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

State of the Habs


Recommended Posts

10 hours ago, Graeme-1 said:

I actually think caperns had the better comparison, just comparing total points in a career is never my favorite: I'll take 10 forty goal seasons over 40 ten goal seasons any day.  This is kind of similar to the HOF argument for guys like Bure and Lindros who didn't have great career totals but were dominant when the played (I'm in the pro-hall-of-fame camp)

Galchenyk gave us a couple decent years as a teenager while Forsberg was in Europe and the AHL (mostly) - that's some amount of value I suppose, but I don't think the fact we brought him up earlier really makes him a better or worse pick - at most perhaps he was more NHL ready? In the four years both have been full-time NHLers, Forseberg has statistically been pretty clearly the better players (especially accounting for goals being more valuable than assists)

Basically f you told gave me a time machine and told me Galcnhenyk spending two more years in junior meant he'd have put up Forseberg's points the last 4 years, I'd take that deal in a second.

I think you're right in the sense that I would take 10 40 goal seasons over 40 10 goal seasons too.  But the rest I'd argue there are some disagreements.  Let's start with the fact that Galchenyuk was an almost 50 points scorer by his third season and almost 60 by his fourth.  And the only reason he hit those late was because his first season was shortened and he got injured in his second.  Last year he got injured again but still put up 44 points.  He did this playing 14 to 15 minutes on the third and fourth lines with no wingers worth mentioning.  I would argue that he succeeded to an extent despite the adversities he faced.  I'd actually say seeing how many road blocks we threw at him, he's a bit ahead of where I'd expected him to be (though not nearly the player he could be).

Forsberg on the other hand, was put in a position to succeed as soon as he stepped into the NHL, like a well managed team does.  He was put on the top line, got plenty of minutes, PP minutes, good linemates, the whole nine yards.  If he was drafted by Montreal would he be in the same boat as he is now?  Or vice versa with Galchenyuk.

The worst part of the whole Galchenyuk saga is, your question on leaving him in the juniors doesn't apply.  In his case it was either Montreal or Sarnia.  He has nothing to learn in Sarnia.  And the next year it would have been Hamilton.  I would say this.  Given our farm system, I'd prefer he played for Sarnia instead of Hamilton/St. John's/Laval.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would agree that Forsberg is the better player right now today as we speak. For one game or one season, I'm taking Forsberg over Galchenyuk. But that's not what we should be judging Trevor Timmins on. A scout's job isn't to pick out a guy who's going to give you one great season or three great seasons, his job is to pick out the guy who's going to have the best career. And at that point, I think it becomes debatable as to whether being great for a short time or good for a long time is a better asset to an organization.

You threw out Lindros and Bure and sure, I'd take those guys on my team without hesitation. But I'll give you another example... Jonathan Cheechoo. In his 2nd season, he put up 28 goals. In his 3rd, he won the Richard with 56. Then he had 37 and 23. 4 really great goal-scoring years. Two years after that he was out of the league completely. And so maybe at the time he put up 30-50 goals, you'd say he was a better player in that moment than some other guys, but that doesn't mean looking back that he had the best career, nor that he was the best choice in his draft year. Now compare him to a player like Scott Gomez. Same draft year. Scored 30+ goals only once his entire career and didn't have a single other season over 19 goals, but his production and longevity were superior to Cheechoo's over his career, despite not having the same monster goal years Cheechoo had. Take Matt Cullen, who was drafted two years before Cheechoo. He's only had a couple of 20 goal years but he's played over 20 years in the league and he's consistently good for 10-16 goals and is considered to be one of the top role players in the league over a very long time. Nowhere near as prolific as Cheechoo or even Gomez, but if you went back to the 90's and could re-draft knowing what kind of careers they would have, would you be drafting Cheechoo and his Rocket Richard trophy with a few great years or would you choose someone like Gomez or Cullen who don't have the same goal-scoring success or star power perhaps but who have been consistently good over a longer period of time. I'd choose the latter.

Again, all this to say that I would personally take Forsberg in a re-draft over Galchenyuk now, based mainly on projections of where each guy is headed from this date going forward. But if we're basing it on what have you done for me already if both careers ended today, it's not a given that one guy is miles ahead of the other. Yes, Forsberg has had better goal-scoring numbers, but as stated, he's done that with more opportunity. Galchenyuk was able to step into the NHL at a younger age. He's had decent periods of goal-scoring success when used in the top 6 and moreso when used at center. So we can blame coaching for the numerous shifts in position and linemates for setting back Galchenyuk's development. I think it's not inconceivable that if the Habs had moved AG to the 1C role and kept him there for the past 3 years that he's be a 30-goal man consistently too. Maybe his defence would still be an issue, but I think his offensive production would come close to matching Forsberg's.

I'm not sure why my comment turned into a full-on attack on Galchenyuk... all I said was that he has arguably been the best player in his draft year until this year, with Forsberg in the process of taking over that title. I'm agreeing that Forsberg is likely the better pick when we look back in a year or three years. But I find it odd that we discount what AG has been able to do since the age of 18, and regardless of where you stand in the AG vs. others in his draft year debate, I think it's fair to say that my original point about Trevor Timmins having nailed the pick as well as he could have still stands. We're debating whether AG is the best or 2nd best player in his draft year, and that's still a hit in my books when it comes to evaluating the job TT did there. If he can come out with a top 2 player in this year's draft when we look back in 6 years, I'll be very pleased with that too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

^^^ The other thing is that at the time Galchenyuk was the right choice.  Had we been 6th or later, maybe you take Forsberg but Galchenyuk definitely had the skills and pedigree to be the right choice at that time.

