Jump to content
The Official Site of the Montréal Canadiens
Canadiens de Montreal


Tryout / Joueur à l'essai
  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Disillusioned1

  1. After giving up 42 shots last night, the habs have given up 26, 33, 41, 34, 43, 36, 34, 39, 50 and 42 in the last 10, playing against at least couple of really bad teams.  No points for guessing which games they won.  Not only are they not scoring, they can't seem to limit the other teams' chances either.

  2. 42 minutes ago, MALMACIAN_CRUNCH said:

    I don’t know… Even under normal circumstances it’s not statistically uncommon for teams that play in the finals to struggle the following year. I see your point theoretically, but in reality it just doesn’t usually pan out that way. And when you combine that with my other two points, well…

    The issue is, Tampa, Vegas and Colorado are legitimately good teams.  They have something to look forward to.  The habs neither is a good team nor have good prospects to get excited about.  Sure, missing Webber and Price hurt, but let's be honest here, they overachieved last year and even with those guys they're a really bad team.

  3. 23 hours ago, habsisme said:

    yeah i don't like this blow back. Not trying to dismiss what he did but I worry about our society when people who make mistakes and pay their debt to society can't move on with their lives

    I'm all for giving people second chances and I'm perfectly okay with any other GM's drafting him.  But I am not absolutely NOT okay with Bergevin drafting him.  Just think about all the people he drove out of town for far less infractions, how they don't have character.  How do you now get on a podium now to announce that pick after what he did?  Methinks Bergevin is full of the brown stuff.

  4. 27 minutes ago, maas_art said:

    The thing about Bergevin is that I think that some of his luck is actually real - but - he has a very strange way of valuing assets.

    lets say you had a crystal ball & you knew that some 4th round pick in columbus was going to be the next NHL scoring champ. No one else knows this or values him even close to that high.    Would you trade McDavid for him? Of course not. Even though in 3 years time he may be outscoring McDavid every year.  Because today, his value is not as high. 

    In the case of Subban, Galchenyuk, Domi and many others in the past, we have given up the more valuable player (at that moment) for less than fair market value. Yes, in all those cases (Verdict out on Domi) we ended up with the better player but why overpay?   Even though you are 100% positive Josh Anderson is going to become the next star power forward, why give up a 72 point player AND a 3rd rounder for him?   

    Funnily enough (since this is the drouin thread) I think one place MB did not do this is with Drouin. In June 2017 Drouin was actually a more valuable asset than Sergachev who was a very highly touted prospect but still had proven nothing at the NHL level.  

    Agreed generally on Drouin probably having more value Sergachev at the point, though I think it's necessary to point out one caveat.  We just lost our Norris winning top RD in Subban and Andrei Markov.  Then we trade off the projected "next Andrei Markov?"  Yes I know projections and all that, but I think strong skating puck moving D has more value than skilled wingers.  On top of that Drouin was on the outs in Tampa.

    Also, we supposedly traded away plenty of skilled players for character issues.  Subban, Galchenyuk, Semin, Kassian, Tinordi, now apparently Domi (even though I think health issues is a legitimate concern in the bubble), but we traded for a malcontent hold-out like Drouin?  Not only that, we didn't offer him a bridge contract when we tried to stiff Subban with a bridge then of course having to overpay later, then of course whining non-stop about "overpaying" even though we did it to ourselves.  What's the logic there?

    Anyways, end rant, see you guys next year.

  5. 23 minutes ago, electron58 said:

    I think Bergy has to sign the players he has now, to see what is left over. Probably has an idea, meaning Sergachev will be too costly. Not sure if this response is on the same page as your comment.

    Not quite haha.  A year ago I made the conscious decision to not watch the habs until Bergevin gets fired.  That changed in the playoffs because I always watch the playoffs regardless of team.  So this is my annual blowing off steam rant.

    We had Sergachev, we're not getting him back, but boy does he look like what we need right about now.  I said at the onset we lost that trade.  That seems to be a trend with Bergevin.  Lose value with every trade.  Subban for Webber (nothing against Webber, he was nothing but professional); destroying Galchenyuk's confidence and more importantly value then trade for Domi when it should have been Domi + pick (in retrospect it's fine, results-wise, but should have been Domi + pick); now destroying Domi's value then trading for Anderson and we gave up the pick.  Look, I like Anderson in isolation, but he just had a major injury.

    I as a casual fan wouldn't have done that trade for Drouin, so why does Bergevin still have a job.

  6. 2 hours ago, HabsAlways said:

    Hathaway, if you're going to use a video to back up your point of view you can at least portray it accurately.    On Hathaway affter Domi throws the hit both he and Hathaway get tangled up and fall and they BOTH fling their gloves off at the same time.

