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

2016-17 Habs Lines


BigTed3
 Share

Recommended Posts

Pretty sure guys drafted directly from the CHL can't go to the AHL until they're 20 or turning 20 that calendar year (like Beaulieu + Scherbak) but guys drafted from different leagues who then go to the CHL are eligible to leave and go to the AHL whenever. Happens often with guys from the USNDP or Europe. Recent example off the top of my head as a Hab who was eligible to leave was Tinordi, he never did but played 09-10 with the US development program, drafted in 2010 and then spent the following season with London. Would have been eligible to leave in 2011 at 19 if we thought he was ready for pro hockey.

The NHL and CHL have an agreement in place that stipulates if a player drafted from one of the three leagues that make up the CHL doesn’t join his NHL club at the beginning of a season, that he must return to the major junior team he was selected from. The AHL is not an option for CHL players until they turn 20.

The key wording here is "drafted by the CHL" ... that includes Euro players taking in the CHL Import Draft

(sorry for font)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If sergachev makes the team who moves on the left side to make room markov emelin or nate

Beaulieu should be a lock & stay in this team's long term plans.

I would move Markov in a heartbeat if a team offered a decent return - although now that we're missing PK we may need Markov for the PP. If we could afford to play him 3rd pairing minutes + PP he may still be a very useful player, but if we play him 1st pairing minutes, MMW it will be a disappointing season for Markie.

Emelin still seems to be coveted in the West surprisingly. I still wonder if we could have done an Emelin + _____ for Hall deal, knowing what the oilers got for him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Emelin still seems to be coveted in the West surprisingly. I still wonder if we could have done an Emelin + _____ for Hall deal, knowing what the oilers got for him.

Emelin's penchant for hitting is why he's coveted in the West. I don't think the Oilers though would have gone for just Emelin + ? ... it would have probably been Emelin + Beaulieu or Emelin + Juulsen .... Emelin to be the "stay at home" guy and another dman with some offensive upside.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

-With Kirk Muller back behind the bench, and some new faces in the lineup, there is reason to believe that the Habs can once again boast a solid power play.

It isn't exactly a secret that the Canadiens power play has struggled for some time. Interestingly enough, the last time it was any good was when Kirk Muller was behind the bench. Well, he's back, and he has some new toys to play with when it comes to structuring a man advantage.

The big piece he'll probably have some fun with is the incoming Shea Weber, the man who boasts arguably the hardest shot in the world. The loss of P.K. Subban hurts for sure, but with Muller pulling the strategy strings, they have all the pieces to form some very dangerous units. So, what will those look like?

The biggest part of the equation is Kirk Muller. He is well known as a power play mastermind, so they won't be nearly as much of a paper tiger that they have been in recent years. I'd get into systematic options, but the simple fact is that I have a whole lot of faith in his ability to handle that.

And a dangerous power play would be huge for the Canadiens. With a healthy Carey Price, all they really need to do is provide the run support, and the best way to do that is on the power play. It is arguably the one thing in their recent successful seasons that prevented them from being true contenders.

One thing I feel very confident in predicting is that the power play will get better. I am excited, and I think that most Habs fans should be.

http://www.habseyesontheprize.com/2016/7/9/12131822/montreal-canadiens-power-play-lineup-kirk-muller-shea-weber-pacioretty-galchenyuk-habs

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, sure. But last season wasn't just Price going down, it was a whole lot of bad luck in general. We were almost certainly going to be better in this upcoming season no matter what. Muller will help a lot, sure. But just like after the disastrous 2011-12 season, it'll probably be a mistake to draw significant conclusions from a rebound season.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, sure. But last season wasn't just Price going down, it was a whole lot of bad luck in general. We were almost certainly going to be better in this upcoming season no matter what. Muller will help a lot, sure. But just like after the disastrous 2011-12 season, it'll probably be a mistake to draw significant conclusions from a rebound season.

Why? we had a few good seasons in a row after that awful year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Regis2

so? is he not part of the team? how would jersey have done without Brodeur? or us in 86-93 without Roy? we have the best goalie the team is built around that seems normal to me.

Yes he's part of the team

But if you lose one player your "team " shouldn't be horrible.

Last year showed that the Habs are nothing without Price

A good team should be able to play good even with their star player out of the lineup

Last year's team couldn't do that

Link to comment
Share on other sites

so? is he not part of the team? how would jersey have done without Brodeur? or us in 86-93 without Roy? we have the best goalie the team is built around that seems normal to me.

