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

2017-18 Habs Lines


BigTed3
 Share

Recommended Posts

33 minutes ago, jennifer_rocket said:

Would we find more success if Galchenyuk centered Lehkonen and Hudon rather than Tomas?

Or AG in place of Gallagher on line 1. AG needs to play in the top 6, we're wasting his talent playing him with Danault and Shaw. The Plekanec line is actually getting the best chances of all the lines as is, so I'd prefer to leave them alone for now. As I suggested last night,

Pacioretty-Drouin-Galchenyuk

Hudon-Plekanec-Lehkonen

Byron-Danault-Gallagher

Hemsky-DLR-Shaw or DLR-Mitchell-Shaw

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, jennifer_rocket said:

Would we find more success if Galchenyuk centered Lehkonen and Hudon rather than Tomas?

Teds lines look pretty good to me. You could also flip Danault and Plekanec IMO. Make the third the second and second the third.

I get how some want Galchenyuk to be that center he was hoped to be. That said, up until last season and the end of the season before, he has mostly played the wing. I honestly think that both Lehkonen and Hudon are still mostly unproven and therefore I am not sure that would be the right fit. I would, however, like to see him play right wing on the first line and be given the ice-time that goes with it. 

As for Tomas, unfortunately he has been the designated #3 center used predominantly in a checking role for lack of what management has considered a suitable replacement. He deserves better IMHO. And when it comes down to it, is the most experienced of all centers the team has with the exception of Torrey Mitchell who is likely only a 4th line player or perhaps 3rd line center in a crunch..

I believe the Drouin experiment will not be as good as expected.

Part of the problem, I think, is that Claude Julien is being a bit greedy wanting to roll 4 potential scoring lines, therefore not loading up the best elements with the best available. 
 

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'll go through this exercise again, to pinpoint where the holes are... let's figure out which spot in the line-up each player should theoretically be playing.

- Pacioretty: 1st line LW, without much doubt. I'm not his biggest fan nor his biggest hater, and while I think he's overrated defensively, his offensive instincts as a scorer are vastly underrated in many circles. He's a bona fide NHL 1st liner.

- Galchenyuk: 1st liner. We can debate whether he should be a center or winger, but his numbers over the past couple of years say he's a first line player when he's played at center. His point totals could be better, but his production per ice time was best on the team last year.

- Drouin: 1st liner. Now this is a bit of a stretch, not because of talent, but because he doesn't have as much history to judge him effectively. I have no doubt he's a top 6 player. I can see the argument for his being a 1nd line player, but I think the stretches of production he had with Tampa combined with the pedigree and skill level we've seen displayed make him a 1st liner. I do think it'll take time to see him develop into a 1C, so you have to accept the growing pains (which didn't happen with AG), but I think he gets there. Unlike AG, he seems to have the support of the organization, and that helps.

- Gallagher: 2nd line RW. Some see his scoring ability, some see him as an energy guy, but again, the numbers suggest his production is good enough to be a 2nd liner. Again, we can argue about how likely he is to stay healthy, but when healthy, he's a 2RW.

- Lehkonen: 2nd line winger. Like Drouin, we're lacking the sample size, but he really came on last year and he's started this season playing like an absolute beast. The points will come if he continues to play as he is.

- Hudon: 3rd line LW... the ceiling is here for him to be a 2nd liner, but unlike Lehkonen and Drouin, I don't think we've seen enough to give him the benefit of the doubt yet. Good talent, good heart, just remains to be seen if it will translate in the long run.

- Danault: 3rd line C. I didn't believe he would deliver at the start of last year, but he's been an excellent replacement for Eller.

- Plekanec: 3rd line C. An overpaid one, but he's still good enough defensively to be a 3C, just no proof that he can be more than that at this stage in his career until proven otherwise.

- Byron: 4th line LW. Tough one, because he's scored well enough to be a 3rd liner, but he's also done that after not scoring that well earlier in his career, so I'm just not sold on his being a permanent 3rd liner just yet. He can play there for stretches, but I'm more comfortable with his being a really good 4th liner.

- Shaw: 4th line RW. Some people have him as a 3rd liner, but he just doesn't have the skill and he takes too many bad penalties IMO. Like Byron, he's a very good 4th liner, but I just can't elevate him higher than that in a winning line-up.

- DLR and Mitchell: 4th line centers. Adequate for those roles.