    For Garbut he hit the guy blind side ... and while it was a clean hit, it's also the kind of hit I'd like to see our team respond to in the way Domi did ... you don't let the other team just man handle you.   You even pointed out how Garbut "knew" people were coming for him ... so even HE knew his hit was garbage.

    What the hell are you talking about?  Let's do a full PBP of the play then.

    Admittedly I'm no familiar with Hathaway but I have him ZERO benefit of the doubt.  When I first saw the play I saw Hathaway trying to hit Domi, who stepped out of the way.  Then Hathaway's arms came up.  At that point I thought it was a reflex.  But as I've said, I gave didn't give him any benefit of the doubt.  I said he "maybe threw an elbow."

    On the other hand, I said Domi had an interference hit and a sucker punch.  I've made no mention of the fact even that he blind sided somebody, he elbowed somebody, he targeted somebody's head.  So I'm wondering how on earth you're keeping a straight face while pretending poor Domi somehow was the victim here.

    Also, the glove DIDN'T come off at the same time.  Domi leveled Hathaway who pushed Domi's knee as reaction.  That's when Domi's gloves came off.  To say Domi somehow didn't throw the first punch, you're outright lying.  Hathaway's gloves came off at 1:14 in the video AFTER Domi grabbed him by the face and started throwing punches at 1:13.  Domi got two shots in before Hathaway was even on his feet.

    And Garbutt's hit being blindside?  Are you even serious?  So every hit when somebody's back was to the boards is a blindside?  It was a clean hit.  Nobody should be expected to answer the bell on a clean hit.  Garbutt saw it coming because Duclair cross-checked him.  Otherwise Domi might have caught him with a sucker punch just like Bertuzzi did to Moore.  The consequences wasn't as severe fortunately, but let's not pretend it wasn't a goon move.

  7. 1 hour ago, Habs_Hockey_Nutz said:

    I still believe the Galchenyuk-Domi trade will prove to be a mistake. And, one that should be corrected ASAP. As it stands IMO, there are already more than enough players who could make not keeping Domi  a positive for the team.

    What's done's done.  Like maas_art said, I'm just hoping Julien get make him realize (aside from cleaning up the antics) that if he is one of our top 6 forwards, we don't need our top 6 forwards and first rounders fighting.  We need him scoring goals, setting up plays and generally playing hockey.

  8. I'll also say this about the Hathaway hit.  When Domi retaliated, he also threw an elbow.  Not only that, if you take a close look at it, it was an elbow, a blindside hit and most importantly, the primary point of contact was Hathaway's HEAD.  So since we're apparently keeping scores here that's at least 6 offenses: retaliation, interference, elbow, blindside hit, targeting the head and sucker punch.

  9. 15 hours ago, HabsAlways said:

    So Domi vs Hathaway, Hathaway tries to elbow him in the head ...  so Domi takes him on ... good for him

    Domi vs Garbut ... Garbut does a garbage hit on Domi's team mate and Domi goes after Garbut ... good for him

    Domi vs Ekblad ... Domi gets heated, and pulls the trigger before Ekblad had accepted the invitation to dance ... nothing I saw that Ekblad did warranted the sucker punch so yeah, shame on Domi ... but I don't think that one punch defines him.      


    In the Hathaway hit, Hathaway threw an elbow, which missed.  Then Domi leveled him which as I said, also got Arizona down a man.  The revenge happened.  At worst that should have been it.  You got your pound of flesh.  Then while Hathaway is down and with his gloves on, Domi started throwing punches.  Didn't even properly challenge the guy.  So good on him for being a goon?

    The Garbutt hit is garbage how?  Elbows in, shoulder to chest, not late, player was playing the puck.  How's it a garbage hit?  Because it was on OEL?  Oh and once again, Domi didn't even challenge the guy, just started throwing sucker punches.  Real good of him there.  I'm guessing you'd defend Bertuzzi here too.

    For Ekblad, at least you admit he did nothing to deserve the punch.  But as I've said, it's not one punch.  Domi sucker punched at last 3 different guys in 3 different seasons.  Sure it's one punch if we just ignore the others.

    12 hours ago, caperns61 said:

    So if you make team Canada u can do this... rubbish

    Most players in the NHL have given cheap shots at one time or another. 