I still contend that had we played him properly he would be a better player than what we have now.   If we had picked forsberg and nashville had picked Galchenyuk, how much you wanna bet we'd be arguing in the reverse?

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, BigTed3 said:

I would agree that Forsberg is the better player right now today as we speak. For one game or one season, I'm taking Forsberg over Galchenyuk. But that's not what we should be judging Trevor Timmins on. A scout's job isn't to pick out a guy who's going to give you one great season or three great seasons, his job is to pick out the guy who's going to have the best career. And at that point, I think it becomes debatable as to whether being great for a short time or good for a long time is a better asset to an organization.

You threw out Lindros and Bure and sure, I'd take those guys on my team without hesitation. But I'll give you another example... Jonathan Cheechoo. In his 2nd season, he put up 28 goals. In his 3rd, he won the Richard with 56. Then he had 37 and 23. 4 really great goal-scoring years. Two years after that he was out of the league completely. And so maybe at the time he put up 30-50 goals, you'd say he was a better player in that moment than some other guys, but that doesn't mean looking back that he had the best career, nor that he was the best choice in his draft year. Now compare him to a player like Scott Gomez. Same draft year. Scored 30+ goals only once his entire career and didn't have a single other season over 19 goals, but his production and longevity were superior to Cheechoo's over his career, despite not having the same monster goal years Cheechoo had. Take Matt Cullen, who was drafted two years before Cheechoo. He's only had a couple of 20 goal years but he's played over 20 years in the league and he's consistently good for 10-16 goals and is considered to be one of the top role players in the league over a very long time. Nowhere near as prolific as Cheechoo or even Gomez, but if you went back to the 90's and could re-draft knowing what kind of careers they would have, would you be drafting Cheechoo and his Rocket Richard trophy with a few great years or would you choose someone like Gomez or Cullen who don't have the same goal-scoring success or star power perhaps but who have been consistently good over a longer period of time. I'd choose the latter.

Again, all this to say that I would personally take Forsberg in a re-draft over Galchenyuk now, based mainly on projections of where each guy is headed from this date going forward. But if we're basing it on what have you done for me already if both careers ended today, it's not a given that one guy is miles ahead of the other. Yes, Forsberg has had better goal-scoring numbers, but as stated, he's done that with more opportunity. Galchenyuk was able to step into the NHL at a younger age. He's had decent periods of goal-scoring success when used in the top 6 and moreso when used at center. So we can blame coaching for the numerous shifts in position and linemates for setting back Galchenyuk's development. I think it's not inconceivable that if the Habs had moved AG to the 1C role and kept him there for the past 3 years that he's be a 30-goal man consistently too. Maybe his defence would still be an issue, but I think his offensive production would come close to matching Forsberg's.

I'm not sure why my comment turned into a full-on attack on Galchenyuk... all I said was that he has arguably been the best player in his draft year until this year, with Forsberg in the process of taking over that title. I'm agreeing that Forsberg is likely the better pick when we look back in a year or three years. But I find it odd that we discount what AG has been able to do since the age of 18, and regardless of where you stand in the AG vs. others in his draft year debate, I think it's fair to say that my original point about Trevor Timmins having nailed the pick as well as he could have still stands. We're debating whether AG is the best or 2nd best player in his draft year, and that's still a hit in my books when it comes to evaluating the job TT did there. If he can come out with a top 2 player in this year's draft when we look back in 6 years, I'll be very pleased with that too.

I have no problem with Timmons drafting, nor do I have a problem with them drafting Galchenyk. Timmons is one of the few people I would keep in this organization. IF we stuck with some of the picks he made we would have an elite group of deeman .. MCdonough, Subban, Sergachev, Jullsen and Mete. The latter three on the cusp and the first two top pairing deeman. Not bad at all.

It easy to say 6 or  7years later we should have picked this guy or that guy, so could 30 other teams.

My argument was not drafting, it was the comment that Galchenyk was ahead of Forsberg and that is not the case. I  cannot imagine you would find very many people that would take Glachenyk over Forsberg right now, whether I selected the last 2 years, 4 years or 6 years, , well maybe some hab fans. If you really want to talk about in the process there are players emerging like Teuvo Teravainen, Shayne Gostisbehere, Morgan Rielly, Matt Dumba, Jacob Trouba, Colton Parayko,Hampus, Lindholm these are players whose values are rising …

Without knowing what I know now, I would still have wanted them to draft Galchenyk in that spot. I thought he was the best player available in that draft and I felt it was a steal at 3rd,  and I believed we had a obtained a true elite player capable of getting 80 or 90 points per season over his prime years from 21 or 22 to 30. That has not been the case or even close to the case.

 

i3 hours ago, maas_art said:

^^^ The other thing is that at the time Galchenyuk was the right choice.  Had we been 6th or later, maybe you take Forsberg but Galchenyuk definitely had the skills and pedigree to be the right choice at that time.

I still contend that had we played him properly he would be a better player than what we have now.   If we had picked forsberg and nashville had picked Galchenyuk, how much you wanna bet we'd be arguing in the reverse?

We have to stop with all the coulda shoulda wouda, blaming every body including the man in the moon.  I will bet you ten million dollars because you will never ever know. Maybe he would have been even worse then he is now.

