depth at centre for us is revealing itself to be a massive strength
Plekanec
Desharnais
Eller
Galchenyuk
White
Dumont
Nokelainen
The best part for me is that I trust any of the bottom three in the same role and any of the top three in the same role and of course Chuckie will soon be among the top three. Love that depth.
But still, if the stats we use to show that DD is "sheltered" is that he's not facing the other teams top offensive line, then it's skewed because the top offensive line is not necessarily the top defensive line. I would even argue that on most teams, it's not the case at all.
Let's pick any player from any other team. Would we say he is "sheltered" if he's not facing the Habs best offensive line, which is DD's line? Of course not, because defensively, it's far from being the most effective. But if the stats that is being used to show that DD is sheltered is built on this model, then it's not valid for very obvious reasons.
Sometimes not - for example, New Jersey's best offensive player is Kovalchuk, but the best defensive line in their current lineup is Elias-Zajac-Clarkson - but it's still usually one of the top 2 lines on the team, with a lot of skill.
Sometimes not - for example, New Jersey's best offensive player is Kovalchuk, but the best defensive line in their current lineup is Elias-Zajac-Clarkson - but it's still usually one of the top 2 lines on the team, with a lot of skill.
But I think you can find as many examples of teams whose best defensive line is not as much of an offensive threat.
Fact is : If DD's line is not facing the other teams best offensive line, it doesn't mean that he's being sheltered at all. He might just be facing the other team's best defensive line.
But I think you can find as many examples of teams whose best defensive line is not as much of an offensive threat.
Fact is : If DD's line is not facing the other teams best offensive line, it doesn't mean that he's being sheltered at all. He might just be facing the other team's best defensive line.
I'd say that Desharnais ought to be afforded the same courtesy we give most young players who are still new to the NHL though, in regards to flaws in their games. Desharnais has his flaws, which you've rightly noted, but I'd argue that he's intelligent on ice, hard working, and that those flaws will be shored up before long--if not turned into strengths. He has the ability to be good defensively, in my mind: he's crafty with the puck, good at stripping opponents of the puck or forcing turnovers. That's fundamental to good defense. In fact, that's fundamental to Montreal transition hockey.
You're right that Desharnais needs sheltering. He's also still new to the NHL and, despite his age, still far from a finished product. Given his history, and his on ice smarts and hard work, he's a tough one to bet against.
Now, that's the kind of answer i like....even if we don't see eye to eye.
I agree with most of that. I could even had that DD is an exemple to follow for everyone on this team.....even an inspiration for a guy like Gallagher. That's part if his upside. He do have a real good Hockey IQ and is still a "rookie".
I disagree about the "defensive side" of DD.......he is 26 years old...late-bloomer....in his prime. It's not like a 22 years old who's got 3 to 4 years of "learning" ahead of him before hitting his prime. He will get better of course...but he won't get any close a players who got that 3-4 years of "learning".....not because DD sucks, but because it's almost impossible for anybody to do that.
And that's okay....that's not why is here...that's not how he got here anyway!
But here's the things that won't change with time:
No intimidation (team charisma)
Will need proctection and won't be able to protect anybody
Won't play a shutdown line cause teams will have better options for this job
Won't play on an energy/gritty line cause teams will have better options for this job
Won't ever bring a physical aspect to a game.
DD is all offensive and he surely ain't the only one (Ryder is about the same)
That don't mean DD is not a good player, but these things won't happen
But if someone like the upside he's bringing to the game....fine! I'm not pissed if DD scored a goal or make a good play (That's what haters do). He is simply not the type of player i want my team to go for.
Pacioretty, Subban, Eller, Emelin, Prust, Gallagher, Bourque, White are the kind of player i like....cause they bring speed, grit, physicality, versatility, talent....that's the upside i like/looking for in a player, and DD doesn't have that
Yes, we get it. You don't like Desharnais. When after a game like he had last night, you come in and still discredit him, you're not going to get a lot of people taking your opinion seriously.
You read what you wanna read....i did write that i give him credit, and that he did played really well lately.
As I already mentioned, if you look at the play by play report from last night, Desharnais’ line mostly played against Kelly’s line and freakin' Zdeno Chara. This phenomenon is repeating itself since last season: our opponents are sending their top D pairing and a sound two ways line against Desharnais, Pacioretty and Cole/Gallagher.
Some people call it, playing against the Charas of this world, “weak” opposition!
That said, an alert coach would not send them against our opponent top offensive line; that’s Plekanec’s job.
I still don't get why the 29 other teams would never use their best defensive line against what has been the Habs best offensive line since 2 seasons now. It's not like the Habs coaching staff always had the last word in it! And I don't think the 29 other coaching staffs are dumb enough to put their 4th line against them on a regular basis. I have a hard time believing this.
Actually, the best defensive line of a team is often the 3rd. So I wouldn't be surprised if DD's line often have to face this line. You may see it as being "sheltered" because it's a "bottom line". But I'm pretty sure that other teams are wise enough to place their best defensive players against them now.
By the way, you may use the word "sheltered" this way, but many other DD's detractors here kept arguing that he could only succeed if he was being "sheltered" between 2 big wingers, which he is now proving to be wrong.