    Look up my favorite player Sidney Crosby. He has given out viscous slashes, Elbows to the head. Blind side hits. The ones you try to pretend are part of the play. But just as bad sometimes worse then facing someone face to face and throwing a punch. I don't condone the play at all but hockey is still a physical game and a lot of players have played against each for a lot of years and tempers sometimes get the best of their common sense. This happened move on. Lots of time to grow up. I am kind of glad we have a player that can defend him self his teamates and can still play the game. Now lets go to sleep for two years wake up and then we should have a pretty good team :)

    Where did I said just because you're team Canada you can do this.  No, if he's on team Canada it's still not acceptable.  The real difference is whether we keep/trade for a player who has such issues.  With a guy like Marchand we say he don't condone what he does but he can actually play hockey.  We'll try to get him to play hockey instead of act like a goon.  We spend more effort changing his behaviour.  With somebody who doesn't have such talent, you still try, but at some time you cut your losses, especially since you got rid of multiple players because of alleged CHARACTER ISSUES.

    Also, like I said, Domi committed what I consider comparable to two of the post egregious offenses in the modern era so let's not pretend it's not worse than slashes and elbows.  Also, in those 3 instances I mentioned, only 1 was Domi actually "defending" a teammate.  And that was on a clean hit.  He did them for HIM, not his team.  That Ekblad punch end up costing us a goal.  We're glad it occurred in the preseason

  10. 35 minutes ago, maas_art said:

    Lets give Julien a little time with Domi before we crucify him.  Yes, he's done some stupid things in the past but Andrew Shaw was an absolute nutcase when we got him (and Therrien seemed to encourage this) but Julien seemed to settle him down to the point where he became a quality forward. The only thing that has hurt him is his injury history. 

    I'll just make one more post before I stop on this subject (because I know I'm probably starting to get annoying on this).  Why do I consider these incidents especially bad.  In the Hathaway incident, sure I think Hathaway might have thrown an elbow, but then Domi threw a blatant interference hit which puts his team down a man, showing lack of discipline.  Then he goes on and sucker punches a guy who's down on the ice who still had his glove on.

    In the case of Garbutt (I never thought I'd defend Garbutt or Ekblad).  But Garbutt threw a clean hit (if late, by a fraction of a second at most) then got assaulted.  He was actually lucky there because he got (as I mentioned) a stick and a crosscheck from Duclair so he knew somebody was coming after him.  When Bertuzzi assault Moore, the latter had little warning that a punch was coming and was knocked out before he even hit his head on the ice where his neck snapped backwards.  Had it not been Duclair's stick, would Garbutt have prepared for the sucker punch?

    Lastly, I don't like Ekblad and it might be a bad angle (maybe Ekblad chopped at Domi, I don't know), but it was far from the worst thing he did and was a hockey play.  Then Domi outright sucker punched him.  That's well, Domi on Samuelsson stuff right there.  I guess the apple doesn't fall far from the tree.

    I consider the Moore and Samuelsson incidents among the most egregious incidents in the modern era.  So when you have a guy who's barely 3 years into the league doing that in the more "disciplined" era, that's straight up thuggish.  Most importantly though, these incidents happened two, three years apart when you're supposed to be older and more mature now.  That's not young and dumb, that's right and wrong difference.  I don't know what Julien can do to fix it.  What Andrew Shaw did is nothing by comparison.

  11. On 9/22/2018 at 11:20 AM, caperns61 said:

    How many people would take Brad Marchand on this team, even after all his antics, I know would.

    One single moment of stupidity does not define anyone, get over this punch thing that was not the most disturbing part, it was his energy level,  he was not ready to play. Maybe through the game he even realized that. I am sure he has more to offer then what we have seen. I was and am still all in on the trade we made. I do think he played like crap in his first game as for the non fight sucker punch, shit happens. He has owned up to it. Time to move on.

    If his first 5 to 10 games have the same level of energy as the preseason game then I will begin to worry.

    Except it's not the first incident.  Far from it.  Aside from the Garnet Hathaway incident I posted above there is this little gem involving Ryan Garbutt.  Some would call that a sucker punching history.  Now, no love lost here for either Ekblad or Garbutt, but I do agree with one of the comments on the video, "reminds me of Bertuzzi."  That's exactly what it reminds me of, Bertuzzi, just without the stick.  We give Marchand, Lucic and Chara crap for sucker punching (as we should) so we do we put up with crap here?

    Also, I would pretend I wouldn't be tempted in having Marchand on the team, but here's an idea, how about Max Domi come within sniffing distance of first line on team Canada before we see how much of a hypocrite I am hmmm?


  12. 6 hours ago, Noob616 said:

    I think under Bergevin there's definitely ...

    I guess overall I just find it frustrating that the French language stuff is such a sticking point when hockey is such an insular old boys' club to begin with, and the French coaching and GM hires at least ensures the Habs are staying out of that pool of "Hockey Men". I am just highly skeptical that the best 31 NHL GM's in the world just happens to include 31 men, 30 North Americans, 17 former NHL players, and a dozen guys with famous hockey dads. The only real outsiders are probably Dubas and Chayka, and I guess you could say Lamoriello was an outsider when he first started but he's now an institution. It just seems really disingenuous to me to focus on the Habs hiring a French-speaking coach and GM as a huge problem while Rob Blake, Don Sweeney, Ron Hextall, Doug Wilson, and Steve Yzerman (and that's just off the top of my head) all got their start as GMs or AGMs for the teams they played for. 

