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

In the next 3 years, will we be that small

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
05-15-2013, 08:24 PM
  #1
HABsurde
Registered User
 
HABsurde's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Montreal
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,444
vCash: 500
In the next 3 years, will we be that small

I don't know much about our pool of prospect but with the players on the team who are 24 or younger (which a good portion might be our core, here is the list

(Of course they will not all make it, but just listing a big chunk of players)

Lars Eller - 24 - 6'2
PK Subban - 24 - 6'0
B. Gallagher - 21 - 5'8
A. Galchenyuk - 19 - 6'2
J. Tinordi - 21 - 6'6
G. Dumont - 22 - 5'9
N. Beaulieu - 20 - 6'2
G. Pateryn - 22 - 6'2
M. Ellis - 21 - 6'2
M. Bournival - 20 - 6'0
P. Holland - 21 - 6'0
D. Dietz - 19 - 6'1
D. Thrower - 19 - 6'0
D. Kristo - 22 - 5'11
S. Collberg - 19 - 5'11
C. Hudon - 18 - 5'10
T. Bozon - 19 - 6'1
M Bennett - 22 - 6'0
M. Nygren - 22 - 6'1
J. Didier - 20 - 6'2
M. MacMillan - 21 - 6'0
J. Nattinen - 22 -6'2
B. Vail - 19 - 6'1
D. Pribyl - 20 - 6'4
C. Sullivan - 20 - 6'2
L. Leblanc - 22 - 6'0

yes we need to get bigger but, as i figure the Habs to be a work in progress, reaching a certain peak in 2-3 years, the size issue, may be resolve even from within...

Am i completly wrong ???

HABsurde is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-15-2013, 09:02 PM
  #2
Rosso Scuderia
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 4,108
vCash: 500
Those are just numbers, we need big players that play big.

Rosso Scuderia is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-15-2013, 09:13 PM
  #3
vik352
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Sherbrooke, Quebec
Country: Canada
Posts: 131
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rosso Scuderia View Post
Those are just numbers, we need big players that play big.
Well at least it's a step in the right direction

vik352 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-15-2013, 09:43 PM
  #4
MXD
Registered User
 
MXD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Ottawa
Posts: 22,694
vCash: 500
The forwards aren't very big as a group, and the biggest ones appear to not be really big players.

Should draft AT LEAST one 6'2+forward this draft.

MXD is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-15-2013, 10:47 PM
  #5
Talks to Goalposts
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Edmonton
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,655
vCash: 500
This might be a minority opinion but maybe people should be asking themselves whether height and weight totals have anything to do with winning hockey games. For something so commonly accepted in hockey circles there doesn't seem to be much tangible evidence of that.

Incidently, Chicago, this year's super squad, is one of the smallest in the league. And the idea that the Habs lost to the Sens because they were smaller is a dubious proposition. MTL was much better at getting into the dirty areas of the ice closer to the net on the whole, where they were getting beat was on goaltending performance.

Talks to Goalposts is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-15-2013, 10:52 PM
  #6
Bobby G
Registered User
 
Bobby G's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,939
vCash: 500
This entire forum has become a discussion about size or Carey Price.

There is more to hockey

Bobby G is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-15-2013, 11:01 PM
  #7
Lemons
Registered User
 
Lemons's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 921
vCash: 500
We need to score more goals and let less goals in.



I don't care how we do it.

Lemons is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-15-2013, 11:17 PM
  #8
StellerEller
Saku :D
 
StellerEller's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Hamilton, ON
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,955
vCash: 351
Quote:
Originally Posted by Talks to Goalposts View Post
This might be a minority opinion but maybe people should be asking themselves whether height and weight totals have anything to do with winning hockey games. For something so commonly accepted in hockey circles there doesn't seem to be much tangible evidence of that.

Incidently, Chicago, this year's super squad, is one of the smallest in the league. And the idea that the Habs lost to the Sens because they were smaller is a dubious proposition. MTL was much better at getting into the dirty areas of the ice closer to the net on the whole, where they were getting beat was on goaltending performance.
I agree in part, as others said its how people play, its not a given that being big will make you be physical. However, Chicago has the right supporting pieces that bring grit and physicality (epescially on their Dcore) to allow them to have such a small team.

The fact of the matter with Montreal is that we do need to get bigger, because even if you're 5ft9 and feisty as hell, you can still get pushed around easily. Larger bodies mean screens, traffic and reach in puck battles, and that's true of both skill and grinding forwards, and that's without considering how physical they are. MB said balance is key, and to achieve balance we not only need to add size but we need to subtract the smurfs (boullion should be the #7D, Gionta needs to retire, DD needs to be moved to wing or traded). For every roster spot one of the small guys take up, were losing a spot for a big body. It's that simple. I have no problem having 2 small guys in the lineup, but we have 4 and that's ridiculous.

