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

Guy Carbonneau


AK-1
 Share

Recommended Posts

Untrue. Anaheim scored all its goals off the odd-man rush and we grossly outshot and outchanced them. It just so happened every defensive blunder we made wound up in our own net and our goaltending was subpar.

This sounds like the same explanation a lot of people made when Philly beat us last year in the playoffs. I saw Anaheim outmuscle our defence, as they greatly outplayed us in our own zone, especially that big first line of theirs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This sounds like the same explanation a lot of people made when Philly beat us last year in the playoffs. I saw Anaheim outmuscle our defence, as they greatly outplayed us in our own zone, especially that big first line of theirs.

The coach put Brisebois over O'Byrne. How many times did the Ducks 1st line draw a penalty against Brisebois? How many times did the Ducks 1st line score when Brisebois was on the ice? How many times did the Ducks 1st line get a great scoring chance thanks to Brisebois poor defensive play? Wasn't the assist against the Ducks the first PP point for Brisebois?

Why was Brisebois on the ice against the top line? This was a coaching mistake.

Why did Brisebois play against the big physical Ducks? Coaching mistake.

Carbo should have had Markov - Komi or Hammer - O'Byrne/Gorges against the Ducks top line. Carbo should have had Koivu line or Lang line against the Getzlaf line. Pleks is not big enough to handle Getzlaf even though he is very good defensively, just too big. Koivu is small but can cover a big player like Getzlaf better then Pleks. As for Lapierre, he is a good 4th line player that has zero chance against a big strong player like Getzlaf or Malkin.

Lapierre is a low cost center. Good for a 4th liner. But not good against top teams with dominating players. The coach had the final line change and was using the 4th line as if it was a checking line. It is not a checking line but rather an energy line and the result was the Ducks top line had an easy game to do what THEY wanted.

The coach has to use the players at on his roster. The coach has the ability to bring up a player like Weber or Chips or Patches. Probably has to discuss callups with BG but the lineup is Carbo's decision.

Why have Laraque on the ice unless he is going to throw big hits with his body or fists. Looked invisible against the Ducks. The Ducks tough guys were able to sucker Carbo into putting Laraque on the ice when he could have been MORE effective waiting on the bench until something happened that needed his presence. Carbo was out coached by the Ducks coach.

Carbo was a very good defensive player and Cup winner. Hopefully losing to the Ducks will teach Carbo to make some better decisions with line matchups and the roster. Rather learn early in the season against the Ducks then in the playoffs when it is probably too late to fix the problems.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The coach put Brisebois over O'Byrne. How many times did the Ducks 1st line draw a penalty against Brisebois? How many times did the Ducks 1st line score when Brisebois was on the ice? How many times did the Ducks 1st line get a great scoring chance thanks to Brisebois poor defensive play? Wasn't the assist against the Ducks the first PP point for Brisebois?

Why was Brisebois on the ice against the top line? This was a coaching mistake.

Why did Brisebois play against the big physical Ducks? Coaching mistake.

Carbo should have had Markov - Komi or Hammer - O'Byrne/Gorges against the Ducks top line. Carbo should have had Koivu line or Lang line against the Getzlaf line. Pleks is not big enough to handle Getzlaf even though he is very good defensively, just too big. Koivu is small but can cover a big player like Getzlaf better then Pleks. As for Lapierre, he is a good 4th line player that has zero chance against a big strong player like Getzlaf or Malkin.

Lapierre is a low cost center. Good for a 4th liner. But not good against top teams with dominating players. The coach had the final line change and was using the 4th line as if it was a checking line. It is not a checking line but rather an energy line and the result was the Ducks top line had an easy game to do what THEY wanted.

The coach has to use the players at on his roster. The coach has the ability to bring up a player like Weber or Chips or Patches. Probably has to discuss callups with BG but the lineup is Carbo's decision.

