went 12-7-5 in last 24 games, they were now playing for .500.

You blame others of being short-sighted, but all you do is give out subjective opinions and disregard facts that go against your views. It's become quite comical.
I think it was obvious to almost everyone that the team was struggling to break even, even under Martin. I didn't agree with the firing, but let's not dress this up. The team was on a downward spiral while Martin was still coach. Suggesting otherwise is revisionism. Why the last 24? Why not the last 5-10? Doesn't look as good? A little tougher to manipulate?

habsfanatics is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-31-2012, 09:26 AM
  #443
Habsterix*
@Habsterix
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 13,475
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kriss E View Post
So, in one post you tell a poster to read Gill's interview, in another you disregard what Gill said. Way to go.

Gill said that even at the moment of his trade (3 months after RC took over), he still believed that they could make it.
But apparently, according to you, the team had already packed it in.

RC took over a team that went 12-7-5 in last 24 games, they were now playing for .500.

You blame others of being short-sighted, but all you do is give out subjective opinions and disregard facts that go against your views. It's become quite comical.
When standing too close, you can't differentiate the forest from the tree... take a couple of steps back and you'll see the big picture.

Habsterix* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-31-2012, 09:32 AM
  #444
MathMan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 17,055
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by habsfanatics View Post
I think it was obvious to almost everyone that the team was struggling to break even, even under Martin.
Not at all. The team was slowed down from multiple injuries, but the uptick was nearly inevitable based on the way they were playing.

MathMan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-31-2012, 09:59 AM
  #445
Kriss E
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 24,654
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by habsfanatics View Post
I think it was obvious to almost everyone that the team was struggling to break even, even under Martin. I didn't agree with the firing, but let's not dress this up. The team was on a downward spiral while Martin was still coach. Suggesting otherwise is revisionism. Why the last 24? Why not the last 5-10? Doesn't look as good? A little tougher to manipulate?
They were 3-1-2 in the last 6.
3-4-3 in last 10.

But those samples are smaller. The reason I take 24games is because I remove the abnormal bad streak from earlier in the year.

And no, we were not in a downward spiral. As MM pointed out, we were suffering injuries, but I'm sure he would have managed to keep us afloat as he had done over the previous two years.

Kriss E is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-31-2012, 10:01 AM
  #446
Kriss E
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 24,654
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Habsterix View Post
When standing too close, you can't differentiate the forest from the tree... take a couple of steps back and you'll see the big picture.
So take a few steps back already.
Reality is waiting for you.

Kriss E is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-31-2012, 11:35 AM
  #447
TMI
Mod Supervisor
 
TMI's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Murfreesboro, TN
Posts: 44,763
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by 29dryden29 View Post
Preds fans are up in arms as are some radio personalities in Nashville with the Gill Interview they say it was a backhanded slap at them and their franchise lol.
Are we? I thought his comments were perfectly fine, and I'm a Preds fan

TMI is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-31-2012, 07:03 PM
  #448
Habsterix*
@Habsterix
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 13,475
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kriss E View Post
So take a few steps back already.
Reality is waiting for you.
I have. You should try. I could agree with you but what's the point, we'd both be wrong!

Habsterix* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-31-2012, 08:34 PM
  #449
habsfanatics
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 3,930
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MathMan View Post
Not at all. The team was slowed down from multiple injuries, but the uptick was nearly inevitable based on the way they were playing.
They were playing horribly, they were no longer out chancing opponents like they had the first 10 games. I really find your opinions out in left field.

Inevitable, sure, how many times have you claimed something to be inevitable and then it inevitably turns out you were wrong?

You seem a touch paranoid about certain things when there's no reason to be, Dudley's evaluating ability and overly positive about others who don't deserve your optimism, JM's coaching ability. I really don't get you.

habsfanatics is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-31-2012, 08:37 PM
  #450
Habsterix*
@Habsterix
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 13,475
vCash: 500
All hail Spacek and Gill telling it the way it is!

Habsterix* 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 04:40 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.