I think the Dcore's need for size trumps the forward group's IMO.

StellerEller is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-15-2013, 11:23 PM
  #9
Habs
Registered User
 
Habs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,596
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Talks to Goalposts View Post
This might be a minority opinion but maybe people should be asking themselves whether height and weight totals have anything to do with winning hockey games. For something so commonly accepted in hockey circles there doesn't seem to be much tangible evidence of that.

Incidently, Chicago, this year's super squad, is one of the smallest in the league. And the idea that the Habs lost to the Sens because they were smaller is a dubious proposition. MTL was much better at getting into the dirty areas of the ice closer to the net on the whole, where they were getting beat was on goaltending performance.
The difference being, their best players are their biggest and they aren't asking 5'7" players to be the 'goto' guys. Kane is the only exception at 5'10.

Habs is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-15-2013, 11:24 PM
  #10
Alexdaman
Registered User
 
Alexdaman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Pominville, Qc
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,519
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by HABsurde View Post
I don't know much about our pool of prospect but with the players on the team who are 24 or younger (which a good portion might be our core, here is the list

(Of course they will not all make it, but just listing a big chunk of players)

Lars Eller - 24 - 6'2
PK Subban - 24 - 6'0
B. Gallagher - 21 - 5'8
A. Galchenyuk - 19 - 6'2
J. Tinordi - 21 - 6'6
G. Dumont - 22 - 5'9
N. Beaulieu - 20 - 6'2
G. Pateryn - 22 - 6'2
M. Ellis - 21 - 6'2
M. Bournival - 20 - 6'0
P. Holland - 21 - 6'0
D. Dietz - 19 - 6'1
D. Thrower - 19 - 6'0
D. Kristo - 22 - 5'11
S. Collberg - 19 - 5'11
C. Hudon - 18 - 5'10
T. Bozon - 19 - 6'1
M Bennett - 22 - 6'0
M. Nygren - 22 - 6'1
J. Didier - 20 - 6'2
M. MacMillan - 21 - 6'0
J. Nattinen - 22 -6'2
B. Vail - 19 - 6'1
D. Pribyl - 20 - 6'4
C. Sullivan - 20 - 6'2
L. Leblanc - 22 - 6'0

yes we need to get bigger but, as i figure the Habs to be a work in progress, reaching a certain peak in 2-3 years, the size issue, may be resolve even from within...

Am i completly wrong ???
We will get bigger with time, but what we need is one or two big veteran who can have a physical presence right now. Plekanec, Gionta, Ryder... Don't really have any physical impact on the ice and they were the ones supposed to be the leaders in the locker room.

With Ryder already about to leave and Gionta who could be out for the beginning of the season and with his contract ending in one year, I think MB can start to be on the lookout for some potential additions

Alexdaman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-15-2013, 11:37 PM
  #12
beaverBFP
Registered User
 
beaverBFP's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Winnipeg
Posts: 696
vCash: 500
Why isn't patches on the list?

beaverBFP is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
05-15-2013, 11:41 PM
  #13
Maxpac
Registered User
 
Maxpac's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: hockey city
Posts: 14,810
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Talks to Goalposts View Post

Incidently, Chicago, this year's super squad, is one of the smallest in the league.
Oh really? We keep talking about adding Stalberg and Bickell over and over, and that's not talking about Saad, Hossa, Mayers, Carcillo, Boilig, Shaw and Hjlamarsson who are either big players or players that play big. Chicago has the perfect mix, so does Pittsburgh now.

Maxpac is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
05-15-2013, 11:45 PM
  #14
Talks to Goalposts
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Edmonton
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,655
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by StellerEller View Post
I agree in part, as others said its how people play, its not a given that being big will make you be physical. However, Chicago has the right supporting pieces that bring grit and physicality (epescially on their Dcore) to allow them to have such a small team.

The fact of the matter with Montreal is that we do need to get bigger, because even if you're 5ft9 and feisty as hell, you can still get pushed around easily. Larger bodies mean screens, traffic and reach in puck battles, and that's true of both skill and grinding forwards, and that's without considering how physical they are. MB said balance is key, and to achieve balance we not only need to add size but we need to subtract the smurfs (boullion should be the #7D, Gionta needs to retire, DD needs to be moved to wing or traded). For every roster spot one of the small guys take up, were losing a spot for a big body. It's that simple. I have no problem having 2 small guys in the lineup, but we have 4 and that's ridiculous.