Why have Laraque on the ice unless he is going to throw big hits with his body or fists. Looked invisible against the Ducks. The Ducks tough guys were able to sucker Carbo into putting Laraque on the ice when he could have been MORE effective waiting on the bench until something happened that needed his presence. Carbo was out coached by the Ducks coach.

Carbo was a very good defensive player and Cup winner. Hopefully losing to the Ducks will teach Carbo to make some better decisions with line matchups and the roster. Rather learn early in the season against the Ducks then in the playoffs when it is probably too late to fix the problems.

That's pretty harsh considering we've only lost one game. I don't totally disagree with you on some of your points, I would have rather seen O'byrne in that game as opposed to Brisebois but Breezer has been pretty steady. As for Laraque, I agree, he should have played less since Paros was not muscling people around. Other than that, I thought we outplayed them, they just took advantage of their opportunities and we didn't. I definitely don't believe that Carbo was outcoached, he can't be held 100% accountable if there are defensive breakdowns. The players still have to play the game.

I think it's too early to be coming down this hard on Carbo especially after the start we've had, the Ducks are a very good team and we're going to have nights where things simply don't click. Let's not blame the coach for every loss unless it's warranted.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This sounds like the same explanation a lot of people made when Philly beat us last year in the playoffs. I saw Anaheim outmuscle our defence, as they greatly outplayed us in our own zone, especially that big first line of theirs.

If they greatly outplayed us in our own zone, why did we outshoot them two to one, recording over 50 shots? Why did none of Anaheim's goals come as a result of hard work down low in which their forwards overpowered our defense?

People buy into the 'big bad west' hype far too readily. I saw a rather ordinary Ducks team take advantage of our turnovers and sloppiness with the puck in the offensive zone and profit from subpar goaltending. The only other factor was Carbo's refusal to match lines properly, which left our fourth line and third D pairing out against Getzlaf and co time and again. That was a mistake.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How many times did the Ducks 1st line draw a penalty against Brisebois?

well since he only took one penalty in the game I would have to say one

How many times did the Ducks 1st line score when Brisebois was on the ice?

well if Perry and Getzlaf make up the first line he was out there for 1 goal. but was on the ice for 2 of ours :)

How many times did the Ducks 1st line get a great scoring chance thanks to Brisebois poor defensive play?

and how many times did our goalies give up soft goals? I mean hey we can split hairs all we want so lets start with the guys who's job is to stop the puck.

Wasn't the assist against the Ducks the first PP point for Brisebois?

http://www.nhl.com/scores/htmlreports/20082009/GS020107.HTM

that says it was an ev strength goal but then again what does it matter if he chips in on the PP or on even strength, an assist is an assist.

Asfor why did the coach play Brisebois maybe he was scared that if O'byrne is missing defensive assignments and is being knocked off the puck against the Panthers he probably wasn't going to fair any better against the Ducks. Was it the right choice? I don't have my crystal ball in front of me to say yes or no however when your starter gives up 4 goals on 12 shots and his replacement gives up 1 goal on 3 shots, it generally isn't the rest of the team that is slacking.

Was he out coached? probably. and it will happen again and again. It's all part of the learning process. I do agree with you and weeping that we could see better combos out there (4th line paired up with our top defensive pair) and last year Carbo actually did that from time to time. You would see the Pleks line out there with Gorges and Boulion. But like greekhockeycoach said Carbo can't be responsible for every single defensive breakdown.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Was he out coached? probably. and it will happen again and again. It's all part of the learning process.