I will use Subban as a perfect example. No one and I mean no one was dragged through the mud like him in this organization. It never stopped him reaching his potential and then some. And its not because he went to Nashville, he was elite with the Habs. Norris Trophy. galchenyk needs to perform like has over the last 20 games and eclipse 30 goals and 70 or 80 points. Elite players don't complain about the weather and their linemates and there coaches and there on and on and on. They just show how good they are so no one has a choice but to play them. Like Subban did with the habs coaches and management. They had to play him on the PK and PP and 5on5 because other then price he had become our best player.

Galchenyk may or may not become that player if he is traded or if he stays. Right now to this day he is a defensively liability who may fetch you 45 to 55 points,  20 to 25 goals, not bad, but not great. Not what i hoped for, but if we can get a center who can give us those same numbers between 22 and 26 with upside or one of the deeman above, Parayk, Lindholm, Dumba etc I am all in.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/6/2018 at 7:29 AM, Disillusioned1 said:

I think you're right in the sense that I would take 10 40 goal seasons over 40 10 goal seasons too.  But the rest I'd argue there are some disagreements.  Let's start with the fact that Galchenyuk was an almost 50 points scorer by his third season and almost 60 by his fourth.  And the only reason he hit those late was because his first season was shortened and he got injured in his second.  Last year he got injured again but still put up 44 points.  He did this playing 14 to 15 minutes on the third and fourth lines with no wingers worth mentioning.  I would argue that he succeeded to an extent despite the adversities he faced.  I'd actually say seeing how many road blocks we threw at him, he's a bit ahead of where I'd expected him to be (though not nearly the player he could be).

Forsberg on the other hand, was put in a position to succeed as soon as he stepped into the NHL, like a well managed team does.  He was put on the top line, got plenty of minutes, PP minutes, good linemates, the whole nine yards.  If he was drafted by Montreal would he be in the same boat as he is now?  Or vice versa with Galchenyuk.

Apart from that year in junior pre-draft, Galchenyk hasn't been particularly injury prone, so I'm not following that. But for the rest, it's true we have no way to know if we swapped the two players situations what the numbers would look like. It's impossible to separate drafting and development until we can invent a time-machine.  I can buy - but have no way to know either way - the argument that Galchenyk was the better draft pick but the Predators did a  better job developing Forseberg.

 

On 4/6/2018 at 7:29 AM, Disillusioned1 said:

The worst part of the whole Galchenyuk saga is, your question on leaving him in the juniors doesn't apply.  In his case it was either Montreal or Sarnia.  He has nothing to learn in Sarnia.  And the next year it would have been Hamilton.  I would say this.  Given our farm system, I'd prefer he played for Sarnia instead of Hamilton/St. John's/Laval.

My point wasn't whether or not more time in junior wouldn't have helped, just that hypothetically I'd give up those two first seasons if it meant his last four had stronger statistics. Not saying there was any actual way to make that "trade".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/6/2018 at 8:45 AM, BigTed3 said:

I would agree that Forsberg is the better player right now today as we speak. For one game or one season, I'm taking Forsberg over Galchenyuk. But that's not what we should be judging Trevor Timmins on. A scout's job isn't to pick out a guy who's going to give you one great season or three great seasons, his job is to pick out the guy who's going to have the best career. And at that point, I think it becomes debatable as to whether being great for a short time or good for a long time is a better asset to an organization.

You threw out Lindros and Bure and sure, I'd take those guys on my team without hesitation. But I'll give you another example... Jonathan Cheechoo. In his 2nd season, he put up 28 goals. In his 3rd, he won the Richard with 56. Then he had 37 and 23. 4 really great goal-scoring years. Two years after that he was out of the league completely. And so maybe at the time he put up 30-50 goals, you'd say he was a better player in that moment than some other guys, but that doesn't mean looking back that he had the best career, nor that he was the best choice in his draft year. Now compare him to a player like Scott Gomez. Same draft year. Scored 30+ goals only once his entire career and didn't have a single other season over 19 goals, but his production and longevity were superior to Cheechoo's over his career, despite not having the same monster goal years Cheechoo had. Take Matt Cullen, who was drafted two years before Cheechoo. He's only had a couple of 20 goal years but he's played over 20 years in the league and he's consistently good for 10-16 goals and is considered to be one of the top role players in the league over a very long time. Nowhere near as prolific as Cheechoo or even Gomez, but if you went back to the 90's and could re-draft knowing what kind of careers they would have, would you be drafting Cheechoo and his Rocket Richard trophy with a few great years or would you choose someone like Gomez or Cullen who don't have the same goal-scoring success or star power perhaps but who have been consistently good over a longer period of time. I'd choose the latter.

While I do place a premium on elite seasons given how hard it is to find elite talent (finding two 25 goal scorers is doable, finding one 50 goal scorer is a lot harder), I'm not saying I only care about the best season (Cheechoo is kind of an extreme example: he had a single phenomenal season, one really good, and a few solid but unspectacular ones). To compare to a similar type of player (goal-scorer) I'd certainly take Pacioretty's consistent 30+ goal seasons over Cheechoo's 56 goal one.  So I agree there.

But I don't think that's the same situation here. We're talking about (pro-rated to 82 games) seasons with 46 and 39 points (< 20 goals in each). I just don't think the fact we chose to bring Gally up to develop in the NHL (and had less options given the CHL agreements) makes him a better or worse draft pick than someone who develops in Europe and the AHL for a couple seasons.  I wouldn't consider Price a better draft pick had we brought him up at 18 and he had a couple okay seasons.