I think the Dcore's need for size trumps the forward group's IMO.
If you think Gionta needs to retire I think you're out to lunch. Regardless of height he's a top six winger with plus defensive skill. Something that doesn't grow on trees even if he's slowing down.

There isn't any purpose to dumping the "smurfs" unless you can find equal to better players for the lineup. Otherwise all you are doing is making your team worse chasing an ideological point.

None of the "smurfs" were actual go to players, Gionta, Gallagher and Desharnais were middle six players, Boullion 3rd pairing. These are supporting cast roles. A big reason the Habs were one of the East's best teams was having 3 lines of quality forwards, which wouldn't exist without embracing a bunch of smaller talents.

Now I think they could stand to dump Boullion, but its not for being small, its for not being good at NHL level hockey. He could be 6'2" like Drewiskie and he still wouldn't be good. Likewise the issue with Gionta is that he's on the decline and the issue with DD is that he doesn't have a good defensive/neutral zone game. Size might be a factor in these matters but its secondary to whether they are actually effective or not.

This perpetual size angst just distracts from more fundamental questions, like whether a player is good for their role and if they can realistically be improved on.

Talks to Goalposts is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-15-2013, 11:49 PM
  #15
Talks to Goalposts
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Edmonton
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,655
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Maxpac View Post
Oh really? We keep talking about adding Stalberg and Bickell over and over, and that's not talking about Saad, Hossa, Mayers, Carcillo, Boilig, Shaw and Hjlamarsson who are either big players or players that play big. Chicago has the perfect mix, so does Pittsburgh now.
Yet their average height is basically the same as the Habs. Maybe the Habs should get more credit for having Pacioretty, Eller, Bourque etc. in their mix.

Talks to Goalposts is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-15-2013, 11:53 PM
  #16
Kimota
Nation of Poutine
 
Kimota's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: La Vieille Capitale
Country: France
Posts: 22,466
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rosso Scuderia View Post
Those are just numbers, we need big players that play big.
Have you watched the playoff games in the west? Big bodies crashing into one another. It's skills, size, grit.

Kimota is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-15-2013, 11:56 PM
  #17
Lafleurs Guy
Registered User
 
Lafleurs Guy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 25,492
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bobby G View Post
This entire forum has become a discussion about size or Carey Price.

There is more to hockey
Its funny because its true.

Lafleurs Guy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-15-2013, 11:58 PM
  #18
gusfring
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 6,502
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lafleurs Guy View Post
Its funny because its true.
The two main reasons we aren't still playing.

Why would we be talking about them?

gusfring is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
05-16-2013, 12:14 AM
  #19
StellerEller
Saku :D
 
StellerEller's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Hamilton, ON
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,955
vCash: 351
Quote:
Originally Posted by Talks to Goalposts View Post
If you think Gionta needs to retire I think you're out to lunch. Regardless of height he's a top six winger with plus defensive skill. Something that doesn't grow on trees even if he's slowing down.

I'm not out to lunch here. Gionta has three things going against him moving forward:

1)Lost a step - making his counter attack game average at best
2)A lack of creativity/puck handling - something usually offset by his counter attack/speed. Unfortunately, the guy kills plays in the Ozone all the time.
3)Declining durability - He's a warrior, but it's clear the lack of speed is making him take more of a beating than usual

He can play a top6 role, but he's taking a spot from a younger and better player any way you look at it. Plekanec, Bourque, Pacioretty, DD, Eller, Galchenyuk, and Gallagher all should be above him in the lineup. Gionta is a spare part (though I agree his defence is still very good)


There isn't any purpose to dumping the "smurfs" unless you can find equal to better players for the lineup. Otherwise all you are doing is making your team worse chasing an ideological point.

Having 4 guys in your lineup who are that small can not lead to winning unless they have St. Louis level skill. Notice how Gallagher was left unmentioned in my post. He and DD are fine but adding Gionta in there weakens our top6 (for the reasons above) and Cube is a 7D at best. The fact that we can only dress 6 Dmen makes Cube a huge problem. Emelin and Tinordi are a good start, but we need one more mean, physical Dman, even if he's bottom pairing. I don't think you can deny that would improve the team drastically.

I also don't understand how you can assume we can't find better players. Cube can be upgraded easily, Gio can be upgraded by simply playing the youth in the top6 and picking up a two-way forward for the bottom 6 (which could come from within the orginization easily; addition by subtraction). Gallagher as I said isn't an issue (obviously) and DD, while he needs to be spoonfed, has value and we can get a good return for him, though I want to make it clear that I'd rather try him at wing first. Ideally, Gallagher and DD should be the only smurf size guys in the lineup.