Nothing to be ashamed of though, that's a great coach in Anaheim. That's why he's got a ring on his finger. Sometimes you just give credit to your opposition instead of consistently looking for faults in the individuals or the team.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The stats don't actually bear that statement out. Sure, we missed chances as a team, but guys like Higgins and Plekanec were the ones who really failed to perform. But that's okay, that's the past. This is a new season. :)

As for Carbo, I really hope he stresses defensive awareness and responsibility this week in practice. I can't remember the last time we gave up so many odd-man rushes with our forwards caught deep in the zone. Our players have to understand that when the forwards are deep, getting the puck in deep is mandatory. None of this prettily feathering passes into the high slot or across the blue line, it's just asking for trouble. We are a skilled team, no doubt, but we have to play better north-south hockey.

but think about it: this is only to point out if there are stress lines between bg and carbonneau, and i'd be surpirsed if some aren't developing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If they greatly outplayed us in our own zone, why did we outshoot them two to one, recording over 50 shots? Why did none of Anaheim's goals come as a result of hard work down low in which their forwards overpowered our defense?

People buy into the 'big bad west' hype far too readily. I saw a rather ordinary Ducks team take advantage of our turnovers and sloppiness with the puck in the offensive zone and profit from subpar goaltending. The only other factor was Carbo's refusal to match lines properly, which left our fourth line and third D pairing out against Getzlaf and co time and again. That was a mistake.

well since he only took one penalty in the game I would have to say one

well if Perry and Getzlaf make up the first line he was out there for 1 goal. but was on the ice for 2 of ours :)

and how many times did our goalies give up soft goals? I mean hey we can split hairs all we want so lets start with the guys who's job is to stop the puck.

http://www.nhl.com/scores/htmlreports/20082009/GS020107.HTM

that says it was an ev strength goal but then again what does it matter if he chips in on the PP or on even strength, an assist is an assist.

Asfor why did the coach play Brisebois maybe he was scared that if O'byrne is missing defensive assignments and is being knocked off the puck against the Panthers he probably wasn't going to fair any better against the Ducks. Was it the right choice? I don't have my crystal ball in front of me to say yes or no however when your starter gives up 4 goals on 12 shots and his replacement gives up 1 goal on 3 shots, it generally isn't the rest of the team that is slacking.

Was he out coached? probably. and it will happen again and again. It's all part of the learning process. I do agree with you and weeping that we could see better combos out there (4th line paired up with our top defensive pair) and last year Carbo actually did that from time to time. You would see the Pleks line out there with Gorges and Boulion. But like greekhockeycoach said Carbo can't be responsible for every single defensive breakdown.

Nothing to be ashamed of though, that's a great coach in Anaheim. That's why he's got a ring on his finger. Sometimes you just give credit to your opposition instead of consistently looking for faults in the individuals or the team.

You guys honestly believe that he was outcoached. Forgive me, but sitting here and criticizing Carbo about not matching lines after the fact is wrong. What if the 4th line had shut them down. Regardless, I don't want to play the what if game, but saying that he was outcoached when we outchanced them and outshot them makes no sense. I don't think it was Carbo's line matching that lost us the game and when I think about the term outcoaching, it has as much to do with the system we're playing as opposed to theirs. If Carbo wasn't able to shut down their system, then I'd say he was outcoached, but matching lines that could or could not have worked is not considered as outcoached in my book.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Untrue. Anaheim scored all its goals off the odd-man rush and we grossly outshot and outchanced them. It just so happened every defensive blunder we made wound up in our own net and our goaltending was subpar.

not talking about the goals, talking about how they overpowered us

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If they greatly outplayed us in our own zone, why did we outshoot them two to one, recording over 50 shots? Why did none of Anaheim's goals come as a result of hard work down low in which their forwards overpowered our defense?

People buy into the 'big bad west' hype far too readily. I saw a rather ordinary Ducks team take advantage of our turnovers and sloppiness with the puck in the offensive zone and profit from subpar goaltending. The only other factor was Carbo's refusal to match lines properly, which left our fourth line and third D pairing out against Getzlaf and co time and again. That was a mistake.

