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

The one thing that bothers me is the Habs seem so easy to play against

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
12-17-2009, 07:31 AM
  #26
Shabutie
Registered User
 
Shabutie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Ottawa
Country: Portugal
Posts: 15,640
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Carey Price View Post
What does the size of the top 6 have to do with anything?

Teams that are hard to play against play a different style than our "trap and counter" style, it has nothing to do with having mosters in the top 6. Marleau Thornton and Healtley average 220-225lbs and they are no harder to play against than our guys.

what makes a team hard to play against is they play an agressive style game, the Habs play a passive game like New Jersey does. That's why it was a snorefest last night.
I kind of get what you're saying with this but you're wrong, those 3 do create alot of space for each other and their big bodies are much harder to get out of the slot/crease than Gomez/Pleks/Gio... Not to mention Thornton is the best passer in the league and Heatley is one of the best goalscorers.

Shabutie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-17-2009, 07:37 AM
  #27
BadHabit
Registered User
 
BadHabit's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Canada
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,583
vCash: 500
Here's my humble take on the debate. It really comes down to one thing - what kind of game are you going to play? The team has to be built for the system the coach wants to use - plain and simple. I've been seeing a mis-match between the front office and behind the bench for awhile now so I think they need to get on the same page.

Small, fast and skilled CAN work if you are talented enough and play an aggressive system. Teams that are big and slow will get scared of you because you can make them pay for any defensive lapses or penalties they take trying to slow you down.

Big, powerful teams can also work if you play the proper game to support it. And just because San Jose hasn't won any cups doesn't mean they aren't always in contention when the playoffs roll around. These kind of teams are tough to play against because they are so physical along the boards and they win a lot of battles there. Dump and chase will not work against these teams.

To me the issue is simple - this team is built for speed and skill but they aren't playing the proper system. They certainly work hard enough to pull it off but they need to play less dump and chase and more possession. We need to see more odd-man rushes and more setting up in the offensive zone/cycling the puck. If we can use speed to our advantage, we'll start seeing more penalties called in our favor and that in turn will give us more opportunities to score and get shots on the net. Until we do that though, it's like trying to put a square peg into a round hole.

Quote:
Originally Posted by onice View Post
Add Metro to your list of names and you probably have one of the smallest teams in the league. Don't look at averages because that can be deceiving. Gill & O'Byrne can screw the averages. Look at the 5 players we have under six feet. And Cammy at 5'9"....yeah right.

I've been saying this since July. We need to trade Gomez (he's useless besides being small) & Gionta (he's not a 5 mil player besides being small). If Pouliot ever plays and shows us anything I would unload Metro also. I like him but I prefer Cammy & Plekanec and those two are the limit to small players.

P.S. how big is Pyatt? He plays hard but he doesn't look that nig out there. Never mind I looked it up...5'11". That's 6 players under 6 feet.
Now look at these names, and even though some of them aren't doing well remember in 2007-2008 where we were tops in the league in points.

Ryder: 6'1" 196
Tanguay: 6'0" 190
Higgins: 6'0" 205
Kovalev: 6'1" 225
Lang: 6'3" 220
Latendresse: 6'2" 229
Kostopoulos: 6'0" 204
Dandenault: 6'1" 200

Not saying that these players would be better, but the reality is that we have gotten SIGNIFICANTLY smaller. Perhaps though, some of these players would've been better suited to JM's system.


Last edited by Habs10Habs: 12-17-2009 at 09:29 AM. Reason: Merge
BadHabit is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-17-2009, 07:56 AM
  #28
Shabutie
Registered User
 
Shabutie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Ottawa
Country: Portugal
Posts: 15,640
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BadHabit View Post
Now look at these names, and even though some of them aren't doing well remember in 2007-2008 where we were tops in the league in points.

Ryder: 6'1" 196

Tanguay: 6'0" 190
Higgins: 6'0" 205
Kovalev: 6'1" 225
Lang: 6'3" 220
Latendresse: 6'2" 229
Kostopoulos: 6'0" 204
Dandenault: 6'1" 200

Not saying that these players would be better, but the reality is that we have gotten SIGNIFICANTLY smaller. Perhaps though, some of these players would've been better suited to JM's system.
The bolded players weren't even on our team in 07-08 during that amazing season.

