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

2016-17 Habs Lines


BigTed3
 Share

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, habs1952 said:

The 4th line seems to be the only line making a total effort TOGETHER.

I would disagree with that. I think Gallagher, Radulov, and Galchenyuk have given a pretty honest effort just about every night. I think Byron has given a pretty good effort on most nights, even though I don't think he's cut out to play the top 9. The guys I've been disappointed with up front have been Plekanec, Desharnais, Pacioretty, Shaw, and to a lesser extent, Flynn.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, BigTed3 said:

I would disagree with that. I think Gallagher, Radulov, and Galchenyuk have given a pretty honest effort just about every night. I think Byron has given a pretty good effort on most nights, even though I don't think he's cut out to play the top 9. The guys I've been disappointed with up front have been Plekanec, Desharnais, Pacioretty, Shaw, and to a lesser extent, Flynn.

Agreed. That said, I think that for the most part Plekanec has given a decent effort each game, has been snake-bit at times and does at least provide other facets to his game that the others have not. I would add that Lekonen is doing well enough all things considered. My major concern is that the defense, other than Weber have not been as good as hoped for.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/6/2016 at 0:03 PM, BigTed3 said:

I would disagree with that. I think Gallagher, Radulov, and Galchenyuk have given a pretty honest effort just about every night. I think Byron has given a pretty good effort on most nights, even though I don't think he's cut out to play the top 9. The guys I've been disappointed with up front have been Plekanec, Desharnais, Pacioretty, Shaw, and to a lesser extent, Flynn.

Absolutely agree. 

Im frustrated though because i think this roster actually has a really good shot at a cup but we're completely mishandling them.  This is easily our deepest top 9 since the days of Koivu-Turgeon-Damphouse.   Likewise, despite Weber being a much bigger question mark Long term compared with PK, our defense is pretty decent too but really badly handled in terms of who is playing where. 

I was hopeful that bringing in Muller we might see some 'influence' on the lines but so far either he isnt giving Therrien his 2¢ or MT just isnt listening to it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, maas_art said:

Absolutely agree. 

Im frustrated though because i think this roster actually has a really good shot at a cup but we're completely mishandling them.  This is easily our deepest top 9 since the days of Koivu-Turgeon-Damphouse.   Likewise, despite Weber being a much bigger question mark Long term compared with PK, our defense is pretty decent too but really badly handled in terms of who is playing where. 

I was hopeful that bringing in Muller we might see some 'influence' on the lines but so far either he isnt giving Therrien his 2¢ or MT just isnt listening to it. 

This is where I differ from most of you here, I don't think our top 9 is anything special. I know you have to adjust for era, but we have a bunch of 50-60 point guys basically. damphousse and turgeon were 90-100 pt players.  we have chucky who is a potential 70+ point guy, and radulov who is a legit 70+ point guy who may or may not regain that form....and i would say his form is fine its just if coach will play him like our best player, which it seems to me although he hasnt been benched, he is still behind gallagher/patch on our perceived depth chart.

gallagher god love him for the little bulldog with some skill that he is, is a way undersized 50-60 point player, who generates more points from crashing the net than by johnny geaudreau type skill for a little guy. a guy i want on my team any day, but not a game breaker, and on this team with radu is honestly a 2nd liner.

patchy is also a 60 point guy, who is strictly a trigger and does very little playmaking or chance generating on his own. he uses his great wheels to get open to use his laser shot, and thats his game. again, not a guy you don't want on your team, but not a gamebreaker and although i do class him as a 1st liner in the nhl,. its on the kyle okposo level of 1st liners.

and thats our guys, unless we start developing our kids. 

All that being said, I definitely think there is a way to assemble and deploy these players in a way more effective manner, and that they can produce and more importantly generate more offensive pressure over the course of a game if assembled and deployed properly. that only happens by accident on team foxhole, and the slightest glitch in any success resets it all, so I basically expect nothing to change.

If Muller has 2 cents, coach T doesnt want it

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, jeff33 said:

This is where I differ from most of you here, I don't think our top 9 is anything special. 

I 'd agree with that. I think sometimes we oer estimate how good these players really are

I think the D is even more average

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/1/2016 at 0:23 PM, maas_art said:

Yeah, the top 4 thing doesnt bother me as much - Petry can play his offside pretty well. The problem with moving Petry to 1st pairing (Petry-Weber) is that our 2nd pair becomes much weaker.  Trouba would make it stronger again but only if he was paired with Beaulieu, who, like you said, we would most likely end up losing in the trade in the first place.  

IMHO there's not a fit there. 