Okay...the "sheltered thing"
As another pointed out, it's not about the size of his wingers....it's the whole things.
See it as privilege/advantage:
It's an advantage to go on the ice everytimes there's a icing with tired player on the ice.
It's an advantage to always be the first line out on a 5 on 3 and on most of the powerplay.
It's an advantage to be playing with the best offensive force on the wings this team got. Never forget, Gallagher was doing as well with Galchenyuk (but less ice-time) and Pacioretty did as well with Gomez!
Don't ask any player to have a 60 points season without some of these advantages (Even Crosby might not be able). But DD got most, if not all of these advantage.
That's what i called being "sheltered".....it's simply impossible to give any better than what he got!!
Okay...the "sheltered thing"
As another pointed out, it's not about the size of his wingers....it's the whole things.
See it as privilege/advantage:
It's an advantage to go on the ice everytimes there's a icing with tired player on the ice.
It's an advantage to always be the first line out on a 5 on 3 and on most of the powerplay.
It's an advantage to be playing with the best offensive force on the wings this team got. Never forget, Gallagher was doing as well with Galchenyuk (but less ice-time) and Pacioretty did as well with Gomez!
Don't ask any player to have a 60 points season without some of these advantages (Even Crosby might not be able). But DD got most, if not all of these advantage.
That's what i called being "sheltered".....it's simply impossible to give any better than what he got!!
This is all based on speculation. The only facts we have is :
DD has reached the conference finals 2 years in a row in the QMJHL (2003-04, 2004-05)
He has won the Kelly Cup (ECHL) 2007-08.
He lost in 7 games in conference finals for the Calder Cup (AHL) in 2009-10.
Based in these evidences, nothing tells us that he couldn't repeat in the NHL. To compare DD to Kyle Wellwood is really showing your bias...
Also, I agree DD is unidimensional as an offensive player. But last time I checked, scoring goals was still the most effective way to win hockey games.
As I already mentioned, if you look at the play by play report from last night, Desharnais’ line mostly played against Kelly’s line and freakin' Zdeno Chara. This phenomenon is repeating itself since last season: our opponents are sending their top D pairing and a sound two ways line against Desharnais, Pacioretty and Cole/Gallagher.
Some people call it, playing against the Charas of this world, “weak” opposition!
That said, an alert coach would not send them against our opponent top offensive line; that’s Plekanec’s job.
Nobody has called Chara 'weak' competition. I don't know why you say this.
Your reference refers to one game, while your claim refers to a season and a half. Perhaps you'd like to align your references and your claims before mocking others' perspectives -- especially since those perspectives are substantiated through advanced stats.
But here's one....only 3 players in the NHL hit the 60 points mark at even strenght.
And that's ONLY the advantage of being on the powerplay!!!! Imagine whit the others i mention?
The best player that didn't get any points on the PP....Vicktor Stallberg with 43 points! (Mention to PAscal Dupuis...59 points with only one in PP)
Pacioretty, Subban, Eller, Emelin, Prust, Gallagher, Bourque, White are the kind of player i like....cause they bring speed, grit, physicality, versatility, talent....that's the upside i like/looking for in a player, and DD doesn't have that
Surely if the 8 players you list are so gritty and versatile we can fit in one player who is perhaps deficient in those areas but is actually an excellent playmaker with a great work ethic that compliments that group perfectly?
Pacioretty, Subban, Eller, Emelin, Prust, Gallagher, Bourque, White are the kind of player i like....cause they bring speed, grit, physicality, versatility, talent....that's the upside i like/looking for in a player, and DD doesn't have that
And yet no one is able to make great passing match after match in that list except maybe Pacioretty.
More than that DD hockey IQ and ability to play smart is severly underrated here.
Nobody has called Chara 'weak' competition. I don't know why you say this.
Your reference refers to one game, while your claim refers to a season and a half. Perhaps you'd like to align your references and your claims before mocking others' perspectives -- especially since those perspectives are substantiated through advanced stats.
People often use the word sheltered as if it meant “easy/weak competition”. I was just underlining the fact that most advanced stats fail, to various degrees, to correctly assess the difficulties associated with playing against the opponent’s best D pairing and a sound two ways line.
And yes: our opponents, since last season, are usually sending their best D pairing against Desharnais’ line. It did not start last night.
Not sure where you saw me “mocking others' perspectives” btw.
But here's one....only 3 players in the NHL hit the 60 points mark at even strenght.
And that's ONLY the advantage of being on the powerplay!!!! Imagine whit the others i mention?
The best player that didn't get any points on the PP....Vicktor Stallberg with 43 points! (Mention to PAscal Dupuis...59 points with only one in PP)
I'm not arguing - merely pointing out that you said Crosby might not be able to gather up 60 points during a season without PP time and great wingmen.