Not to mention Kostopolous was replaced by Moen, who's bigger and Dandenault by Gill, who's bigger.

Shabutie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-17-2009, 08:01 AM
  #29
Souvenirs
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Trois-Rivieres
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,949
vCash: 500
Meh, I think our size would be less of a problem if we used our speed and forechecked harder...we have to force opposing players to take penalties.
The Habs just have to put more pressure 5 on 5. They do it well enough on the PK, and I always wonder why they don't play as agressively even strength.

Souvenirs is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-17-2009, 08:06 AM
  #30
BadHabit
Registered User
 
BadHabit's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Canada
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,583
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shabutie View Post
The bolded players weren't even on our team in 07-08 during that amazing season.

Not to mention Kostopolous was replaced by Moen, who's bigger and Dandenault by Gill, who's bigger.
Ryder most certainly was here during that season, and Dandenault played forward as well so you can't really say Gill replaced him. More like Gill replaced Bouillon.

As for the other players who weren't here during 2007-2008 - what does that have anything to do with the fact that we're getting smaller as a club?? Nothing. We lost those players and got smurfs back who for the most part aren't effective because of the system we play. That's the point. If you want to argue the actual point then do so, but don't argue just for the sake of it.

BadHabit is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-17-2009, 08:08 AM
  #31
otto bond
Registered User
 
otto bond's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,851
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JayBee View Post
Maybe what Bauchemin said was not that far off base. The habs don't hate, they don't out-skate, they don't out-muscle you. They take weak shots, they take a lot of penalties, rarely is anyone in front of the net.

Teams used to hate to play the habs...now I think they look forward to playing them.

Playing the habs now is a walk in the park.

I hope this changes. I don't know where to start though. New players, new coach, same result.
100% agree. Add that the other team get to play in their zone 90% of the time. weak forchecking.

Quote:
Originally Posted by BadHabit View Post
Here's my humble take on the debate. It really comes down to one thing - what kind of game are you going to play? The team has to be built for the system the coach wants to use - plain and simple. I've been seeing a mis-match between the front office and behind the bench for awhile now so I think they need to get on the same page.

Small, fast and skilled CAN work if you are talented enough and play an aggressive system. Teams that are big and slow will get scared of you because you can make them pay for any defensive lapses or penalties they take trying to slow you down.

Big, powerful teams can also work if you play the proper game to support it. And just because San Jose hasn't won any cups doesn't mean they aren't always in contention when the playoffs roll around. These kind of teams are tough to play against because they are so physical along the boards and they win a lot of battles there. Dump and chase will not work against these teams.

To me the issue is simple - this team is built for speed and skill but they aren't playing the proper system. They certainly work hard enough to pull it off but they need to play less dump and chase and more possession. We need to see more odd-man rushes and more setting up in the offensive zone/cycling the puck. If we can use speed to our advantage, we'll start seeing more penalties called in our favor and that in turn will give us more opportunities to score and get shots on the net. Until we do that though, it's like trying to put a square peg into a round hole.
I have seen most match at time also but with all these penalties, it's gonna happen. Then their is that brutal calender.....wow why not sart the season earlier....other leagues and other sports? Cut the pre-season from 8 games to 4 or even 3. I guess with all these dual sports and concerts in the buildings, it's makes things harder.


Last edited by Habs10Habs: 12-17-2009 at 09:35 AM. Reason: Merge
otto bond is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-17-2009, 08:14 AM
  #32
saints96
Registered User
 
saints96's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: montreal
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,928
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by onice View Post
Add Metro to your list of names and you probably have one of the smallest teams in the league. Don't look at averages because that can be deceiving. Gill & O'Byrne can screw the averages. Look at the 5 players we have under six feet. And Cammy at 5'9"....yeah right.

I've been saying this since July. We need to trade Gomez (he's useless besides being small) & Gionta (he's not a 5 mil player besides being small). If Pouliot ever plays and shows us anything I would unload Metro also. I like him but I prefer Cammy & Plekanec and those two are the limit to small players.