None of the "smurfs" were actual go to players, Gionta, Gallagher and Desharnais were middle six players, Boullion 3rd pairing. These are supporting cast roles. A big reason the Habs were one of the East's best teams was having 3 lines of quality forwards, which wouldn't exist without embracing a bunch of smaller talents.

Maybe not in actual performance, but Gionta and DD we're played like go to players, and failed. DD had a awful year, Gionta is declining. As for Gallagher, he was vital to our success and while you're right about the 3 lines of offensive attack, we can still have that by just removing Gionta, as I've stated.

Now I think they could stand to dump Boullion, but its not for being small, its for not being good at NHL level hockey. He could be 6'2" like Drewiskie and he still wouldn't be good. Likewise the issue with Gionta is that he's on the decline and the issue with DD is that he doesn't have a good defensive/neutral zone game. Size might be a factor in these matters but its secondary to whether they are actually effective or not.

We're agreed on Cube, but a guy like Drewiske is a isolated incident. LIke I said, size does not guarantee ability, but I'm positive we can find a better, more physical #6 than Boullion. Size matters on a larger scale. We can look at each "smruf" individually and make a case for why they help the team but its the fact that we have so many of these guys which causes the problem. Having 3 forwards like that is redundant and is the very reason we are imbalanced.


This perpetual size angst just distracts from more fundamental questions, like whether a player is good for their role and if they can realistically be improved on.
I'm not suggesting we change our game plan and try to become the Big bad habs, but clearly we lack balance and size and we are not leaving room for supporting players who will crash and bang. Size and Skill are not mutually exclusive and I think we can agree that any player coming into the lineup needs to be able to play to fit the system and shouldn't be there because of the tape measure. That being said, it's simply a fact that there are options out there for MB to act on in order to make this team tougher to play against, which he must exercise to achieve the balance he's talking about. Whether the answer is from the draft, trades, or free agency is up for debate.

StellerEller is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-16-2013, 12:22 AM
  #20
Galchenyuk4habs
Registered User
 
Galchenyuk4habs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Montreal
Posts: 489
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by gusfring View Post
The two main reasons we aren't still playing.

Why would we be talking about them?
seriously tho

The habs have no forwards above 6'2 outside of Blunden. Chicago has like what 3-4?

Galchenyuk4habs is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-16-2013, 12:45 AM
  #21
Teufelsdreck
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 15,006
vCash: 500
Since there aren't many big specimens in the prospect pool we shouldn't expect the new look Habs to be much bigger. However, they'll be better as some of some of the fringe players on the roster are weeded out.


Last edited by Teufelsdreck: 05-16-2013 at 12:58 AM.
Teufelsdreck is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
05-16-2013, 12:51 AM
  #22
Galchenyuk4habs
Registered User
 
Galchenyuk4habs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Montreal
Posts: 489
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Teufelsdreck View Post
Since there aren't many big prospects in the prospect pool we shouldn't expect the new look Habs to be much bigger. However, they'll be better as some of some of the fringe players on the roster are weeded out.
This prospect pool looks like an average sized team at best, D-men are quite big I give you that. Not many European dman in the prospect pools, we have a lot of grit there. Offence lacks size, it's not as bad as today's team, but needs improvement in this draft. I'm sure Timmins will get the job done as usual.

Galchenyuk4habs is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-16-2013, 12:58 AM
  #23
StellerEller
Saku :D
 
StellerEller's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Hamilton, ON
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,955
vCash: 351
Quote:
Originally Posted by Galchenyuk4habs View Post
This prospect pool looks like an average sized team at best, D-men are quite big I give you that. Not many European dman in the prospect pools, we have a lot of grit there. Offence lacks size, it's not as bad as today's team, but needs improvement in this draft. I'm sure Timmins will get the job done as usual.
This should always be remembered when discussing the future. Until we can review the choices made at the draft, alot of the arguments are moot. This draft can drastically change the way we see our team (or not) but we can't know til the draft is over. At this point we can only identify problems, but it's hard to say how we'll solve them.

StellerEller is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-16-2013, 01:01 AM
  #24
Watsatheo
Error 503 Service
 
Watsatheo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 30,430
vCash: 500
I don't remember when the Habs weren't considered 'small/fast/skill' type team.

Watsatheo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-16-2013, 01:18 AM
  #25
StellerEller
Saku :D
 
StellerEller's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Hamilton, ON
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,955
vCash: 351
Quote:
Originally Posted by Watsatheo View Post
I don't remember when the Habs weren't considered 'small/fast/skill' type team.
You're right, we shouldn't abandon that philosophy. However, I believe that past management, while aiming for the right kind of team, had failed to bring in the supporting grit to support the skill. Any cup winning Habs team has had that element, though it was secondary to the skill.

StellerEller 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 04:45 PM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2015 All Rights Reserved.