Last year showed that the Habs are nothing without Price

A good team should be able to play good even with their star player out of the lineup

That's really it, and it's been gone over in a lot of ways. This team does not play well, it benefits from otherworldly goaltending. When it gets league average goaltending, it isn't a league average team, it's a significantly below average team. This an is objective statement of fact. Naturally there'll be discussion and disagreement about why this happens to be true, but it is true.

That said, if we want to accept the premise that the Canadiens are built around Carey Price, last year rather obviously shows that that isn't a good idea in the modern NHL.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

so what to do? we have the best goalie.......trade him too? LOL it is what it is we were pretty thin till Price came along really the best player from before is Marky and lets face it this is probably his last year or pretty close to it. the other good players on our team came after the arrival of Price so the team for better or worse got built around him and when he got hurt we had no proper backup lets face it Condon did what he could but he was never going to be the answer and he was in net for most of the year. with even a fair goaltender of NHL level and a fair Power play we would have been ok not great but ok. in this league if you are missing your best player that is pretty good! so the gm goes out and makes some changes to fix what he felt was missing, which was a power play coach to get it working a power play point man, as he obviously felt PK was not that guy for us, weather he is right or wrong about that is a sore point for most but he did what he felt he had to do. he got a right winger with plenty of talent who may or may not pan out but he is low risk with a one year contract. the moves are pretty good if Webber can come in and perform at a high level which should be no problem for 3-4 years at which point we can trade him off and either get someone else or our new young russian will be the top dog.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

so? is he not part of the team? how would jersey have done without Brodeur? or us in 86-93 without Roy? we have the best goalie the team is built around that seems normal to me.

Funny you should mention Brodeur. He had one season (2007? 2008?) where he had a major injury (he was usually pretty healthy) - i think he was out close to 4 months. If memory serves, the Devils came first in their division that year.

Losing your best player should hurt, yes. It should not mean a total collapse though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think that's the crux of it. We are definitely a good team with Carey Price in net, and Price's worth is 100% considered when evaluating the worth of the team. But it's clear that the rest of the team, despite having some good parts, under-performed last year (we had the worst record in the league from mid-December on). But it's also true that the rest of the team under-performed for the two years before that as well. Again, analysis shows that if you replace Price with the 15th best starter in the league (Bishop and Quick were tied for 15th best save percentage last year), we would not have made the playoffs. So if we had gone with Condon or Tokarski or so on two seasons ago, we would have also likely ended up in the basement of the standings. The point is that the team without Price is not a playoff team and is more comparable to squads like Arizona and Buffalo and Calgary. That's a problem.

So sure, you can mask that problem by having Price play at an all-star level. But Price playing well should not be mutually exclusive from the rest of the team being improved. Why should we accept guys who can't score and defencemen who can't clear the zone and a coach who can't develop a successful system or powerplay? If we think about this mathematically, let's say you rate your coach, your offence, your defence, and your goaltending each on a scale of 1 to 10 and then add up all the points to get a team's net worth. And let's say that a level of 25 is about what's needed to get into the playoffs. So maybe our coach performed at a level 3, our O at a level 5, our defence at a level 7, and Price at a 10. Add that up and we're a 25 and we make the playoffs. But that doesn't mean we should be happy with that. That doesn't mean we shouldn't strive to be a perfect 40. So if you have obvious deficiencies that you can fix, you should still do it, despite having Price to make them less apparent.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Price is at an age where he's very possibly and even probably exiting his physical prime, you never know how goalies will age. There's also the fact that year to year, it's an unpredictable position and there's plenty of luck involved. Even if we assume Price comes back from his injury issues at the exact same level he was at when he got hurt, there's still a pretty wide range of SV%s you can expect and if he were to fall to say, .922, which is still a solid year, we'd be in trouble.

Also, being a goaltending reliant team that gets decidedly outplayed seems to very rarely yield a Cup win. It'll make us good through the year but does anyone view us as serious Cup threats? Even when Price carried us to 110 points, near the top of the league, did anyone honestly consider us one of the top 5-7 teams most likely to actually win the Cup?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

so? is he not part of the team? how would jersey have done without Brodeur? or us in 86-93 without Roy? we have the best goalie the team is built around that seems normal to me.