P.S. how big is Pyatt? He plays hard but he doesn't look that nig out there. Never mind I looked it up...5'11". That's 6 players under 6 feet.
are you serious? you would trade gionta? ive seen it all

saints96 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-17-2009, 08:19 AM
  #33
Shabutie
Registered User
 
Shabutie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Ottawa
Country: Portugal
Posts: 15,640
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BadHabit View Post
Ryder most certainly was here during that season, and Dandenault played forward as well so you can't really say Gill replaced him. More like Gill replaced Bouillon.
Dandenault did not play much forward in 07-08. But you're right Ryder was "here". He was definitely not part of the reason that we did so well though. He was probably the reason our 2nd line (Koivu) wasn't nearly as good as the first.

Quote:
Originally Posted by BadHabit
As for the other players who weren't here during 2007-2008 - what does that have anything to do with the fact that we're getting smaller as a club?? Nothing. We lost those players and got smurfs back who for the most part aren't effective because of the system we play. That's the point. If you want to argue the actual point then do so, but don't argue just for the sake of it.
You're talking about our success as a team in 07-08, where on average we were smaller than this year's team. Now you bring up Lang and Tanguay who weren't even on the team and say that we got smaller since then. Now let me ask you how Lang and Tanguay's size made a difference last year? That's right...it didn't.

Shabutie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-17-2009, 08:31 AM
  #34
otto bond
Registered User
 
otto bond's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,851
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shabutie View Post
Dandenault did not play much forward in 07-08. But you're right Ryder was "here". He was definitely not part of the reason that we did so well though. He was probably the reason our 2nd line (Koivu) wasn't nearly as good as the first.

You're talking about our success as a team in 07-08, where on average we were smaller than this year's team. Now you bring up Lang and Tanguay who weren't even on the team and say that we got smaller since then. Now let me ask you how Lang and Tanguay's size made a difference last year? That's right...it didn't.
I 75% agree.In 07-08, it was the Pleky,kovy and Kostitsyn line that produce with a pp of Markov and Streit. Huet was in net for the most part and back in that day, he stoll like 7 games via shutout. We were a weak team physically then and we are today. This team gets worned down and their is not much of anything else to wear down the opponent.

otto bond is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-17-2009, 08:53 AM
  #35
David
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 2,007
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Analyzer View Post
Maybe the year we finished first they hated playing us, but other than that... they never disliked playing us.

Take a look at our top 6.

Gomez -6'5
Cammalleri 6'4
Plekanec 6'5
A. Kostitsyn - 6'4
S. Kostitsyn 6'3
Laps 6'4 .

Gio comes back and our top 6 is even smaller.
The hockey ignorance of some of the kids on here, and in some cases common sense, or lack there of, is just astounding.

You're telling me that all things being equal, you don't think that these guys won't be any better and harder to play againt if bigger?

Size isn't everything but of course it matters.

David is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-17-2009, 08:58 AM
  #36
David
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 2,007
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kriss E View Post
Are you going to argue that the reason our PP was so low was because our PP players were so afraid of the big bad bruins they refused to get into their zone and preferred to chill by the blueline??..

.
In this case, YES.

David is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-17-2009, 09:06 AM
  #37
MathMan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 16,967
vCash: 500
This has nothing to do with size. I find it exceedingly amusing that lack of size is a problem at forward but somehow having too much is a problem on defense.

The Habs are too easy to play against because they implement a passive collapse defense that basically concedes the opponent to do whatever it was and attempts to defend by blocking shots. It makes for low-percentage shots... but so many low-percentage shots that you don't get any defensive benefit in the end, and you don't get to attack either. They do not do anything aggressively, they play cautiously in everything they do. This leads to losing games a lot, but not getting embarrassed too much.

In short, it's a system designed to lose games 2-1. It's executed very well but it's still a losing strategy.

Does wonders for the goaltenders' stats though.


Last edited by MathMan: 12-17-2009 at 09:17 AM.
MathMan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-17-2009, 09:10 AM
  #38
Aarex
Registered User
 
Aarex's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Regina, Saskatchewan
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,273
vCash: 500
size is useless if the players play small, we need to find guys like lucic who doesn't give a **** about anyone and does anything it takes to win. Theres alot of talk about how NHL players need to respect other players more...well for once i'd like to have one of those disrespectful guys on my team, someone other teams fear and think twice about entering the neutral zone with their head down, someone who can make the other guys fear driving the net, someone who will drive the net and lay a smack down on defensemen and goalies.