 

Quote

Again, all this to say that I would personally take Forsberg in a re-draft over Galchenyuk now, based mainly on projections of where each guy is headed from this date going forward. But if we're basing it on what have you done for me already if both careers ended today, it's not a given that one guy is miles ahead of the other. Yes, Forsberg has had better goal-scoring numbers, but as stated, he's done that with more opportunity. Galchenyuk was able to step into the NHL at a younger age. He's had decent periods of goal-scoring success when used in the top 6 and moreso when used at center. So we can blame coaching for the numerous shifts in position and linemates for setting back Galchenyuk's development. I think it's not inconceivable that if the Habs had moved AG to the 1C role and kept him there for the past 3 years that he's be a 30-goal man consistently too. Maybe his defence would still be an issue, but I think his offensive production would come close to matching Forsberg's.

I suppose I don't like the "what have you done for me already" approach because taken to extremes it implies any player brought up at 18 who can do *something* needs to be considered a better draft pick than a player who hasn't had their debut in the NHL yet.  I think it's fine to say in a few years after a draft it's simply too early to really evaluate (who was the better draft pick at age 20 just doesn't seem like a useful question).

I do agree there's no way to separate drafting and development though, there's just no way to know either way what would have happened had our draft picks been reversed. The players are close enough in talent that different coaching & opportunities could be what's made the difference.

 

Quote

I'm not sure why my comment turned into a full-on attack on Galchenyuk... all I said was that he has arguably been the best player in his draft year until this year, with Forsberg in the process of taking over that title. I'm agreeing that Forsberg is likely the better pick when we look back in a year or three years. But I find it odd that we discount what AG has been able to do since the age of 18, and regardless of where you stand in the AG vs. others in his draft year debate, I think it's fair to say that my original point about Trevor Timmins having nailed the pick as well as he could have still stands. We're debating whether AG is the best or 2nd best player in his draft year, and that's still a hit in my books when it comes to evaluating the job TT did there. If he can come out with a top 2 player in this year's draft when we look back in 6 years, I'll be very pleased with that too.

I don't think anyone's attacking Galchenyk, just saying that since Forsberg entered the league he's been the better player every season. I agree that given the overall weakness of that draft (at least for forwards), Gally was still a good pick, maybe great if you think the issues he's had were mostly due to development.  But when your top draft pick is spending good chunks of time playing on the fourth line as he quickly approaches UFA status and is showing up regularly in trade rumors, it's hard to be too excited by the results so far.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, CANADIENS27 said:

Once again, the luxury of playing a team out of the playoffs.  We'll see what happens tomorrow night.  

 

 

You know things are going well when it's surprising to see a comment about the current schedule in the "State of the Habs" thread :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, H_T_L said:

Hopefully Molson goes first and cans his butt.

1. This is what should happen 100%. instead, molson is going to come out and say "marc is a smart guy and I have total confidence in him"  translation:  I don't have a clue, and I just believed whatever placating nonsense he told me and wished really hard he was right, and now that we totally bombed with the garbage team he put together, I don't have the guts to fire him and I'm going to instead believe whatever NEW placating nonsense he is going to tell you dummies and pray like crazy that everything goes right next year so I don't have to fire this guy and pay him for another 5 years to sit on his couch"

2. Our intrepid GM will then take the stage, tell us we had injuries and things didnt go our way and this despite all empirical evidence is a playoff team.

he will then go on to not trade pacioretty because it was too hard...translation: I vastly over-valued him and waited way too long to start the process of trading him, and  I also have too much ego invested in him since I chose him over subban, so I wouldn't budge on my exorbitant asking price and 29 other GM's laughed in my face.  

afterwards he will go re-sign tomas plekanec and a rugged stay at home depth defenceman who is known for being "good in the room",  possibly sign paul stastny to yet another team crippling contract, and declare us a cup contender again. weber will be back to making elite level 4 foot passes, carey price will win all the awards again, andrew shaw will demonstrate his will to win and sticktuitiveness, and we will win the cup 1-0

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My final player grades for the season:

Goalies:

- Niemi: A... he was on his game most of the time.

- Lindgren: B.. faltered a bit the more he was asked to do but overall still impressive given the D he had in front of him.

- Price: D... awful year. Inconsistent, with frequent bouts of looking distracted or disinterested. Not sure how much had to do with injuries or having a new kid at home, but he needs to be better.

Defence:

- Petry: A-... a few bad defensive miscues here and there, but overall our best D man by a country mile. Really stepped up offensively with Weber down.

- Mete: B... pleasant surprise. Looks to be a modern-day puck-moving D man with on-ice smarts.

- Juulsen: B... solid finish to the year. Looked more comfortable than I thought, decent puck moving skill and good physicality too. Needs to show he can do it in the long haul.

- Weber: B-... I'll chalk some of his play up to injury since we know he was hurt, but if he was that bad, he should have been smart enough to not be playing. He was slow and not very agile this year, and hopefully he rebounds now that he's had the surgery.

- Reilly: C+... decent depth player, better than the guys rated below him here, albeit not a top 4 guy in the future.

- Lernout: C-... better than last year, but has a ways to go to be an NHLer.

- Benn: D... slow and not very good, albeit far from the worst D man on our team sadly.

- Alzner: F... started out horribly. Got a tad better in mid-season, but then reverted to being poor down the stretch. Just not able to keep up with the game and even though he's not as bad as Schlemko, his contract says expectations were higher.

