• Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About BigTed3

  • Rank

Profile Information

  • Gender

Recent Profile Visitors

15,436 profile views
  1. ^^ They also both sunk as soon as they hit the ice.
  2. Agreed. Bergevin's obviously getting bad advice from somewhere. He's got a big team and it doesn't seem to be helping him.
  3. Why, is Geoff Molson planning on having a viewing party at the Bell Center so we can watch the Leafs-Sens game on the jumbotron? #ouch #butprobablytrue
  4. He actually does finish consistently. Byron's had one of the highest shooting percentages on the team since he arrived here. He just doesn't shoot as much as a lot of other guys. He argues that he only takes high-percentage shots (as opposed to a guy like Pacioretty, who just shoots from everywhere). Two different philosophies, I'm not sure which one is better... short story is that Byron is a pretty valuable 3rd-4th line guy, but when you try to play good bottom-6 players as top-line players it doesn't necessarily translate. You just make that player look inadequate for his role (see Rene Bourque and Travis Moen and AK46) and at the same time, you have true skill guys languishing on the 4th line with no ice time and weak linemates, so they don't bust their slumps either. Recipe for disaster. You can wake a guy up with a short stint on the 4th line or a one-period benching, but if the team is going to get out of its funk, the best players need to be the best players and given the ongoing chance to do that.
  5. In order of ease of moving contracts (accounting for salary, term, age, and skill of player): 1. Pacioretty 2. Galchenyuk 3. Gallagher 4. Price 5. Weber 6. Shaw 7. Alzner Even with the huge money and term afforded to Weber and Price, they're still game changers that other teams will take on if they feel it can put them over the top for a Cup. If Edmonton or Pittsburgh or Washington or Chicago or Anaheim or so on can add this player and make themselves a top-3 contender for the Cup for the next couple of years, they will bite the bullet on what it costs them at the end of the deal. I'd have been fine with adding Weber to our team to make a Cup run, just not doing it by subtracting our best position player in Subban. Pittsburgh will add Weber if given the chance, but they won't do it by giving us Malkin. Edmonton won't give up Draisaitl or McDavid to acquire Price. Chicago isn't trading Kane for Pacioretty. That was our mistake. MB went "all in" to make a Cup run, but he subtracted a bigger piece than he got back, so it just didn't make any sense. Instead, he shortened the Cup window for nothing.
  6. He's the new Eller/Subban/Briere/PAP/Sekac/Thomas/Diaz/Hudon... this team loves to hate on skill players. But hey, ladies and gentleman, top-6 players Paul Byron and Andrew Shaw!
  7. On the one hand, I think it's sad that Galchenyuk seems to be the guy who is repeatedly picked on and put on the 4th line. Pacioretty has been worse than Galchenyuk and is still in the top 6. Plekanec and Hudon and Gallagher have been just as bad on most nights. Shaw has been our worst forward many nights, last game being one of the exceptions. On the other hand, at the very least AG will be playing with skill players this time. He's not with Mitchell and Flynn and Ott and Martinsen and so on this time around. So I have hope that the line will actually benefit from a match-up advantage and produce. The question is whether they will be given minutes to do that. Don't expect AG to produce with 8-10 minutes a game. He needs 15-17 minimum to get a fair shot.
  8. On a larger scale, absolutely... Bergevin has completely replaced his defence corps in a matter of 2-3 years and for the worse. Weber and Petry are on the decline, albeit still good defencemen, but they need to be complemented by faster, puck-moving D men on the left too. We had a lot of defencemen in camp this year competing for jobs, but almost all of the others were fringe NHLers to begin with.
  9. A number of media members today saying they requested a press meeting from Marc Bergevin and that the club told them no. They also point out it's not unusual for the Gm to refuse meetings with the press and that he typically only meets with media 4 times a year anyways. Which begs the question, if the GM's job is pretty much to talk to other GM's and players and the league and if his job is not to talk to the media on a regular basis, then why exactly does the GM need to speak French?
  10. And no, I have no idea what lines are supposed to be in what order. The three best forwards (JD, MP, AG) are all on different lines. Two of the other guys who would/should be in the top 6 (CH, BG) are on a 4th different line. So I don't really know how ice time will be distributed among this group.
  11. Here are your lines from practice today: Byron Drouin Lehkonen Pacioretty Danault Shaw Hudon Plekanec Gallagher Scherbak McCarron Galchenyuk with Mitchell and DLR extra. Hemsky on IR, as expected.