 

So when I look at that, I count three potential 1st liners, two 2nd liners, three 3rd liners, and four 4th's. We're not far off, but we're a really good 2C away from an ideal forward core. One could easily slot JD or AG down a line into the center role, but then you need to find a 1st line RW instead. But I do see a lot of skill here and very good bottom 6 depth. Ultimately, this isn't the biggest concern on our team.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Now let's go over the same exercise for the D:

- Weber and Petry: two 1B's... Weber has the reputation, the shot, the PP ability, the heavy hitting. Petry has the better puck-carrying ability and vision and ability to pinch in. They both have flaws with their games and neither guy is a top-15 defenceman in the league. But both guys are above average as top 4 righties. I'll package them together and say that we have a lower-tier 1st pairing guy and an above-average 2nd pairing guy in whatever order you want to put them in.

- Mete: 2nd pairing lefty... really impressive but too young to be given the big minutes and match-ups of a true 1st pairing guy. He's ideally a 2nd pairing guy and would be a great complement to Petry on that duo.

- Benn: 3rd pairing right side. He excelled on the right side last year. He's struggled this season, but he's played most of his minutes on the left. So why not move him back to the right and fill that hole?

- Davidson: 7th D man. Maybe he becomes a 3rd-pairing guy, but right now, he's not consistent enough and is best-suited to being a 7th guy.

- Morrow: 7th D man. More offensive upside than Davidson, but more defensive miscues. Same end result.

- Alzner: 6th-7th defenceman. The numbers suggest he's a 3rd pairing guy, but thus far, he's been really slow and I'm not sure he's any better than Emelin and maybe worse. He could be a 3rd-pairing lefty for us, but then I'd feel like we couldn't pair him with Davidson or Benn. We'd have to hide his lack of puck skill by playing him with a guy who has more offensive potential, and even Petry hasn't been good enough to overcome that.

- Streit: AHL. I don't see anything that tells me he should be in the NHL right now. Not any more.

 

So that leaves us with

??? - Weber

Mete-Petry

??? - Benn

That's two big holes, both of which really need to be good puck movers to fit into our line-up. We don't have those guys on the roster right now. Maybe Gelinas or Jerabek could fill the 3rd-pairing one, but they've been relegated behind lesser players right now. And the other things which make this a much bigger problem than the forward corps are

1. D men, especially top pairing guys, play bigger minutes. We're talking about having to find a guy who can play 23-26 minutes a night to play with Weber.

2. Mistakes by defenceman usually end up being more costly, so having a Streit or Alzner or Morrow in there hurts us more than having a lesser forward (like a Flynn or Terry or so on). None of those guys may be bring much to the line-up, but the lesser-skilled defencemen are harder to hide in the line-up and hurt us more by being there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Pacioretty - Drouin - Galchenyuk

Byron - Plekanec - Gallagher

Hudon - Danault - Shaw

Byron - De La Rose - Hemsky

Mitchell

OR

Pacioretty - Plekanec - Gallagher

Drouin - Danault - Galchenyuk

Hudon - Shaw - Lehkonen

Byron - De La Rose - Mitchell

Hemsky

 

Mete-Weber

Shlemko - Petry

Jerabek - Lernout

Davidson

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Ravadak said:

How about a defence core off say

Sergachev - Subban

Mete - Petry

Beulieu/Markov/ - Jullsen

Mete looks really good, Sergachev looks like he will be a super star

Gonna take some major trades to make that happen

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/9/2017 at 7:42 AM, BigTed3 said:

Or AG in place of Gallagher on line 1. AG needs to play in the top 6, we're wasting his talent playing him with Danault and Shaw. The Plekanec line is actually getting the best chances of all the lines as is, so I'd prefer to leave them alone for now. As I suggested last night,

Pacioretty-Drouin-Galchenyuk

Hudon-Plekanec-Lehkonen

Byron-Danault-Gallagher

Hemsky-DLR-Shaw or DLR-Mitchell-Shaw

 

I agree that Plekanec's line has looked good but so have others & no one is finishing.  Id take your idea to the next level & try:

Pacioretty - Drouin - Galchenyuk
Lekhonen - Hudon - Gallagher

Byron - Danault - Shaw
DLR - Plekanec - Mitchell/McCarron

You dont really end up with clear 1, 2, 3 or 4 lines - Plekanec's line or Danault's line would both be shut-down lines.  The Hudon line is small, no doubt, but all fast, feisty players.  No matter what we do though, we need to get Chucky into the top 6 and I *think* he'd complement Drouin really really well to be honest.  