Provided Petry is serviceable on the left side I would have zero worries about Trouba paired with Emelin, Barberio, or Markov. He would instantly be the best all around defenseman on the team and he's far better than Beaulieu.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

59 minutes ago, jeff33 said:

This is where I differ from most of you here, I don't think our top 9 is anything special. I know you have to adjust for era, but we have a bunch of 50-60 point guys basically. damphousse and turgeon were 90-100 pt players.  we have chucky who is a potential 70+ point guy, and radulov who is a legit 70+ point guy who may or may not regain that form....and i would say his form is fine its just if coach will play him like our best player, which it seems to me although he hasnt been benched, he is still behind gallagher/patch on our perceived depth chart.

gallagher god love him for the little bulldog with some skill that he is, is a way undersized 50-60 point player, who generates more points from crashing the net than by johnny geaudreau type skill for a little guy. a guy i want on my team any day, but not a game breaker, and on this team with radu is honestly a 2nd liner.

patchy is also a 60 point guy, who is strictly a trigger and does very little playmaking or chance generating on his own. he uses his great wheels to get open to use his laser shot, and thats his game. again, not a guy you don't want on your team, but not a gamebreaker and although i do class him as a 1st liner in the nhl,. its on the kyle okposo level of 1st liners.

Here's the thing though: you can't compare any current NHL player to a former player on the same point scale. Damphousse and Turgeon played in the late 80's (the height of NHL scoring) and the expansion era of the early-mid 90's (when scoring remained high). Here's a graphical depiction of average scoring in the NHL by year:

http://hockeyanalytics.com/Research_files/NHLEras.jpg

This doesn't show recent years but you can see how scoring in the 80's/90's when Turgeon and Damphousse played was 20-40% higher than when most of the current NHL players broke into the league. Damphousse played into the 2000's but he never hit 90 points after 1995-96 (the last year Turgeon also hit that total), whether that was due to his age or due to the NJ Devils trap system becoming the standard style of play teams tried to emulate. Look at Patrick Roy, widely considered by some to be the greatest goalie of all time, or at least one of the top 5-10. Early in his career, he was one of the formidable goalies in the NHL, and he would put up GAA's in the high 2's and even 3's. Yet later in his career, just before he retired, he was putting up fantastic numbers as the league moved into the dead puck era with trap hockey and bigger goalie equipment. In 1995-96, Damphousse finished 20th in league scoring with 94 points, 22 players hit 90, 12 hit 100, and Mario Lemieux won the Art Ross with 161 points. Last season, only one player had more than 90 points; the year before that, Jamie Benn won the Art Ross with 87. It's a different era, and it is simply not reasonable to expect players to score 80-90 points any more.

If you can get 60-70 points out of 3-4 guys (Pacioretty, Galchenyuk, Gallagher, and Radulov for example), that's about the equivalent of having four 90-point scorers 20-30 years ago. I don't know if all of them will hit 60, but I think they'll all get close if they stay healthy, and that's a pretty good top 4. There's no frank star like a Crosby or Kane or Benn or Stamkos, but those are all top-line NHL players, and we have 4 of them. Plekanec is fading, but I wouldn't be surprised to see him hit 50 points by season's end. And we have talent in our system, with Hudon, Ghetto, Lehkonen, McCarron, Scherbak, and so on. I think we simply need to be willing to give some of those guys a chance to put up points, because it's not realistic to think we can acquire top-end talent willy-nilly without giving anything up and to be able to fit that under the cap. In the salary cap era, teams must be able to produce their own talent and squeeze affordable young skill players in under the limits. That's one thing Montreal has failed to do adequately, as Therrien seems to be averse to giving young guys extended chances and Lefebvre is hopeless at this and seems content to lean on veteran journeymen in the AHL as well. Our 3rd and 4th lines are deep and can match up with other teams', so really, what is needed is to give young scorers a true chance and to look for an upgrade at the 2C position. Otherwise, I really like this forward group and in the absence of being able to draft a generational superstar up front, I think the collection of guys we have is more than adequate.

Are there teams in the league with better forwards? Absolutely. But no team has exactly what they want at all positions. Everyone has to make sacrifices somewhere in their line-up to meet the budget or meet the cap, and we're no exception. We simply need to do more with what we have within, and that really comes down to developing younger skill players better and faster. We can debate exactly how good the team is, but I think we should be able to agree that this isn't a team that should have caved as it did without Price. It isn't a team that should have trouble scoring goals and trouble getting the PP to work. Looking at the line-up, I see a group that should be able to contend for the playoffs and a division crown, even if we had a league average starter in goal, be that a Bishop, a Quick, a Halak, a Crawford, or so on. With Price allowing 2 goals or less a game, we should be elite. Yet we're not. We're a mid-level team with Price and we're a cellar-dweller without him, having posted the worst record in the NHL last year after his injury. That isn't right. This line-up is better than what that data suggests, and that to me comes down to bad coaching and bad personnel decisions in developing youngsters and allowing veterans with little skill to play over them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