    In the case of Babcock, I believe he's arguably one of the best in the game today and I'd rank him not so marginally ahead of Julien.  For one thing, I find Julien coaches the Julien system.  Sure, every coach has his preferred system, but I find Julien more so.  If he has plays who can play the Julien roles then he does better.  But that's the thing, even NHL 18 doesn't let you pick your whole team.  I think Babcock is better in that regards.  Also I think Babcock is better at adapting to plays from the other team.  Which is not to say Julien is not a top coach.  Just that I find Babcock better (my personal opinion, I could be wrong) and I wish we had him.  Yet we didn't consider him.


    But the other thing I probably didn't make clear is this.  It's not that there aren't bad Angelophone coaches or all Francophone coaches are bad.  It's that we're limiting the pool.  Julien wasn't available at the time.  Neither was Boucher (whom I also like) or Vigneault.  Ducharme as you mentioned was in the minors.  I find it highly problematic that we didn't even consider Babcock.  It's one thing to say there are no good available coaching candidates available, let's train Ducharme and see how that works.  It's quite another when a coach of such pedigree was available and might be interest, that we didn't even consider him.  Not to mention, as I said, we had Therrien at the time.  You also mentioned us retreading on Carbonneau, but that's exactly what we did with Julien and Therrien.


    Lastly but certainly not the least, I find it highly problematic when a team (politics aside) deciding and saying outright that it is okay to accept an inferior product.  I do understand your point, politically.  But I find it unacceptable.

  13. 22 hours ago, Noob616 said:

    I'm just not that convinced that the pool of competent coaches is so small that the Francophone thing is inherently an issue. Obviously if the Habs only signed Francophone players it would be nearly impossible to be competitive, but Claude Julien stacks up against the best coaches in the league, and Guy Boucher is a competent middle of the road coach who's comparable to what most teams with average coaching have. As much as people ragged on Jacques Martin he is a very good coach as well, and he immediately figured out what kind of player PK Subban was and used him as a top pair guy. Alain Vigneault too, I think he's lost some of his lustre lately but he's still a very good coach who got 100 point seasons of out old and mediocre Rangers teams. 

    What I think is the Habs need to commit to using development leagues as a pipeline for coaches instead of hiring guys like Sylvain Lefebvre who have little shot at becoming NHL coaches. Guy Boucher is one example, although I don't blame them for not replacing Martin with him in 2010. To their credit they seem to be on this path now, they've hired Ducharme as an assistant and Bouchard as the AHL coach, and there's rumblings they're going to buy an ECHL team and move it to Trois Rivieres in the next couple seasons and presumably they'd be looking for coaches out of the QMJHL for that team as well. There needs to be succession plans in place and it's pretty obvious that's the intention with Ducharme and/or Bouchard. 

    The players in totality but not as individuals, and they're also usually asked much less important questions. The coach is a singular figure that effectively functions as a club spokesperson for the most important company in Quebec. I do not believe translating is enough in that situation. If the Habs' sole jurisdiction was Montreal I'd agree but the team is followed by (and arguably representative of) people from the whole province and outside of Montreal it's a small portion of people who speak English, and in my opinion it's important the coach in that role speaks French. They don't need to be Quebecois but I think the language is important. Julien is from Ottawa, Bowman was an Anglo-Montealer, Bob Hartley is a Francophone, French media has been pining for Giroux and Toews as Francophone stars, etc.

    For me the difference is it would be virtually impossible to have a predominantly Francophone team and be successful, but I'm not convinced the marginal value between Claude Julien and Mike Babcock or the marginal difference between Julien Brisebois and Jason Botterill or whoever is an issue. Especially when these days team front offices are so much more collaborative with specialist scouts in each region and player development coaches etc etc, the person with the "GM" title doesn't even necessarily need to be the person pulling the strings. 