- Schlemko: F... what a trainwreck. Not NHL caliber.

Forwards:

- Gallagher: A+... monster year for Gallagher. Goal scoring galore and great effort all season.

- Hudon: A... I thought he was remarkably under-appreciated by coaches and fans. Really liked the effort and the skill/skating.

- Byron: A-... continued to score well for a depth player.

- Galchenyuk: A-... really matured well as the season went on. Was reasonably consistent, and our most dangerous PP player.

- A. Shaw: B... I actually really liked what we got from Shaw this year. Much more consistent and with less indiscipline than we saw under Therrien.

- Carr: B... also greatly under-appreciated. Our best 4th liner.

- Lehkonen: B-... funny year for AL. Started the year with all kinds of scoring chances and great play but couldn't finish. Finished the season with a cluster of goals. Needs to be more consistent, but he's still got it in him to be a regular 20+ goal scorer.

- Danault: B-... maybe a step back from the end of last year, but still decent.

- Deslauriers: B-... strong year for a 4th liner. I know people won't agree with me here, but a lot of his success can be drawn up to luck that I don't think will be sustained, but true that the effort was there consistently.

- Drouin: B-... had flares of brilliance with the puck but was never really that dominant. I had hopes he would outplay AG, and I think the opposite happened. Maybe he just needs more time to adjust, maybe he needs to be on the wing.

- Scherbak: C+... some great games and others where he was invisible. I think he's grown as a player though.

- DLR: C-... seemed to play much better after the Plekanec trade, when he had success with AG and AL. But he's got to be more consistent and show better offfensive skill if he wants to stick next year.

- Pacioretty: C-... a disappointing season for the captain. He can be better, and I think he will be wherever he is next year. But he can't be captain, just doesn't deal well enough with that weight.

- Froese: D-... not NHL caliber IMO.

- L. Shaw: F... awful pick up. Don't know what he adds to this team.

Coaches and GM:

- Julien: C... saddled down by a poor D corps and bad GM, but he's got to be better next year to keep his job past that.

- Assistant coaches: F... as a whole, they were putrid. The PK was appallingly bad, and there wasn't much improvement seen in many areas. I think they should be cleaned out, except for Waite.

- Bergevin: F... didn't address team needs, complained about how hard his job was, thought his D was going to be great when it turned out to be league worst, sat on empty cap space. Not much he did right.

- Lefebvre: F... consistently awful. He needs to go too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, BigTed3 said:

My final player grades for the season:

Goalies:

- Niemi: A... he was on his game most of the time.

- Lindgren: B.. faltered a bit the more he was asked to do but overall still impressive given the D he had in front of him.

- Price: D... awful year. Inconsistent, with frequent bouts of looking distracted or disinterested. Not sure how much had to do with injuries or having a new kid at home, but he needs to be better.

Defence:

- Petry: A-... a few bad defensive miscues here and there, but overall our best D man by a country mile. Really stepped up offensively with Weber down.

- Mete: B... pleasant surprise. Looks to be a modern-day puck-moving D man with on-ice smarts.

- Juulsen: B... solid finish to the year. Looked more comfortable than I thought, decent puck moving skill and good physicality too. Needs to show he can do it in the long haul.

- Weber: B-... I'll chalk some of his play up to injury since we know he was hurt, but if he was that bad, he should have been smart enough to not be playing. He was slow and not very agile this year, and hopefully he rebounds now that he's had the surgery.

- Reilly: C+... decent depth player, better than the guys rated below him here, albeit not a top 4 guy in the future.

- Lernout: C-... better than last year, but has a ways to go to be an NHLer.

- Benn: D... slow and not very good, albeit far from the worst D man on our team sadly.

- Alzner: F... started out horribly. Got a tad better in mid-season, but then reverted to being poor down the stretch. Just not able to keep up with the game and even though he's not as bad as Schlemko, his contract says expectations were higher.

- Schlemko: F... what a trainwreck. Not NHL caliber.

Forwards:

- Gallagher: A+... monster year for Gallagher. Goal scoring galore and great effort all season.

- Hudon: A... I thought he was remarkably under-appreciated by coaches and fans. Really liked the effort and the skill/skating.

- Byron: A-... continued to score well for a depth player.

- Galchenyuk: A-... really matured well as the season went on. Was reasonably consistent, and our most dangerous PP player.

- A. Shaw: B... I actually really liked what we got from Shaw this year. Much more consistent and with less indiscipline than we saw under Therrien.

- Carr: B... also greatly under-appreciated. Our best 4th liner.

- Lehkonen: B-... funny year for AL. Started the year with all kinds of scoring chances and great play but couldn't finish. Finished the season with a cluster of goals. Needs to be more consistent, but he's still got it in him to be a regular 20+ goal scorer.

- Danault: B-... maybe a step back from the end of last year, but still decent.

- Deslauriers: B-... strong year for a 4th liner. I know people won't agree with me here, but a lot of his success can be drawn up to luck that I don't think will be sustained, but true that the effort was there consistently.

- Drouin: B-... had flares of brilliance with the puck but was never really that dominant. I had hopes he would outplay AG, and I think the opposite happened. Maybe he just needs more time to adjust, maybe he needs to be on the wing.

- Scherbak: C+... some great games and others where he was invisible. I think he's grown as a player though.

- DLR: C-... seemed to play much better after the Plekanec trade, when he had success with AG and AL. But he's got to be more consistent and show better offfensive skill if he wants to stick next year.