You can be built around a player, so to speak, without being a complete tire fire when he's not there to save you. If we were a .500 team without Price last year it would be moderately concerning, maybe imply we rely a little too much on him but it's completely embarrassing for us to be the type of team we are without him and it's basically impossible to win a Cup like that.

To answer your question on the Devils without Brodeur, in 08-09 he only played 30 games due to injury and bare in mind this is not the peak Devils, still a good team, not anywhere near what they were in the early 2000s but Scott Clemmensen, who retired with a .905 career SV%, went 25-13-1 for them and they finished with 106 points and won their division.

It's completely logical to rely heavily on your best players, if we were a serious Cup contender losing Price could reasonably take us from that level to being, at worst, a fringe playoff team. Having no Price = being the worst team in the NHL is honestly a testament to how far away we are. If he somehow leads this team to a Cup playing as they've played the last 3 seasons, it's a greater feat than 86 or 93 for Patrick, by a lot.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes we had no Price last season , but we had ALOT more people missing in action too...

No Petry
No Gally for awhile
ect
ect
ect
Most of the team were dropping like flys all season long... we had 4 ("FOUR") regulars go all 82 games ..... FOUR ! :blink:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes we had no Price last season , but we had ALOT more people missing in action too...

No Petry

No Gally for awhile

ect

ect

ect

Most of the team were dropping like flys all season long... we had 4 ("FOUR") regulars go all 82 games ..... FOUR ! :blink:

We were unreasonably healthy the year before, injuries do happen. By the time we lost Petry the season was already a write off. Gallagher and Price were basically our only injuries while we were completely spinning out in December and January.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Regis2

Yes we had no Price last season , but we had ALOT more people missing in action too...

No Petry

No Gally for awhile

ect

ect

ect

Most of the team were dropping like flys all season long... we had 4 ("FOUR") regulars go all 82 games ..... FOUR ! :blink:

Petry went down in February - the season was lost around Xmas ( IMO ) the team was floundering

BG missed the moth of December -

The team was just awful when price went down

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We were unreasonably healthy the year before, injuries do happen. By the time we lost Petry the season was already a write off. Gallagher and Price were basically our only injuries while we were completely spinning out in December and January.

To boot, at the time he went down, I would argue that Pacioretty, Galchenyuk, and Plekanec were all better players and more valuable to the team. Subban and Price were also without a doubt more valuable than Gallagher. So while Gallagher has lots of heart, I'd argue he was probably our 6th most valuable player to start last season... if a team falls apart missing its 4th best forward and 6th most valuable player, it's still a problem.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To boot, at the time he went down, I would argue that Pacioretty, Galchenyuk, and Plekanec were all better players and more valuable to the team. Subban and Price were also without a doubt more valuable than Gallagher. So while Gallagher has lots of heart, I'd argue he was probably our 6th most valuable player to start last season... if a team falls apart missing its 4th best forward and 6th most valuable player, it's still a problem.

The kicker being that we're not talking about a mediocre stretch, we're talking about an unfathomably bad stretch. A stretch worse than I expect we'll see from the Vegas expansion team in their first couple of years. It's pretty easy to use injuries as an excuse for going 10-13-1 or something but there's no excuse for 2 guys (and really only Price) being that extreme of a difference maker.

I'll acknowledge that there was also some bad luck at play in terms of percentages and we weren't maybe truly THAT bad but I don't know how much more evidence that we're not going to contend for a Cup relying on a goalie the way we do.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Continuing a thought.

Markov - Weber or Emelin - Weber will both be disastrous imho. If we can all see this, i sure hope Therrien can too.

I dont like the idea of any R shot with Weber - we're really nicely balanced on the right side so I wouldnt try Petry, Pateryn or Juulsen there

I stopped to think about this further, and I had a thought: we have to insulate not one but two defencemen, Markov and Emelin. Do we put them together to play very limited bottom pair minutes to keep the other pairs functional?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Continuing a thought.

I stopped to think about this further, and I had a thought: we have to insulate not one but two defencemen, Markov and Emelin. Do we put them together to play very limited bottom pair minutes to keep the other pairs functional?

What we would try logically, is highly unlikely with MT. He floats his own boat. He has used that pairing in the past though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What we would try logically, is highly unlikely with MT. He floats his own boat. He has used that pairing in the past though.

He did, and it was the stuff of nightmares. But maybe keeping them together with single-digit 5-on-5 minutes is the way to keep the other pairs afloat.

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...