    In principle, I agree with you but it's very easy for me to say that because I could follow any of 30 NHL teams, MLB teams, NBA teams, NFL teams, or basically any other sports team in Canada and have a coach that's generally representative of me. It wouldn't bother me because it isn't political for me as an Anglophone Canadian to have a Russian speaking coach of the Habs since it's not representative of anything other than a hockey team. I know that as a white Anglophone Canadian with a very weak regional Maritimes accent my language or speech will basically never be a hindrance to anything in my professional career. If I were a Francophone in Val d'Or I don't know that losing probably the most notable Francophone public figure outside of Trudeau/Macron would be something I'd just brush off. I agree, I imagine most Habs fans would get over it if the team was winning cups with Mikhail Babkov from St. Petersburg as head coach, but I don't think translating press conferences and interviews is ideal. I watch a lot of the press conferences and the translations tend to lack a lot of the nuance that comes first in the French parts, even for someone like Julien who is as comfortable in French and English. For Bergevin who's not as comfortable in English a lot of stuff gets lost in translation. 

    Sports are political. They're always political, always have been, and always will be deeply political. Some of the most memorable moments in Habs history are Richard's suspension, Patrick Roy leading an underdog to a cup, and dynasties full of Francophone superstars in a country that did its best to suppress and marginalize Francophones. The most famous hockey memories overall too, Miracle on Ice, 1972, 2010 Olympics, Those games and Habs moments all took on deeper importance due to political implications. When Habs fans booed the American anthem after overworked US pilots on amphetamines bombed Canadian soldiers in a deeply unpopular war (and when the US was about to start another ghoulish war) that was political. When Bruins fans chanted "USA" at the Habs because their Bergeron and Julien led Bruins were beating the Habs with more American players, that was political. The Habs hiring a Francophone coach and GM is political too, and I have no problem with someone disagreeing with the decision, but I personally agree with it and think it's overblown as an issue. I just don't think it's fair to brush it off as "politics' because the whole institution of professional sports and hockey has always been deeply political and always will be. 

    The easy counter-argument to my position is that FC Barcelona doesn't have a Catalan coach, and Catalonia is a roughly analogous minority within Spain, and arguably the issues run even deeper considering the Spanish civil war, yet their coach is from the other side of Spain and doesn't speak Catalan. It's not quite the same because Spanish and Catalan are so similar, but in terms of the politics Catalonia and Quebec are very similar regional identities within a larger nation with concerning histories of mistreating them. That's probably proof of concept that the Habs could hire a non-Francophone coach and be fine, but I guess I'd split hairs with the language because 99% of people in Barcelona would also speak Spanish while English is a wholly different language that isn't mutually intelligible. 

    I guess agree to disagree then. I don't believe the language thing is a stupid issue, nor do I think it's holding the team back. You could make the same argument about the Leafs and "Good Ontario Boys". They have Brown, Hyman, Kadri, Leivo, Marner, and Tavares as "Good Ontario Boys" and they're generally all well liked by fans. You could make the same argument about them having half their forward group from Ontario when proportionally it should be 3/12 or something, and how that wouldn't be smart because of how thin the NHL talent pool is. (Granted, I think many Leafs/Doug Ford fans wouldn't consider Kadri a "Good Ontario Boy", it's pretty obviously a dog whistle that applies to "John Tavares" and not "Nazem Kadri" for obvious reasons). But of course it isn't an issue, the issue with "Good Ontario Boys" is when they're David Clarkson or Dave Bolland, not Tavares or Marner. Same as how the Francophone stuff is an issue if it's Briere or Therrien, not Hudon or Ducharme. 

    There's also an argument to be made that the Habs could do better by hiring Francophones because they're generally outside the old boys club and cronyism of Hockey Canada and the general "hockey men" community which tends to heavily skew Anglophone. Therrien is a counter to that but I think looking at guys like Vigneault, Julien, and Boucher who got their start with the Habs and went on to coach two of the biggest American franchises and an up and coming Tampa Bay team is perhaps an argument in favour of it. I guess I just look at Burns, Demers, Laperriere, Tremblay, Vigneault, Therrien, Julien, Gainey, Carbonneau, Martin, Therrien, Julien, and likely later Ducharme/Bouchard and have a hard time seeing that as a notably bad record compared to other teams. That's four very good coaches in that record plus Boucher who came through the Habs organization and has established himself as a godo coach. Is that list different than most other teams? I dunno. 

    I don't disagree that there is a lot of politics embedded in sports, but I strongly disagree with having a French coach.

    First of all, I think Babcock is a better coach than Julien.  You may say that's marginal.  But you know what, if the whole organization fills up with marginally inferior products at key positions all the way to the minors, it adds up.

    Secondly, as Ted said, you're limiting your pool.  In this case it isn't even a Babcock/Julien comparison.  It's a Babcock/Therrien comparison.  And Babcock is WAY better than Therrien so the difference wasn't even marginal.  We artificially limited our selection process to a small fraction of the pool that when Babcock wasn't even considered (when he's shown at least minor interest no less).  At the time, Julien wasn't available, so we went with crap.  We're really lucky Julien became available, what if he didn't?  Right now we're not even sure Brisbois is available.