  12. I think a lot of Bergevin's trades and signings have been bad, especially int he last 18 months, but the Drouin-Sergachev deal is not one of them. It's a deal we might lose badly, it's a deal we might win, but it was a fair trade IMO. We dealt a very good asset for an equally good asset, one who is a tad older but who was also more proven at the NHL level. In Drouin's case, this is not a Shea Weber or Scott Gomez, where you've dealt a stud in or entering his prime (like Subban or McDo) for a guy who is good but already past his prime. We are getting Drouin when he will likely still be a top performer for another 6-8 years. I see this as a trade where you give up something good to get something good, and not a trade that we won or lost just yet. It was a hockey trade where we swapped one asset for another, and I have no problem with that. The bigger problem is what Bergevin has or has not done with the defence. We had a huge hole at center, and it certainly seems like MB planned to fill that hole with Drouin. I like the way JD has played thus far. He is terrific at zone entries, his puck control on the PP is very good, and he's even made some nice defensive plays. But there will be a growing curve for a younger player who hasn't played center in the NHL before. The frustrating thing for me is that AG did just as well at center (better offensively than JD but not quite as good defensively and equally miserably in the FO circle) and wasn't given the chance to grow there. So I personally have no issue with JD at center, but I do take issue with not having given AG the same chance. Nevertheless, that brings us back to the problem of MB trading for JD as a center to fill that hole when he had an equally good option in AG in house. And having made that trade, he now has a huge hole at left D. Luckily for MB, Victor Mete surprised everyone by filling some of that void. Without Mete, the left side of the D would be Alzner, Morrow, and Davidson, and not one of those players has looked better than being a #6 guy thus far, not to mention cast-off Mark Streit. So, the Drouin-Sergachev trade in a vacuum is fine as a hockey deal. But it's a bit bizarre if you examine it in the bigger context of things for the Habs, because MB seemingly had no plan to fill the void on his D. He had already weakened the right side by trading Subban for Weber. And then he goes out and deals Sergachev and at the same time, sends Beaulieu packing and plays hardball with Markov. So he goes from 3 puck-moving D men on the left to none. Forget the loss of Emelin, I'm not crying over that. But look at those other 3 guys you lost and now look at the 3 guys you had to replace them (not counting Mete's emergence, which wasn't a guarantee when MB made those moves anyways). It's not the case where you deal Sergachev because you have other players lined up in the wings to fill that void. MB has nothing. He didn't have a back-up plan, he didn't really have anyone who played last year at the AHL level ready to step in. And then he goes out and dumps the two puck-moving D men he has left on the left side. If you know you've dealt Sergachev and you aren't sure you're going to be able to re-sign Markov, then why in Sam's name would you trade Beaulieu away and protect Benn? If you've lost Sergachev and Beaulieu and you have tons of cap space left over, why don't you pay Markov for the one-year deal everyone admits he was willing to take? In isolation, I have no particular issue with moving on from Markov or dealing Beaulieu or using Sergachev as a trade chip to get a young NHL star like Drouin. But put it all together and look at the lack of an alternate solution, and it really looks like Marc Bergevin had no plan and lacked all foresight for building his D. And for him then to come out and say we have a better defence than last year and more puck moving ability... yet more of Bergevin's lies to us. So no, the Sergachev trade isn't a losing bet. It's a gamble, but I take no issue with that. What I do take issue with is Bergevin's lack of a plan to offset multiple losses on the left side of the D.
  13. I don't have any pretense that a new GM will save this season. The crux of it is what you said: a desperate GM fighting to save his job will make bad moves to try to win now. He'll trade a dollar worth of futures for a 25 cent player now. Bergevin also lacks perspective on players like Shaw and Alzner, whom he has overpaid to play minimally-important roles. That has to stop too.
  14. With the call-ups: Galchenyuk-Drouin-Gallagher Pacioretty-Danault-Lehkonen Byron-Plekanec-Shaw Hudon-McCarron-Scherbak Nothing wrong with that forward group IMO. I'd love to see Carr get another shot at some point too, but I'll take the present call-ups over Hemsky, Mitchell, and DLR any day. The defence, however, remains the primary problem with the club, and Marc Bergevin continues to fail to address that urgent need.
  15. We might get more if we split it into two different trades. I think you could easily ask for Nurse and Puljujarvi for Pacioretty. And Weber is worth more than RNH in my opinion. Much harder to find a #1 defenceman than a 2nd-3rd string center.