Aarex is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-17-2009, 09:13 AM
  #39
MathMan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 16,967
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hab-a-maniac View Post
But don't forget Umberger. 8 goals in 5 games!? The Habs lacked a scoring presence like him in that series as our snipers weren't nearly as strong nor did they crash the net like he did.
lol. Umberger had a crazy lucky shooting run and suddenly he's something the Habs should've had.

The Flyers were not more skilled than the Habs, nor were they more physical, and they did not win because they were bigger. The Flyers won because the Habs could not finish. They'd hit posts, they'd hit the goalie, they'd hit their own players, they'd stand in front of the net and would get shots from there (more than the Flyers) but wouldn't be able to score. Oh and they hit seven posts to the Flyers' one.

Meanwhile, at times it looked everything the Flyers shot at the net was deflected in. There was a couple of sequences in Game 5 that really illustrated the point. The Habs had a rush and Latendresse, of all people, was leading. He cuts right, makes Hatcher lie down, embarasses him by skating around him, makes Biron lie down, shoots high -- and hits the crossbar. Very next shift, faceoff in the Habs zone, there's a bit of a scramble, the Habs almost clear but fail, the point man throws the puck at the net, it deflects off Kostopoulos right to a Flyer near the net who deflects it in. Game winning goal.

It was like that all game long in games 2-3-4. Just looking at the shot chart, you can really tell the Habs should've routed Philly. The notion that Philly won due to size or skill is an hilarious retcon of the past by people who don't want to deal with reality.

MathMan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-17-2009, 09:14 AM
  #40
MathMan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 16,967
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by David View Post
You're telling me that all things being equal, you don't think that these guys won't be any better and harder to play againt if bigger?
All things being equal, if they were 6'4" to 6'5", we'd be complaining about how they can't attack because of their lack of foot speed, and the real problem would still be a passive system that lets the opponent do what they want in the O-zone.

MathMan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-17-2009, 09:16 AM
  #41
David
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 2,007
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MathMan View Post
This has nothing to do with size. I find it exceedingly amusing that lack size is a problem at forward but somehow having too much is a problem on defense.

The Habs are too easy to play against because they implement a passive collapse defense that basically concedes the opponent to do whatever it was and attempts to defend by blocking shots. It makes for low-percentage shots... but so many low-percentage shots that you don't get any defensive benefit in the end, and you don't get to attack either. They do not do anything aggressively, they play cautiously in everything they do. This leads to losing games a lot, but not getting embarrassed too much.

In short, it's a system designed to lose games 2-1. It's executed very well but it's still a losing strategy.

Does wonders for the goaltenders' stats though.
You're that 'know-it-all' kid who try to reduce hockey to numbers and argue about things even if they don't make sense, ain't ya?

Just think about the validity of that statement you just made.

David is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-17-2009, 09:20 AM
  #42
MathMan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 16,967
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by David View Post
Just think about the validity of that statement you just made.
That it's not about size?

It's not. The Habs actually have a big defense and spend most of their game in the defensive zone. One would think that if size was an issue, the Habs' large defensemen could be having a significant positive impact. (But then we complain that they lack mobility. ).

People obsess about the size of the forwards, but the Habs rarely get to the point where it might actually matter. They get stuck in their own zone too much and it doesn't really matter how big the guy covering the D-man is then.

Funny that you accuse me of being a 'know-it-all' in that post, BTW.

MathMan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-17-2009, 09:23 AM
  #43
MathMan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 16,967
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by David View Post
Not aware of this insignificant little thing called 'physics', are you?

If a player's overall strength and conditioning is equal but he has more mass, he'll skate slower and -- more importantly -- will have less agility. A 6'5" player is just not going to skate like Gionta.

MathMan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-17-2009, 09:27 AM
  #44
11Goat11
Inside her
 
11Goat11's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,761
vCash: 500
When Carolina won the cup they didn't seem to have a physically imposing team, same with Detroit in 08. They have some guys with size but they are not sandpaper guys, they all had skill. Pittsburgh was sort of the same way, their skill guys are big, but it is not just becasue they are big they won, they were really skilled.