    So that's that then?  Every time we select an inferior product?

  14. On 7/3/2018 at 9:54 PM, Regis22 said:

    For a team with no real  # 1 or # 2 C the signing of the over the hill TP  has created a log jam


    As we stand right now, the four centres on opening night seem to be Phillip Danault, Jonathan Drouin, Plekanec, and Matthew Peca. Peca was signed to a one-way contract and Marc Bergevin has said he expects him to be an NHL player next year. That means that Byron Froese, Michael McCarron, and Jacob de la Rose are out of a spot down the middle. To make matters even more complicated, all of them will require waivers if they should go to the American Hockey League.

    That doesn’t even factor in other forwards who will require waivers like Nikita Scherbak, Rychel, and Nicolas Deslauriers


    It could end up being a game of musical chairs, but there are still several months before the music will stop


    This is why I was against the resigning of TP  .

    See, the most frustrating part of all this is not only that none of them are top 2 line centres, but more importantly, why the hell did we sign Deslauriers mid-season?  Was Bergevin pretending we were never gonna resign Plekanec or what?


    The move by itself doesn't really cost us much, but it clearly shows the lack of anything thinking.  It's so damn point less.


  15. 5 hours ago, maas_art said:

    Im actually more at odds with calling Domi a Ford. The implication is that Galchenyuk is 'top of the line' while Domi is merely average.

    Both players have .61 ppg over their career.  Domi was one of the highest touted players in the league the year he came in, ranking 6th in calder voting behind the likes of Eichel, McDavid, Panarin etc.       He's had 1 injury shortened season and one bad (while his team imploded around him) season.   He is still a very good player.

    Do I think Domi and Galchenyuk are of equal value right now? NO. Do i think we should have gotten more for Galcheynyk YES (although i certainly see how much MB and co damaged AG's value prior to trading him).

    But to suggest that domi is some run of the mill utilitarian plugger is a bit silly.  He's played 3 seasons and 222 games compared with Galchenyuk's 6 and 418 games.  Lets give Max an opportunity to show what kind of player he is (hopefully with better linemates) before comparing them as thoroughbred vs pony.

    By the same token then Galchenyuk had a strike shortened season and two injury shortened seasons.  Also, as mentioned, he was centred by offensive juggernauts like Steve Ott, Jacob De La Rose, Brian Flynn and Mike McCarron.

    I must also admit I'm also not understanding the 222 vs. 418 games logic here.  There is a one year difference between Domi and Galchenyuk in age.  Given that the strike shortened the first season to 48 games, why didn't Domi play give or take 370 games (adjusted for injuries)?  Simple.  Because Galchenyuk was better earlier on.  It's not like they said let's play him and see where it gets us.  It's because he was good early on and got to play early on.  It's not a chicken and egg problem.  Domi didn't get to play early on because he wasn't good enough.  To say they both produced 0.61 points is to say a 21 year old produced the same as an 18 year old Galchenyuk and so on.  I wouldn't exactly view that in a positive light.

    But no, Domi is not a bad players.  You'll excuse me, I'm rather frustrated these days and might be taking it out on him.

  16. 7 hours ago, caperns61 said:

    I am not sure when Galcheynk became a Mecedez. If he was he would likely be putting up 30 plus goals and 40 plus assists then you can call him a mercedez.

    He has been consistently on the wrong side of the score sheet for 6 NHL season. NOT 1. And we are not giving up a ton of goals 19 last season 17 the season before that. And they are his good qualities :4224: He had a grand total of 10 even strength goals, 27 assists ????????, last season  and we are worrying about losing his offensive production???? Max Domi had 8 even strength goals and  28  assists, WHAT ? And we talk about how much better AG, Why?  

    What I dont get is we did not try to get a young centerman  or young left deeman,  even if you had to package Patches and Galchenyk.... or even top ten picks to accumulate them in the draft...

    This is a trade between two GMS who hope the player they traded for can reach their full potential and one of 3 things will happen, they both will, they both will not, or one will and the other wont


    Galchenyuk has been on the wrong side of the scoring sheet for 6 season has he?  Oh?  News to me.  I know how you like to quote +/- so let's start with that.  He was +14, -12, +8, -8, -5 and -31.  Now interesting thing there, his +/- is highly correlated with how the team did, shocking I know.  Just like the team, there's a bunch of really high minuses this year.  So saying he was consistently on the wrong side of the scoring sheet is an outright lie.  But if you want to talk about it then Domi hasn't been a plus since his first year.

    Secondly, oh he even scored 10 even strength goals has he?  Well, Domi only scored 5 goals against a goalie.  What's your point?  So Domi's inability to scoring on the PP is now a negative for Galchenyuk?  Nice logic.  Steve Stamkos only scored 12 even strength goals last year.  Filip Forsberg, 13.  Patrik Laine, 24.  What losers.