42 minutes ago, Noob616 said:

Provided Petry is serviceable on the left side I would have zero worries about Trouba paired with Emelin, Barberio, or Markov. He would instantly be the best all around defenseman on the team and he's far better than Beaulieu.

signed 2 yrs in winnipeg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2016-11-06 at 3:03 PM, BigTed3 said:

I would disagree with that. I think Gallagher, Radulov, and Galchenyuk have given a pretty honest effort just about every night. I think Byron has given a pretty good effort on most nights, even though I don't think he's cut out to play the top 9. The guys I've been disappointed with up front have been Plekanec, Desharnais, Pacioretty, Shaw, and to a lesser extent, Flynn.

I was thinking more about one line working together as a unit each game, not just individual players. Lines 1 to 3 always seem to have someone not performing whereas the 3rd line seems to play well every game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On ‎06‎/‎11‎/‎2016 at 3:03 PM, BigTed3 said:

 The guys I've been disappointed with up front have been Plekanec, Desharnais, Pacioretty, Shaw, and to a lesser extent, Flynn.

If MB wanted to change the character of the team maybe he should have thought about trading some of these guys . Yea Max is a 40 goal scorer but none  of them  appear to be difference makers  . Maybe they could have got some youth with energy

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Regis22 said:

If MB wanted to change the character of the team maybe he should have thought about trading some of these guys . Yea Max is a 40 goal scorer but none  of them  appear to be difference makers  . Maybe they could have got some youth with energy

 

 

Totally agree. Pacioretty, DD & Plekanec should be replaced. Naturally I would add coach MT to that list.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Habs=stanleycup said:

Totally agree. Pacioretty, DD & Plekanec should be replaced. Naturally I would add coach MT to that list.

Desharnais should be traded or let go at season's end, no question. I think we can get the same or better play from someone like Hudon or McCarron.

Pacioretty is a bona fide scorer on a bargain contract. It makes little sense to get rid of him, although I would be open to trading him if we could improve ourselves. Pacioretty for Duchene, for example, was a trade floated around here before. I don't think he's captain material, but as a hockey player, he's providing good value on his deal and he is a top-line player.

Plekanec is a tricky situation. If we were paying him 3M a year, he'd be a phenomenal third-line center. The problem is that he's being paid based on how he played 2-3 years ago, and that hurts us if we're tight to the cap. You'd be trading him away for cap space as an asset, not because he provides no value. His play has dropped off, but he still has great value as a two-way center. He just doesn't have 6M value, and that's where the fault lies with MB. Bergevin has a track record of paying players based on how they performed in the past and not what they will give us in the future. He's low-balled players like Pacioretty, Subban, Galchenyuk, and Eller yet overpaid the likes of Desharnais, Emelin, Markov, Shaw, and Plekanec. This is terrible management. Anyone can become GM and say, you scored x number of points over the last two years, therefore you get this amount of money. What it takes is a GM who can say, Plekanec's numbers have dropped slightly, his possession stats are down despite Eller taking some of the tougher match-ups away from him, therefore I can foresee a slight drop-off in play or Markov had a productive year offensively but his numbers were largely driven by Subban and without Subban next to him, he was a lot weaker, so let's not pay him like he's a #1 defenceman. Bergevin hasn't done that, and that's why we're in the predicmant we're in scrounging for savings to find a 2C and a top pairing left-handed defenceman.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, BigTed3 said:

Desharnais should be traded or let go at season's end, no question. I think we can get the same or better play from someone like Hudon or McCarron.

Pacioretty is a bona fide scorer on a bargain contract. It makes little sense to get rid of him, although I would be open to trading him if we could improve ourselves. Pacioretty for Duchene, for example, was a trade floated around here before. I don't think he's captain material, but as a hockey player, he's providing good value on his deal and he is a top-line player.