 

On defense I dont know what the heck id do. I hope that Schlemko gives us some options but honestly we're looking at a 19 year old kid and a journeyman defensmen as our saviours for our top 2 LD spots. :(

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The whole Galchenyuk story ranges from being silly to utterly ridiculous. You have a skilled player who has had success playing on the top line before and who is not producing playing with plugs in the bottom 6. You have a top 6 that is not producing goals right now. It seems like an obvious solution to move AG back up to the top line, help him produce, and help the offence turn things around. I just don't get it, and the only clear explanation for this that makes any sense is that the organization dislikes Galchenyuk the same way they went to no ends to put down Subban and eventually trade him.

Who are our top 6 most skilled forwards, regardless of position?

- Pacioretty

- Drouin

- Galchenyuk

- Hudon

- Lehkonen

- Gallagher

 

So if the team is having trouble scoring, the natural solution should be to group your top 6 offensive players in your top 6. We can argue about who should be at center or how good each player is defensively and so on, but the fact is that AG has one of the lowest expected goals against rates on the team thus far. And he has been the most electric offensive forward on the squad for the past two years. Either he needs to be on the right of Pacioretty-Drouin or he needs to be centering the 2nd line. So either

Pacioretty-Drouin-Galchenyuk

Lehkonen-Hudon-Gallagher

 

or

 

Pacioretty-Drouin-Lehkonen

Hudon-Galchenyuk-Gallagher

 

Anything else really just doesn't seem legit at this point. The bottom 6 seems like it should be

Byron-Danault-Shaw

DLR-Plekanec-Hemsky

but I don't see any reason AG should be back on the 4th line and not even the 3rd. It's flabbergasting how badly he gets treated, yet we see guys like Pacioretty and Drouin and Shaw and Danault seemingly given free passes despite the fact they're playing poorly at times too. We saw how mistreating and undervaluing Subban worked out for the club. And we saw what Claude Julien putting Tyler Seguin on the 4th line did for Boston. Whether you plan on keeping or trading AG, someone needs to step in and stop wasting his talent and devaluing him as a player.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

49 minutes ago, BigTed3 said:

The whole Galchenyuk story ranges from being silly to utterly ridiculous. You have a skilled player who has had success playing on the top line before and who is not producing playing with plugs in the bottom 6. You have a top 6 that is not producing goals right now. It seems like an obvious solution to move AG back up to the top line, help him produce, and help the offence turn things around. I just don't get it, and the only clear explanation for this that makes any sense is that the organization dislikes Galchenyuk the same way they went to no ends to put down Subban and eventually trade him.

Who are our top 6 most skilled forwards, regardless of position?

- Pacioretty

- Drouin

- Galchenyuk

- Hudon

- Lehkonen

- Gallagher

 

So if the team is having trouble scoring, the natural solution should be to group your top 6 offensive players in your top 6. We can argue about who should be at center or how good each player is defensively and so on, but the fact is that AG has one of the lowest expected goals against rates on the team thus far. And he has been the most electric offensive forward on the squad for the past two years. Either he needs to be on the right of Pacioretty-Drouin or he needs to be centering the 2nd line. So either

Pacioretty-Drouin-Galchenyuk

Lehkonen-Hudon-Gallagher

 

or

 

Pacioretty-Drouin-Lehkonen

Hudon-Galchenyuk-Gallagher

 

Anything else really just doesn't seem legit at this point. The bottom 6 seems like it should be

Byron-Danault-Shaw

DLR-Plekanec-Hemsky

but I don't see any reason AG should be back on the 4th line and not even the 3rd. It's flabbergasting how badly he gets treated, yet we see guys like Pacioretty and Drouin and Shaw and Danault seemingly given free passes despite the fact they're playing poorly at times too. We saw how mistreating and undervaluing Subban worked out for the club. And we saw what Claude Julien putting Tyler Seguin on the 4th line did for Boston. Whether you plan on keeping or trading AG, someone needs to step in and stop wasting his talent and devaluing him as a player.