    Oh and lastly but certainly not the least, despite being the more offensively gifted player, Galchenyuk actually gets much more defensive zone starts than Domi, with plugs as linemates for most of the time he was here.

  17. 17 hours ago, MALMACIAN_CRUNCH said:

    Okay, how about a different approach. Assuming Galchenyuk is a 60 point player (30/30). What sort of production do we need out of Domi to see the trade in a positive light? Does it have to be 30/30? Would 20/40 suffice? With Domi being known to play a more complete game, do the point totals need to level out? Or is some level of drop off reasonable if he positively contributes in other areas like defense and on the penalty kill? If he has a 50 point season (15/35), is that acceptable? Because I don't think 15/35 totals are so far fetched. If he could produce like that, would that ease some of negativity regarding this trade?

    I get it, player for player I can see how an argument could be made that Domi straight up for Galchenyuk is a raw deal, and under other circumstances I might have expected a little more coming back as well (I always want a little something extra coming back). But there was a lot more to this trade than that. Galchenyuk might have a ton of talent, but it has been wasted here. A lot of that falls on MB and his crew, but some of it falls on AG as well. And blame game aside, it just seemed obvious to me that we would be parting ways. Maybe if MB didn't spend the whole season talking publicly about how poor his play is we could have gotten a little more. But all things considered, Max Domi is a darn good return IMO. I'm sorry if you don't see it that way. Who knows, maybe he will change you mind. :)     


    First of all, I won't ever be happy with this trade.  The reason I've made clear with the Mercedes vs. Ford example.  At this point, Galchenyuk has more value than Domi.  Even if next year the Mercedes breaks down and the Ford keeps going, we don't know that right now.  Which means we should have gotten more for the Mercedes.  If was Domi + pick then maybe okay.  But standing right now, at the point of the trade, we lost.  If it was a one-off then I say yeah everybody screws up.  But the problem is, we kept losing this type of trades regardless of whatever playing style you fancy.  So no I'm not happy, even if Domi ends up being the better player, which I doubt.

    The second point is this.  I've heard the line Galchenyuk needed a change of scenery and that the combination of Bergevin and him doesn't mix.  What I don't hear being talked about is how Domi isn't working out for Arizona either.  Galchenyuk at least you say never realized his potential or plateaued.  Domi and Duclair (apparently the other player we wanted) outright have their stats fall of a cliff from the first year (especially Duclair).  So you can't objectively say one has wasted talent while the other has not and we're literally trading our alleged problems for other people's alleged problems and lost the trade in the process.  Once again, Galchenyuk might flourish in Arizona too.

  18. 12 minutes ago, MALMACIAN_CRUNCH said:

    I wasn't meaning to imply that Domi turning into a consistent 20/40 guy equaled us winning the trade, just that he has better hands than a lot of people are giving him credit for. And that I wouldn't be surprised to see him put up 20+ goals regularly.

    But, since you mention it. Galchenyuk has never put up a 20/40 season, let alone in a down year. And no mater how you play with the numbers, 30/30, 40/20, he's never put up 60 points. He's had a shortened season or two where his PPG% might have been close to that, absolutely. But to say Galchenyuk is a 60 point player is a stretch, and to add "in a down season"? I don't know man...

    For arguments sake, lets assume we traded a guaranteed 60 point player for a projected to be 60 point player (that was just my projection to be clear, I don't have any outside sources to quote Domi as a 60 point player). If i were to attempt to convince you that the trade was a win for us I would do so by highlighting the stats that point to Domi being the more complete hockey player. Their +/- speaks volumes. Personally, I don't look at the trade based on winners and losers. I see two equally young, equally talented players that needed fresh starts. I hope everybody wins.

    As for who is going to score without our third best scorer? I can't say for certain. I will say that Lehkonen has shown in the past to have a pretty wicked one-timer from the slot, as well as a few others that have room for an increase in their scoring like Hudon, Scherbak, Drouin etc. Other than one year, Galchenyuk himself hasn't really put up much more than 20, which is my prediction for Domi. And lastly, playmakers have the ability to create scorers. Just look at Big Joe and how many 40 goal scorers he has created over the course of his career. Lol Domi is no Joe, just pointing out the nature of playmaking.

    I'm not trying to pretend that Domi is a superfreak, but I think we're just worrying ourselves into a tizzy over nothing. He's not a slug, the kid can play just fine, and Galchenyuk isn't leaving behind as big of a crater to fill as some are letting on. We might have just as bad a season this year as we just had, but it won't be because of this trade. (except for maybe the fact that we didn't acquire a top left D or center, but obviously nobody was willing to bite on that)    

    First of all, +/- speaks volumns does it?  I don't know who it was that mentioned it here, if that's the case the Alzner's a better player than Petry.