11Goat11 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
12-17-2009, 09:27 AM
  #45
onice
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Montreal
Posts: 5,415
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MathMan View Post
All things being equal, if they were 6'4" to 6'5", we'd be complaining about how they can't attack because of their lack of foot speed, and the real problem would still be a passive system that lets the opponent do what they want in the O-zone.
No one is saying we want all players of 6'4". But we also don't want 6 players on the forward lines that are under 6 feet.

And if you do put 6 forwards under 6 feet, you better compensate with speed & skill. You see this team beating anybody with speed & skill?

onice is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-17-2009, 09:30 AM
  #46
Hackett
HF Needs Feeny
 
Hackett's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 15,399
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JayBee View Post
Maybe what Bauchemin said was not that far off base. The habs don't hate, they don't out-skate, they don't out-muscle you. They take weak shots, they take a lot of penalties, rarely is anyone in front of the net.

Teams used to hate to play the habs...now I think they look forward to playing them.

Playing the habs now is a walk in the park.

I hope this changes. I don't know where to start though. New players, new coach, same result.
I think this was one of the question marks on the team before the season even started. I mean, you look at this roster and there's not a whole lot of edge to it. I do think think that the size factor also has something to do with this. The smaller guys are not as likely to win the puck battles around the boards. Also, when you are a smaller team, you would hope that you're lightning fast. The habs have some speed but I think a team like Buffalo takes it to another level.

There's no easy answers to these problems.

Hackett is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-17-2009, 09:33 AM
  #47
BadHabit
Registered User
 
BadHabit's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Canada
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,583
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shabutie View Post
Dandenault did not play much forward in 07-08. But you're right Ryder was "here". He was definitely not part of the reason that we did so well though. He was probably the reason our 2nd line (Koivu) wasn't nearly as good as the first.

You're talking about our success as a team in 07-08, where on average we were smaller than this year's team. Now you bring up Lang and Tanguay who weren't even on the team and say that we got smaller since then. Now let me ask you how Lang and Tanguay's size made a difference last year? That's right...it didn't.
The only reason I brought up the success of the team in 07-08 was because as soon as I put that list of players up, people would say "oh yeah look how good they are doing this season". It was not to compare and contrast this years team to that year - in hindsight I probably should have left that part out because it wasn't my point... my bad.

My point is that we have gotten considerably smaller in the last 2 years, yet we are playing the type of system that assumes we have all of these bigger bodies still around.

BadHabit is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-17-2009, 09:41 AM
  #48
David
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 2,007
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MathMan View Post
Not aware of this insignificant little thing called 'physics', are you?

If a player's overall strength and conditioning is equal but he has more mass, he'll skate slower and -- more importantly -- will have less agility. A 6'5" player is just not going to skate like Gionta.
Clearly, you grasp the concept of 'All things being equal'...

So, I'll not waste any more of our time with you.


Last edited by David: 12-17-2009 at 11:35 AM.
David is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-17-2009, 09:48 AM
  #49
Kriss E
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 23,271
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by David View Post
In this case, YES.
Great counter argument I must admit. But coming from you, I'm not surprised in the least.

Kriss E is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-17-2009, 09:48 AM
  #50
Miller Time
Registered User
 
Miller Time's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 8,128
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Carey Price View Post
Not sure what team you are watching by lumping A.Kost with Gomez and Cammaleri, on most nights he gets 4-5 big hits and more often than not takes the body. I don't know of many top 6 forwards in the NHL that have the energy to hit everything that moves and still play 20+minutes in an offensive role. Maybe a guy like Hartnell or Lucic most other top hitters are soely bottom 6 forwards.
A.Kost has been playing a little more aggressively of late (and go figure he's also producing better), but for the first ~20 games of the season he was not nearly as assertive/aggressive in the offensive zone.

so while he may be capable of playing that kind of game, when things are going well and his confidence is high, he still inconsistent in that department...

so make it 1 1/2 players in the top 9... still no where near enough...

Miller Time 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 03:24 PM.

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

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2014 All Rights Reserved.