Quote:
Originally Posted by thebinne4pres
Don't ask any player to have a 60 points season without some of these advantages (Even Crosby might not be able)
Fun facts:
- Crosby has been averaging 1.4 PPG since the start of his career
- on a regular 82-games season, that's 115 pts
- OK, so he plays with Letang, Malkin and Neal on the PP, but he has scrubs for wingmen at ES
Look, if you're going to post ridiculous claims and then try to change the subject to avoid being railed, why don't you go back to the original posts and edit them? Or better yet:
But here's the things that won't change with time:
No intimidation (team charisma)
Will need proctection and won't be able to protect anybody
Won't play a shutdown line cause teams will have better options for this job
Won't play on an energy/gritty line cause teams will have better options for this job
Won't ever bring a physical aspect to a game.
DD is all offensive and he surely ain't the only one (Ryder is about the same)
That don't mean DD is not a good player, but these things won't happen
But if someone like the upside he's bringing to the game....fine! I'm not pissed if DD scored a goal or make a good play (That's what haters do). He is simply not the type of player i want my team to go for.
Pacioretty, Subban, Eller, Emelin, Prust, Gallagher, Bourque, White are the kind of player i like....cause they bring speed, grit, physicality, versatility, talent....that's the upside i like/looking for in a player, and DD doesn't have that
Ok so basically, you just want players that play the exact same brand of hockey, in which grit is more important than talent..?
Are you aware that many, probably hundreds of players in this league don't have the charasteristics that you blame DD for not having? So according to this description, I suppose that you wouldn't want those players on your team :
Steven Stamkos
Martin St.Louis
Tomas Vanek
Patrick Kane
Jakub Voracek
Mike Ribeiro
Alexander Semin
PA Parenteau
Taylor Hall
Ryan Nugent-Hopkins
Alex Tanguay
Phil Kessel
Jeff Skinner
Mike Cammalleri
Tyler Ennis
Jonathan Huberdeau
Zach Parise
Tomas Fleischmann
Jiri Hudler
David Perron
Daniel Brière
Etc.
Should I continue?
Seriously, this is basic "team building". A good team is not made of player all built in the same mold. A team like this would be pretty easy to counter. Grit is not enough to win hockey games. You also need speed, talent and hockey IQ. I mean, do I really need to spend time explaining that?
And really, how in the world can you like Gallagher and hate DD?? Both are small, but both are fearless and willing to go in front of the net and receive hits. Gallagher is not any more "tough" than Desharnais. The main difference between both is that one is a goal scorer while the other is a playmaker. We need both kind of players in a hockey team.
Surely if the 8 players you list are so gritty and versatile we can fit in one player who is perhaps deficient in those areas but is actually an excellent playmaker with a great work ethic that compliments that group perfectly?
Yep...you said it!! We can fit ONE player who is deficient in those areas but is actually an excellent playmaker with great work ethic.....
ONE player...at least at center.
Soon (i would like as fast as possible)....Galchenyuk who is perhaps deficient in those areas but is actually an excellent playmaker with great work ethic, might NEED to be that ONE player for his devellopment!
Yep...you said it!! We can fit ONE player who is deficient in those areas but is actually an excellent playmaker with great work ethic.....
ONE player...at least at center.
Soon (i would like as fast as possible)....Galchenyuk who is perhaps deficient in those areas but is actually an excellent playmaker with great work ethic, might NEED to be that ONE player for his devellopment!
So suddenly, you make up a rule that we can only have one unidimensional player as if it was some kind of universal truth...? And of course, that exception has to be your favorite player... No no, you're not biased at all.
By the way, I don't think Galchenyuk will be unidimensional in his prime. He'll be a complete player.
By the way, are you aware that the Bruins have soft players on their team like Peverley, Seguin or Krejci? And some players that are weak defensively like Thornton, Horton and Hamilton?
Actually, even on the Stanley Cup winning team, you have soft players like Justin Williams and Jeff Carter, or players that are not good defensively like... Jeff Carter, Dustin Penner and Kyle Clifford. But you know what? These players are still useful because they fill other roles.
So suddenly, you make up a rule that we can only have one unidimensional player as if it was some kind of universal truth...? And of course, that exception has to be your favorite player... No no, you're not biased at all.
By the way, I don't think Galchenyuk will be unidimensional in his prime. He'll be a complete player.
By the way, are you aware that the Bruins have soft players on their team like Peverley, Seguin or Krejci? And some players that are weak defensively like Thornton, Horton and Hamilton?
Actually, even on the Stanley Cup winning team, you have soft players like Justin Williams and Jeff Carter, or players that are not good defensively like... Jeff Carter, Dustin Penner and Kyle Clifford. But you know what? These players are still useful because they fill other roles.
I never said that Galchenyuk will be unidimensional in his prime. I said he will be in the next 1-2-3 years and mayby even 4....when he'll only be 22-23 years old.
Galchenyuk will be able to do a lot of things eventually.
I don't make any rules....that's only my opinion!
You need a center to shutdown top offensive line, playing as much minutes as them and put up some points in the process. That's Pleky right now
You need a center to create offensive, PP specialist and your go-to-guy for goals...that's DD right now
This is where we might differ:
A center you can help defensively if needed, offensively if needed...able to help both speciality if injuries. That's Eller right now
Where Galchenyuk fit the most for the next 3-4 years?