    Second, Galchenyuk was a 56 point scorer, playing roughly 15 mintues a game, when he only played centre for part of it and had decent linemates, once gain, only for the part of it, without playing on the PP.  So technically no that's not 60 points, but it's better than 40 points.  In addition, to quote myself above.  If you consider Galchenyuk a 30 goal scorer, then he's in a pretty exclusive group that's less than 3.5% of the league.  Even if he's a 20 goal scorer, that's at minimum, top 8% of the league.  And on our team, we scored 209 goals last year as a team.  Some we just traded away roughly 10% of our goal production (on a year he shot terribly too) and one of the few semi-reliable options on our dreadful powerplay, so we're definitely not fine.

    Lastly but certainly not the least, I don't have a crystal ball.  We don't deal in hypotheticals.  But since we're assuming things about the future, we can just as well assume that Galchenyuk somehow miraculously develop strong defensive skills in his prime, or more realistically, become a 75 to 80 point scorer.  That's no more or less accurate than predicting Domi will be a 60 point scorer.  Why would I give away the essential bird in hand of a basically 60 point scorer for a hypothetical 60 point scorer?

  19. 2 hours ago, Regis22 said:

    MB was disappointed in him being out late in a car involved in an accident

    Yeah I'm aware of those incidents.  But none of those are on ice/in locker room incidents other than maybe Chucky and his dad.  So if that's the case then they definitely aren't on ice problems that Bergevin is concerned with.  All the more reason that if we're not hypocritical, don't touch Voynov.

  20. 2 hours ago, MALMACIAN_CRUNCH said:

    What, that Domi will spend the majority of his career scoring between 20-30 goals a season? Maybe a touch optimistic, perhaps 15-25 is more realistic. Anyways, point is I think Domi has better hands than he is being credited for. I have no explanation for the past two seasons, but do we really think that his rookie year is the best he has, and that he will never reach even those heights again? I expect that he will surpass those totals. I can't say by how much, or when, but I don't think it's unreasonable to eventually see him plateau around 20 goals/40 assists.

    You do realize you just said that you hope his upside is what Galchenyuk is today, in a down season.  Then once again, why did we do the trade?

    But on the more practical side of things, he's billed as a playmaker right?  Who will he pass to?  Even if Pacioretty doesn't get traded and gets back to scoring 35 goals instead of 17, or Webber somehow remains healthy for the whole year, this team still can't score any damn goals, before it traded its third leading scorer.

  21. 47 minutes ago, habsisme said:

    I don't know anyone who did that, nor do I think MB is doing that. 

    Its about character in the room, it's not about morality. I mean honestly, even after reading that article, I would bet that the majority of owners are worse people than Voynov... ask the poor people of Michigan what they think about their tax dollars going to a new arena while they cant get access to clean water, or have lost their pensions... and yet we all still watch hockey and feed these poor excuses for human beings. I promise they have caused more human suffering that Voynov ever could. 

    I don't really want this deal either but its because I want a rebuild. The character issue is relevant but its not the same thing and it doesn't effect the room the same way. Its okay if you want to hate him (I'm glad most of you do) but its just not the same thing and I don't think we should pretend it is. Character doesn't mean all things about someone's character - only what applies to hockey and the room. 

    Okay but what is this "character" that's afflicting the locker room?  Let's say Subban was not well liked, why was Chucky traded?  Let's say Chucky was a problem, what problem did Bergevin have with Eller?  What about Kassian?  He didn't play a single game so how did he affect the locker room?  What about Tinordi?  He got called up all of what, less than 30 games so when did he even get a chance to affect the locker room?  Yet we found out he had a substance abuse problem and traded him for John Scott whom I'd literally have take a bag of pucks over.

    I get what you're saying, on ice/team vs. off ice/team problems.  But clearly to Bergevin it never was an in or out of the locker room problem.  So calling him a hypocrite would be putting it very mildly.

  22. Just for reference.  Since Galchenyuk got drafted, I'm gonna exclude the first strike shortened year, in no year has there been 30 players who scored 30 goals or more.  The year Galchenyuk did for example, there were 28.  The lowest was 2014-2015 were there were 15, and it generally hovered around the low to mid 20 or so mark.  That is, once again, not a Bugatti, but it is pretty exclusive company.

    He was a 20 goal scorer in his first full season, the third season (his second season he was injured for 17 games) and a 30 goal scorer in his fourth.  The trade is not a giveaway and, nothing against Domi personally, but we should not pretend to be happy about it.

  • Create New...