 

You could even do

Pacioretty - Drouin - Lekhonen
Galchenyuk- Hudon - Gallagher    
 

But I agree, those are the 6 guys who should be in our top 6.  
Its nuts. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

imagine how this is effecting AG his game and how he deals with this, could be some of the reason for his poor game, i mean no ones played well yet, could possibly move anyone down for poor play, this is like suban all over again, only problem is you cant move him if he has no value

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, BigTed3 said:

The whole Galchenyuk story ranges from being silly to utterly ridiculous. You have a skilled player who has had success playing on the top line before and who is not producing playing with plugs in the bottom 6. You have a top 6 that is not producing goals right now. It seems like an obvious solution to move AG back up to the top line, help him produce, and help the offence turn things around. I just don't get it, and the only clear explanation for this that makes any sense is that the organization dislikes Galchenyuk the same way they went to no ends to put down Subban and eventually trade him.

Who are our top 6 most skilled forwards, regardless of position?

- Pacioretty

- Drouin

- Galchenyuk

- Hudon

- Lehkonen

- Gallagher

 

So if the team is having trouble scoring, the natural solution should be to group your top 6 offensive players in your top 6. We can argue about who should be at center or how good each player is defensively and so on, but the fact is that AG has one of the lowest expected goals against rates on the team thus far. And he has been the most electric offensive forward on the squad for the past two years. Either he needs to be on the right of Pacioretty-Drouin or he needs to be centering the 2nd line. So either

Pacioretty-Drouin-Galchenyuk

Lehkonen-Hudon-Gallagher

 

or

 

Pacioretty-Drouin-Lehkonen

Hudon-Galchenyuk-Gallagher

 

Anything else really just doesn't seem legit at this point. The bottom 6 seems like it should be

Byron-Danault-Shaw

DLR-Plekanec-Hemsky

but I don't see any reason AG should be back on the 4th line and not even the 3rd. It's flabbergasting how badly he gets treated, yet we see guys like Pacioretty and Drouin and Shaw and Danault seemingly given free passes despite the fact they're playing poorly at times too. We saw how mistreating and undervaluing Subban worked out for the club. And we saw what Claude Julien putting Tyler Seguin on the 4th line did for Boston. Whether you plan on keeping or trading AG, someone needs to step in and stop wasting his talent and devaluing him as a player.

 

Captain Pacioretty?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, habs1952 said:

Captain Pacioretty?

Pacioretty said today he didn't think Galchenyuk was upset about playing on the 4th line or unhappy with being a Hab (although Pacioretty also said that there was no problem between the team and Subban)... so I ask, if it's a non-issue, then why doesn't Pacioretty go play with Mitchell and Shaw and let's all see how well he produces in that situation... would love to see the reaction to either Max or Drouin being put on the 4th line and yanked off the first PP wave while Hemsky stays there and being given 10-12 minutes a game of ice time. Would people accept that? Would people blame the player for not producing in that role? Or would people clamor for the player to be put back where he belongs and accuse the coaching/management of making absurd decisions? Because that's what's happening to Galchenyuk. He's being demoralized and minimized and then accused of not contributing when he's not being put in a position to succeed. AG has more of a proven track record than Drouin and neither guy has really done that much to start the season. So why is one guy the 1C and the other languishing at the bottom of the line-up? Complete double standard. And I say that not because I have something against Max or Drouin, I just think that Galchenyuk should be given the same opportunity those two guys are getting.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, BigTed3 said:

Pacioretty said today he didn't think Galchenyuk was upset about playing on the 4th line or unhappy with being a Hab (although Pacioretty also said that there was no problem between the team and Subban)... so I ask, if it's a non-issue, then why doesn't Pacioretty go play with Mitchell and Shaw and let's all see how well he produces in that situation... would love to see the reaction to either Max or Drouin being put on the 4th line and yanked off the first PP wave while Hemsky stays there and being given 10-12 minutes a game of ice time. Would people accept that? Would people blame the player for not producing in that role? Or would people clamor for the player to be put back where he belongs and accuse the coaching/management of making absurd decisions? Because that's what's happening to Galchenyuk. He's being demoralized and minimized and then accused of not contributing when he's not being put in a position to succeed. AG has more of a proven track record than Drouin and neither guy has really done that much to start the season. So why is one guy the 1C and the other languishing at the bottom of the line-up? Complete double standard. And I say that not because I have something against Max or Drouin, I just think that Galchenyuk should be given the same opportunity those two guys are getting.

if only people outside these boards cared, maybe we should be messaging molson himself, might actually get something done

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • H_T_L locked this topic
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

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