Plekanec is a tricky situation. If we were paying him 3M a year, he'd be a phenomenal third-line center. The problem is that he's being paid based on how he played 2-3 years ago, and that hurts us if we're tight to the cap. You'd be trading him away for cap space as an asset, not because he provides no value. His play has dropped off, but he still has great value as a two-way center. He just doesn't have 6M value, and that's where the fault lies with MB. Bergevin has a track record of paying players based on how they performed in the past and not what they will give us in the future. He's low-balled players like Pacioretty, Subban, Galchenyuk, and Eller yet overpaid the likes of Desharnais, Emelin, Markov, Shaw, and Plekanec. This is terrible management. Anyone can become GM and say, you scored x number of points over the last two years, therefore you get this amount of money. What it takes is a GM who can say, Plekanec's numbers have dropped slightly, his possession stats are down despite Eller taking some of the tougher match-ups away from him, therefore I can foresee a slight drop-off in play or Markov had a productive year offensively but his numbers were largely driven by Subban and without Subban next to him, he was a lot weaker, so let's not pay him like he's a #1 defenceman. Bergevin hasn't done that, and that's why we're in the predicmant we're in scrounging for savings to find a 2C and a top pairing left-handed defenceman.

Bang on the money on the assessment of both the players and the management.

The really interesting thing is that when MB took over we had a wealth of left wingers and left defensman (from the Gainey-Gauthier era) but were really weak on the right side, both forwards and defensman.

Look at our roster now, we have too many right wingers and right defensman and are really weak on the left defense (so so on left wing, although MT hasnt been using some of our LW talent in the minors).


Says to me we have a GM that fills one hole by making another. He can assess a problem & realize it needs to be fixed, but does so without maintaining strength in areas we are not problematic at - or at the expense of those areas.  Its a bit like the PK/Weber trade. If you're Marc Bergevin and you decide we absolutely positively need a guy like Weber, thats one thing but PK should have been untouchable. Instead we lost one of the best defensmen in the league and gained... one of the best defensemen in the league (that plays a different type of game).  Makes no sense. 

This is a troubling trend. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, habs1952 said:

I was thinking more about one line working together as a unit each game, not just individual players. Lines 1 to 3 always seem to have someone not performing whereas the 4th line seems to play well every game.

Should have read 4th line.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Radulov-Galchenyuk on 1st line is the right move. But move Lehkonen to LW and move Radulov to his natural right side.

Gallagher moves to 2nd line.  Nothing against his playing form but Radu is more effective on the right in the 1st line.  Let Gallagher play with Pacioretty and Pleky.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Galchenyuk-Radulov is clearly working well. And I think Pleky has shown more bounce since being reunited with Gallagher, even though it hasn't helped Gallagher to be away from Chucky. Nevertheless, I think 3 of those 4 players have benefited from the swap, and I think Gallagher can play with anyone. Pacioretty, however, has seemed off his game, and I think the next goal has to be to jumpstart him again. So my next move, if I were MT, would be to put Pacioretty up on the 1st line and give him the two best players to play with. I'd try

Pacioretty-Galchenyuk-Radulov

Lehkonen-Plekanec-Gallagher (and would love to see Hudon in Lehkonen's spot until he's back)

Danault-Desharnais-Carr

Byron-Mitchell-Shaw

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, BigTed3 said:

Pacioretty-Galchenyuk-Radulov

Lehkonen-Plekanec-Gallagher (and would love to see Hudon in Lehkonen's spot until he's back)

Danault-Desharnais-Carr

Byron-Mitchell-Shaw

With our current roster this is almost perfect to me.  Once everyone is healthy, id go:

 

Patches - Galchenyuk - Radulov
Andrighetto - Plekanec - Gallagher
Lehkonen - Danault - Carr
Byron -Mitchell-Shaw

Its a pretty decent group, albeit with shaw making way too much for a 4th liner and DD needing to be either moved or waved.  I dont dislike DD but with this lineup you could actually put pretty much any line out against any other line - which is something we need to do since MT seems unable to effectively match on the fly. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lines at practice according to RDS:

Byron-Galchenyuk-Radulov
Andrighetto-Plekanec-Gallagher
Pacioretty-Danault-Shaw/Desharnais
Carr-Mitchell-Flynn

Emelin-Weber
Markov-Petry
Beaulieu-Pateryn

Price
Montoya

 

They're also saying there's a good chance Desharnais will be a healthy scratch against LA.

 

http://www.rds.ca/hockey/canadiens/canadiens-david-desharnais-laisse-pour-compte-jeudi-face-aux-kings-de-los-angeles-1.3656761

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, ChiLla said:

Lines at practice according to RDS:

Byron-Galchenyuk-Radulov
Andrighetto-Plekanec-Gallagher
Pacioretty-Danault-Shaw/Desharnais
Carr-Mitchell-Flynn

Emelin-Weber
Markov-Petry
Beaulieu-Pateryn

Price
Montoya

 

They're also saying there's a good chance Desharnais will be a healthy scratch against LA.

 

http://www.rds.ca/hockey/canadiens/canadiens-david-desharnais-laisse-pour-compte-jeudi-face-aux-kings-de-los-angeles-1.3656761

I had to read that twice!!!!. :)

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...