- Pacioretty: C-... a disappointing season for the captain. He can be better, and I think he will be wherever he is next year. But he can't be captain, just doesn't deal well enough with that weight.

- Froese: D-... not NHL caliber IMO.

- L. Shaw: F... awful pick up. Don't know what he adds to this team.

Coaches and GM:

- Julien: C... saddled down by a poor D corps and bad GM, but he's got to be better next year to keep his job past that.

- Assistant coaches: F... as a whole, they were putrid. The PK was appallingly bad, and there wasn't much improvement seen in many areas. I think they should be cleaned out, except for Waite.

- Bergevin: F... didn't address team needs, complained about how hard his job was, thought his D was going to be great when it turned out to be league worst, sat on empty cap space. Not much he did right.

- Lefebvre: F... consistently awful. He needs to go too.

I like your assessment. Defensively, I thought Alzner was better than Benn  from January on but his contract does not make him worth keeping unless he improves more. Lernout was a nice surprise and Reilly looked good. It will be interesting to see if Mete can  follow up on this years success, which is not always easy to do when you're 19.  

For the forwards. I think L. Shaw may be our 4th line centre next year. I would put Galchenyuk much closer to Drouin performance wise but give Drouin a good grade as he was playing centre. Galchenyuk is starting to look like he has turned a corner and may be ready to take the next step (so Bergy will probably trade him soon). De la Rose and Scherbek need to take a job next year and both have the potential to do so. I think Byron continues to increase his value and has proven 201617 was no fluke, While Lehkonen looks good he needs to be more consistent and we need to find him a good centre. I agree with your assessment of Patches too and we to sign him long term before the start of next year or trade him. I would not be surprised to see him moved at the draft if he drags out negotiations. Given Bergevin's recent signings Patches should expect to get overpayed ala Plekanec, Price, Subban, Alzner or feel lowballed and decide to be a UFA.

I agree with much of the grades for coaches but would be quite a bit harsher on Julien as a veteran coach whose team looked nowhere near ready during the first 15 games of the season. While I give Price and Weber a one -off on a bad year due to injuries the coaches have no excuse. 

If Bergevin signs Tavares than his cap space makes sense and his collection of high draft picks looks like some forward thinking. His refusing to sign Radulov is easier to take as even with all  the talent in Dallas Rads could not put them in the playoffs, but his signing of Schlemko, Alzner, Hemsky Streit and some of, if not all of the coaches this year is not looking good. We have some tough decisions to make on McCarron, Carr and a few other RFA;s. Scherbek, Rychel, de la Rose amd L.Shaw look to have a little more security, but some may be traded. It will be an interesting off-season

Much of our success next year is going to rely on some good young forwards having success and a fairly experienced defense and goaltender returning to form.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, BigTed3 said:

My final player grades for the season:

Goalies:

- Niemi: A... he was on his game most of the time.

- Lindgren: B.. faltered a bit the more he was asked to do but overall still impressive given the D he had in front of him.

- Price: D... awful year. Inconsistent, with frequent bouts of looking distracted or disinterested. Not sure how much had to do with injuries or having a new kid at home, but he needs to be better.

Defence:

- Petry: A-... a few bad defensive miscues here and there, but overall our best D man by a country mile. Really stepped up offensively with Weber down.

- Mete: B... pleasant surprise. Looks to be a modern-day puck-moving D man with on-ice smarts.

- Juulsen: B... solid finish to the year. Looked more comfortable than I thought, decent puck moving skill and good physicality too. Needs to show he can do it in the long haul.

- Weber: B-... I'll chalk some of his play up to injury since we know he was hurt, but if he was that bad, he should have been smart enough to not be playing. He was slow and not very agile this year, and hopefully he rebounds now that he's had the surgery.

- Reilly: C+... decent depth player, better than the guys rated below him here, albeit not a top 4 guy in the future.

- Lernout: C-... better than last year, but has a ways to go to be an NHLer.

- Benn: D... slow and not very good, albeit far from the worst D man on our team sadly.

- Alzner: F... started out horribly. Got a tad better in mid-season, but then reverted to being poor down the stretch. Just not able to keep up with the game and even though he's not as bad as Schlemko, his contract says expectations were higher.

- Schlemko: F... what a trainwreck. Not NHL caliber.

Forwards:

- Gallagher: A+... monster year for Gallagher. Goal scoring galore and great effort all season.

- Hudon: A... I thought he was remarkably under-appreciated by coaches and fans. Really liked the effort and the skill/skating.

- Byron: A-... continued to score well for a depth player.

- Galchenyuk: A-... really matured well as the season went on. Was reasonably consistent, and our most dangerous PP player.

- A. Shaw: B... I actually really liked what we got from Shaw this year. Much more consistent and with less indiscipline than we saw under Therrien.

- Carr: B... also greatly under-appreciated. Our best 4th liner.

- Lehkonen: B-... funny year for AL. Started the year with all kinds of scoring chances and great play but couldn't finish. Finished the season with a cluster of goals. Needs to be more consistent, but he's still got it in him to be a regular 20+ goal scorer.

- Danault: B-... maybe a step back from the end of last year, but still decent.

- Deslauriers: B-... strong year for a 4th liner. I know people won't agree with me here, but a lot of his success can be drawn up to luck that I don't think will be sustained, but true that the effort was there consistently.

- Drouin: B-... had flares of brilliance with the puck but was never really that dominant. I had hopes he would outplay AG, and I think the opposite happened. Maybe he just needs more time to adjust, maybe he needs to be on the wing.