40 of the 50 shots were from the blueline because the slot was shut down

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You guys honestly believe that he was outcoached. Forgive me, but sitting here and criticizing Carbo about not matching lines after the fact is wrong. What if the 4th line had shut them down. Regardless, I don't want to play the what if game, but saying that he was outcoached when we outchanced them and outshot them makes no sense. I don't think it was Carbo's line matching that lost us the game and when I think about the term outcoaching, it has as much to do with the system we're playing as opposed to theirs. If Carbo wasn't able to shut down their system, then I'd say he was outcoached, but matching lines that could or could not have worked is not considered as outcoached in my book.

i said he was "probably" out coached ;) Given the fact Carbo doesn't have many years of coaching under his belt (talking head coach) it is quite possible for him to be out coached. My original post was more to defend against the "we lost because of brisebois" statements but i was trying to point out that under the circumstances Carbo went with Brisebois , a vet who has been steady, versus O'Byrne who is still raw.

Jl posts the Ted Nolan quote

"sometimes it's not what we as a team did wrong but what the other team did right"

could Carbo match lines up better? sure, would it have made a difference? too hard to tell. Sometimes the other team just gets those lucky bounces. Hell the habs lived off of those in past seasons.

Personally I am happy with Carbonneau as a coach :) I hope he stays around for a long time

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i said he was "probably" out coached ;) Given the fact Carbo doesn't have many years of coaching under his belt (talking head coach) it is quite possible for him to be out coached. My original post was more to defend against the "we lost because of brisebois" statements but i was trying to point out that under the circumstances Carbo went with Brisebois , a vet who has been steady, versus O'Byrne who is still raw.

Jl posts the Ted Nolan quote

"sometimes it's not what we as a team did wrong but what the other team did right"

could Carbo match lines up better? sure, would it have made a difference? too hard to tell. Sometimes the other team just gets those lucky bounces. Hell the habs lived off of those in past seasons.

Personally I am happy with Carbonneau as a coach :) I hope he stays around for a long time

Thanks for the reply Kindred. What's I'm actually trying to get at is, if a coach throws out a line that he thinks will work and it doesn't, is that necessarily an indication that he was out coached. I totally agree with the Ted Nolan quote and I've been a huge critic of Carbo in the past, however, he seems like he's gotten his act together. Can he still learn, of course, even the most experienced of coaches are always learning. I'm just saying that we shouldn't use the term "out coached" when it pertains to line matching.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You guys honestly believe that he was outcoached. Forgive me, but sitting here and criticizing Carbo about not matching lines after the fact is wrong. What if the 4th line had shut them down. Regardless, I don't want to play the what if game, but saying that he was outcoached when we outchanced them and outshot them makes no sense. I don't think it was Carbo's line matching that lost us the game and when I think about the term outcoaching, it has as much to do with the system we're playing as opposed to theirs. If Carbo wasn't able to shut down their system, then I'd say he was outcoached, but matching lines that could or could not have worked is not considered as outcoached in my book.

First off, I'm not criticizing after the fact. I have been concerned about Carbonneau's robotic line-rolling for a very long time now, and often take note of it during games before anything negative has even happened. Second, coaching isn't just about schemes, it's about the ability to adjust, and in this area Carbonneau has a lot of room for improvement. If he had shown at any time in the past that he had learned how to match lines properly, I wouldn't keep mentioning it, but he is making the same mistake now as he was a year ago. The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result. Night after night, Carbo seemingly can't be bothered to match lines with the other team, even when we're playing at home, despite our depth which should allow us more favorable matchups more frequently. We have three good scoring lines yet it's our 5 worst players who end up on the ice multiple times against Getzlaf, Perry, and Kunitz? Heck yes, that's being outcoached!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

First off, I'm not criticizing after the fact. I have been concerned about Carbonneau's robotic line-rolling for a very long time now, and often take note of it during games before anything negative has even happened. Second, coaching isn't just about schemes, it's about the ability to adjust, and in this area Carbonneau has a lot of room for improvement. If he had shown at any time in the past that he had learned how to match lines properly, I wouldn't keep mentioning it, but he is making the same mistake now as he was a year ago. The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result. Night after night, Carbo seemingly can't be bothered to match lines with the other team, even when we're playing at home, despite our depth which should allow us more favorable matchups more frequently. We have three good scoring lines yet it's our 5 worst players who end up on the ice multiple times against Getzlaf, Perry, and Kunitz? Heck yes, that's being outcoached!

Fair enough my friend Weep, we can't always agree :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Carbo is a good coach. But there is appears to be situations, especially after a loss to find fault. Right or wrong. We want Montreal to win every game even though we know this is not possible.

Checking line or shut down line. Does Montreal have one? And if so which players are the shut down players.

Should the 4th line play against the other team #1 line? I hope not based on how Perry and Getzlaf had lots of fun with this line.

I disliked the Brisebois signing, BG made a mistake IMO. I have seen nothing to indicate that Brisebois should be on the roster especially with Dandenault, Weber, and O'Byrne (possibly Belle, Valentenko) all offerring more upside compared to Brisebois. Only 1 point in 7 games. It is time that Carbo at least keep Brisebois in the press box as his defence is poor and 1 point is not enough for a player getting PP time.

The number of shots on goal. Lots and lots of easy saves for the Ducks goalie.

Yes, Halak had a bad game. But the goals were scored in situations when the defence and forwards did not provide any defensive awareness and/or the wrong line was out against the Ducks top line.

Price. I am a fan of Price so maybe I have rose coloured glasses. Short handed break away goal. Nice if Price had stopped it but this should never happen on the PP. Selanne scoring on the PP off a rebound. The penalty should not have occurred or the PK should have had better coverage as Selanne was wide open on the goal.

Ironically Carbo did the right thing pulling Halak as his confidence was gone after allowing 4 goals. I don't think anyone should put Price in the weak goals category as he was not even ready to play.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Jl posts the Ted Nolan quote

"sometimes it's not what we as a team did wrong but what the other team did right"

I liked it very much when Nolan said that. I think I'll change my signature back to that. :)

"Sometimes, we look at what we did wrong too much and not look at what the other team did right." ~ Ted Nolan

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Ce n’est pas toujours facile de mettre la rondelle dans le fond du filet. Ça prend de la créativité, de la rapidité. C’est pour ça qu’il faut laisser un peu plus de liberté à des joueurs aussi talentueux que Koivu, Kovalev, Plekanec, les Kostitsyn, croit Tanguay. Guy (Carbonneau) était un joueur intelligent et les joueurs intelligents font des entraîneurs intelligents."

"It's not always easy to put the puck in the back of the net. You need creativity, speed. That's why you need to give a bit of freedom to talented players like Koivu, Kovalev, Plekanec, the Kostitsyn's, believes Tanguay. Guy (Carbonneau) was a smart player and smart players make smart coaches."

clap.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So did Carbo make a great speech in the 2nd intermission or did the leaders of the team get the players focused for 20 minutes?

Wish we knew.

I was listening to the post-game interview with Carbonneau and when asked about his line juggling in the third, he said that after the speech he gave them, it wouldn't matter which line combo he'd be putting on the ice, they were fired up!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was listening to the post-game interview with Carbonneau and when asked about his line juggling in the third, he said that after the speech he gave them, it wouldn't matter which line combo he'd be putting on the ice, they were fired up!

Interesting. But also a strange statement. Carbo did change up the lines. So it was not just the speech that got the team to play in the 3rd period.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Interesting. But also a strange statement. Carbo did change up the lines. So it was not just the speech that got the team to play in the 3rd period.

I'm just reporting what he said... But it's definitely interesting that he would have said that. I'd like to know what the message was as it sure whipped them at the right place!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

im guessing the 2nd int message didnt include plans for an off day sunday lol

Possible. I'm thinking more along the lines that they have a healthy line-up and no one is guaranteed to play on Friday. And since Carbo has shown in the past that he's not afraid to sit his best players if they don't perform, they took him seriously.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...