- Scherbak: C+... some great games and others where he was invisible. I think he's grown as a player though.

- DLR: C-... seemed to play much better after the Plekanec trade, when he had success with AG and AL. But he's got to be more consistent and show better offfensive skill if he wants to stick next year.

- Pacioretty: C-... a disappointing season for the captain. He can be better, and I think he will be wherever he is next year. But he can't be captain, just doesn't deal well enough with that weight.

- Froese: D-... not NHL caliber IMO.

- L. Shaw: F... awful pick up. Don't know what he adds to this team.

Coaches and GM:

- Julien: C... saddled down by a poor D corps and bad GM, but he's got to be better next year to keep his job past that.

- Assistant coaches: F... as a whole, they were putrid. The PK was appallingly bad, and there wasn't much improvement seen in many areas. I think they should be cleaned out, except for Waite.

- Bergevin: F... didn't address team needs, complained about how hard his job was, thought his D was going to be great when it turned out to be league worst, sat on empty cap space. Not much he did right.

- Lefebvre: F... consistently awful. He needs to go too.

Admittedly I didn't watch a lot of the second half of the season, but based on what I saw for the first half and heard more recently, these seem about right.

It's clear we have a lot of players who kind of fit into that "really good third liner" category (20-40 points, often with good defensive instincts). The question is if players like Hudon and Lehkonen can improve and be legitimate top-six threats in the near future or are just cheap depth guys? 

I have no clue how to evaluate Galchenyk at this point because I have no idea what my expectations should be. The season as a whole is still disappointing for a 3rd overall draft pick in his 6th overall NHL season. But if we ignore draft position and just look at cap hit, he did fine (and was still our second best player statistically). And the fact he seemed to turn a corner at the end of the season is definitely more encouraging for next season than had his points been evenly distributed throughout the season. I'm still cautiously optimistic he can be a true first line winger (or possibly center), although he's yet to put together a full season that suggests he's more than a second-liner, so time will tell.

Drouin is kind of a similar case - my expectation was we were getting him with the hope he'd take the next step forward and yet he seemed to regress a bit. He still didn't have a bad season and some of the issues may have been playing center, but overall not great compared to expectations.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, kinot-2 said:

Bergevin and Molson to hold separate press conferences on Monday.

 

7 hours ago, habsisme said:

.... is that normal? 

Its not. Normally Molson either doesnt have a press conference, or he has one alongside his foxhole buddy.  Unfortunately it sounds like the link was a hoax.  There were some twitter posts by people saying both Rene Lavoie and Eric Engels had reported this.... but neither guy did. 

It sounds like MB and GM will be at the same conference, at the same time tomorrow. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Goalies:

- Niemi: A... he was on his game most of the time. Agreed

- Lindgren: C.. faltered often, much of his own doing... even considering the defense in front of him IMO. AHL record was dismal too.

- Price: D... awful year. Inconsistent, with frequent bouts of looking distracted or disinterested. IMO he was... probably because he could see the writing on the wall from the start of the season.

Defence:

- Petry: B+... More than a few bad defensive miscues here and there, barely our best D man... simply because the other vets were awful period and the rookies were rookies

- Mete: B... pleasant surprise. Looks to be a modern-day puck-moving D man with on-ice smarts. Agreed (but on the small side unfortunately)

- Juulsen: B... solid finish to the year. Looked more comfortable than I thought, decent puck moving skill and good physicality too. Needs to show he can do it in the long haul. Agreed... could be a keeper.

- Weber: B-... I'll chalk some of his play up to injury since we know he was hurt, but if he was that bad, he should have been smart enough to not be playing. He was slow and not very agile this year, and hopefully he rebounds now that he's had the surgery. Agreed

- Reilly: C+... decent depth player, better than the guys rated below him here, albeit not a top 4 guy in the future. Agreed

- Lernout: C... better than last year, and I see potential vs. the vets other than Petry and Weber... potential 6th-7th d-man currently IMO.

- Benn: C... far from the worst D man on our team overall... not really that slow Per Se... but slow to react IMO.

- Alzner: F... started out horribly. Got a tad better in mid-season, but then reverted to being poor down the stretch. Just not able to keep up with the game and even though he's not as bad as Schlemko, his contract says expectations were higher. Agreed totally!

- Schlemko: F... Has what looks like potential at times... but lacks hockey smarts it seems...still not good enough overall

Forwards:

- Gallagher: A+... monster year for Gallagher. Goal scoring galore and great effort all season. Agreed

- Hudon: A-... I thought he was remarkably under-appreciated by coaches and fans. Really liked the effort and the skill/skating. Agreed

- Byron: A-... continued to score well and proved he was more than just a 4th liner. Versatile player IMO

- Galchenyuk: A-... really matured well as the season went on. Was reasonably consistent, and our most dangerous PP player. Agreed

- Shaw: B-... Not worth the investment... does not live-up to expectations

- Carr: B... also greatly under-appreciated. Agreed... but unfortunately isn't a model 4th liner in reality

- Lehkonen: B... disappointing year for AL. Hard worker that needs the right assignment. A classic case of an over-rated expectation IMO

- Danault: B... maybe a step back from the end of last year, but still decent. Hard to say considering injuries...a 3rd line center at best IMO

- Deslauriers: B-... strong year for a 4th liner... the effort was there most nights. Did hit and score... but will it continue

- Drouin: B-... had flares of brilliance with the puck but was never really that dominant. Agreed... improved somewhat at the end of the season

- Scherbak: C... some flares of brilliance, but games where he was invisible. Still needs to be more assertive as a leader... not a follower

- DLR: C-... seemed to play better after the Plekanec trade, had some success with AG and AL. Still a question mark IMO

- Pacioretty: C-... a disappointing season for the captain. More than just that IMO... disinterested (Carey Price Syndrome... )

- Froese: C-... Depth player and was just that

- L. Shaw: C-... Depth player and was just that

Coaches and GM:

- Julien: D-... poor D corps and bad GM... Kept assistants and toed the line by avoiding true leadership... still not the best man for the job

- Assistant coaches: F... as a whole, they were putrid. The PK was appallingly bad, and there wasn't much improvement seen in many areas. I think they should be cleaned out, except for Waite. Agreed... Waite = Price, but also Niemi...

- Bergevin: F... didn't address team needs, complained about how hard his job was, thought his D was going to be great when it turned out to be league worst, sat on empty cap space. Not much he did right. Agreed... Including hiring/keeping inept coaching staffs.

- Lefebvre: F... consistently awful. He needs to go too. Agreed... and maybe his assistants... New GM to replace Carriere IMO

All that being said, IMO the season was an outlier period. The team was never going to be as good as we may have hoped for, but not as bad as the record showed in the end. Everything that could go wrong did go wrong... either as a result of poor decisions from management to bad acquisitions of players and consequential team breakdowns due to injury, disinterest and what seems to be unworthy communications.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"- Scherbak: C... some flares of brilliance, but games where he was invisible. Still needs to be more assertive as a leader... not a follower"

After playing on the right side (he shoots left), where I  thought he played quite well, CJ moved him to the left side where he became somewhat invisible.

Moved back to the right side for his last game and a half(?) where he belongs, IMO.

Hope CJ keeps him there. And since he's such a good playmaker, he should be playing with, at least, one other skilled guy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Exit interview soundbytes here:  https://www.habseyesontheprize.com/latest-news/2018/4/9/17214406/quotes-and-highlights-from-the-habs-locker-clean-out-max-pacioretty-carey-price-drouin-galchenyuk

 

Some interesting take-aways:

- Many players indicating that the team was not good enough from day 1.   Some (like Petry) think the talent was there, not the desire but most seem to be pointing to the team needing roster help.   

- Neither Drouin nor Galchenuk were told if they would play wing or centre next year.

- Shaw did NOT suffer a concussion on the season ending play. He did hurt his knee & it will require surgery.

- As always, several players playing hurt. Hudon, Gallagher etc. Aside from shaw sounds like none need surgery.

- Patches said several times he loves playing for the habs & hopes to be a hab for life. 

 

What a mess of a season. The players just seem so dejected.  The theme seems to go along with this Beatle's classic:  It can't get no worse

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, maas_art said:

Exit interview soundbytes here:  https://www.habseyesontheprize.com/latest-news/2018/4/9/17214406/quotes-and-highlights-from-the-habs-locker-clean-out-max-pacioretty-carey-price-drouin-galchenyuk

 

Some interesting take-aways:

- Many players indicating that the team was not good enough from day 1.   Some (like Petry) think the talent was there, not the desire but most seem to be pointing to the team needing roster help.   

- Neither Drouin nor Galchenuk were told if they would play wing or centre next year.

- Shaw did NOT suffer a concussion on the season ending play. He did hurt his knee & it will require surgery.

- As always, several players playing hurt. Hudon, Gallagher etc. Aside from shaw sounds like none need surgery.

- Patches said several times he loves playing for the habs & hopes to be a hab for life. 

 

What a mess of a season. The players just seem so dejected.  The theme seems to go along with this Beatle's classic:  It can't get no worse

 

No solid leadership from the Owner on down. No commitment to the fans. No Stanley Cup. Is it any wonder we are getting mixed messages from the players who seem to be trying to be politically correct and towing the party line for this disastrous Management & Ownership.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

These guys are dillusional, even Price

https://www.tsn.ca/gallagher-no-answers-in-habs-lost-season-1.1051324

 

But most players believe that the same team returning healthy next year would do much better than this season's squad.

"I'm not worried about the future of this team," said Price. "We just had a bad year.

"A lot of under-achieving performances, myself included. It's disappointing, but next year's a brand new year and we have to go in with the most optimism."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, maas_art said:

Exit interview soundbytes here:  https://www.habseyesontheprize.com/latest-news/2018/4/9/17214406/quotes-and-highlights-from-the-habs-locker-clean-out-max-pacioretty-carey-price-drouin-galchenyuk

 

Some interesting take-aways:

- Many players indicating that the team was not good enough from day 1.   Some (like Petry) think the talent was there, not the desire but most seem to be pointing to the team needing roster help.   

- Neither Drouin nor Galchenuk were told if they would play wing or centre next year.

- Shaw did NOT suffer a concussion on the season ending play. He did hurt his knee & it will require surgery.

- As always, several players playing hurt. Hudon, Gallagher etc. Aside from shaw sounds like none need surgery.

- Patches said several times he loves playing for the habs & hopes to be a hab for life. 

 

What a mess of a season. The players just seem so dejected.  The theme seems to go along with this Beatle's classic:  It can't get no worse

 

Good one as well from Danault... "We need another center. We're not stupid, we realize that."

 

... wait, so the players know it. Does Bergevin?

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...