Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
HabsAlways

Should the Habs just blow it up - La Tank for Lafreneire

Should the Habs just blow it up - La Tank for Lafreneire   22 members have voted

  1. 1. Should the Habs just blow it up - La Tank for Lafreneire..

    • Yes
      10
    • No
      12

Please sign in or register to vote in this poll.

131 posts in this topic

The Montreal Canadiens do not "tank" !

That is a strategy for teams with silly uniforms and silly names.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, if you're not for a full rebuild be ready for another 20 years of mediocrity.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, HabsAlways said:

Well, if you're not for a full rebuild be ready for another 20 years of mediocrity.

I would rather have 20 more years of meiorocrity than teach the young guys the mentality of losing is ok. There is no guarantee that we get a lottery pick and even a top 10 pick may never pan out. The odds of winning the draft lottery from 6th back are basically the same as squeaking into the playoffs and winning the cup so why not go for it. Teach the guys how to win through hard work not taking the easy route cause in sports as in life losing is never ok.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, campabee82 said:

I would rather have 20 more years of meiorocrity than teach the young guys the mentality of losing is ok. There is no guarantee that we get a lottery pick and even a top 10 pick may never pan out. The odds of winning the draft lottery from 6th back are basically the same as squeaking into the playoffs and winning the cup so why not go for it. Teach the guys how to win through hard work not taking the easy route cause in sports as in life losing is never ok.

100%, this whole scorched earth no choice but to tank talk is pointless and it does not mean 20 years of mediocrity! lots of teams have tanked and done nothing at all.....Edmonton? they have had more blue chip prospects than anyone else and? there is no sure path we have a good core of young kids and more coming if we get a couple of good picks in the next year or two we will be good.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, campabee82 said:

I would rather have 20 more years of meiorocrity than teach the young guys the mentality of losing is ok.

This mediocrity is losing . Three  years of not making the playoffs .

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Regis22 said:

This mediocrity is losing . Three  years of not making the playoffs .

Exactly, and the worst part is that without meaningful changes it's going to be all the same again next season. Maybe there's another offer-sheet this summer, we'll see reports about the Habs being interested in Hall (who of course won't sign here), then we move on an sign another 2nd tier UFA and hope for the kids to progress and make a difference while guys like Jordan Weal play on the 1st PP unit.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Regis22 said:

This mediocrity is losing . Three  years of not making the playoffs .

We missed last year by 2 points and could easily have gotten those 2 points had we 1. Had a decent LHD and 2. Played guys with skill over the likes of Alzner, Wiese, Schlemko, Benn, DLO, Peca and Hudon.

This year we have lost too many 1 goal games to count if we even picked up half of those points we wouldn't even be having the tank convo cause we would be up with Boston. It's not like most of the games were 5-1 or something we have been in most games all year to the end. We have lost 15 games by 1 goal. With 18 wins 15 losses by 1 goal I'd say we are in better shape than most believe just not getting the results due to lucky bounces, breakdowns in goal or on D or so on. So yes we are out of a playoff spot right now but any of those 15 games could have been ours or at least pushed to OT and things would be drastically different.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, ChiLla said:

Exactly, and the worst part is that without meaningful changes it's going to be all the same again next season. Maybe there's another offer-sheet this summer, we'll see reports about the Habs being interested in Hall (who of course won't sign here), then we move on an sign another 2nd tier UFA and hope for the kids to progress and make a difference while guys like Jordan Weal play on the 1st PP unit.

exactly. until i see a serious commitment to winning i am going to be frustrated. what are we honestly doing

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, campabee82 said:

We missed last year by 2 points and could easily have gotten those 2 points had we 1. Had a decent LHD and 2. Played guys with skill over the likes of Alzner, Wiese, Schlemko, Benn, DLO, Peca and Hudon.

This year we have lost too many 1 goal games to count if we even picked up half of those points we wouldn't even be having the tank convo cause we would be up with Boston. It's not like most of the games were 5-1 or something we have been in most games all year to the end. We have lost 15 games by 1 goal. With 18 wins 15 losses by 1 goal I'd say we are in better shape than most believe just not getting the results due to lucky bounces, breakdowns in goal or on D or so on. So yes we are out of a playoff spot right now but any of those 15 games could have been ours or at least pushed to OT and things would be drastically different.

 

that ius exactly the point. we are playing the bridesmaid. the holes are clear. either go for it or accept we cant and trade a weber or a gallagher and get legit multiple pieces. otherwise we are window dressing with almost and maybe. the patches trade should be our template going forward

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, jeff33 said:

exactly. until i see a serious commitment to winning i am going to be frustrated. what are we honestly doing

To be honest no one here knows what WE (the Habs) are doing in the front offices. Is MB looking for upgrades probably, is it possible no one wants to make a significant deal with MB cause of his OS to Aho possibly. We aren't privy to any of that info but what we do know is MB tried to sign Aho however pathetic the offer was. He tried to sign Duchene but Duchene chose Nashville. He tried to sign Gardiner to upgrade the D. Thankfully that fell through. What other moves has he looked into we won't know unless one comes back around and is successful.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, campabee82 said:

We missed last year by 2 points and could easily have gotten those 2 points had we 1. Had a decent LHD and 2. Played guys with skill over the likes of Alzner, Wiese, Schlemko, Benn, DLO, Peca and Hudon.

This year we have lost too many 1 goal games to count if we even picked up half of those points we wouldn't even be having the tank convo cause we would be up with Boston. It's not like most of the games were 5-1 or something we have been in most games all year to the end. We have lost 15 games by 1 goal. With 18 wins 15 losses by 1 goal I'd say we are in better shape than most believe just not getting the results due to lucky bounces, breakdowns in goal or on D or so on. So yes we are out of a playoff spot right now but any of those 15 games could have been ours or at least pushed to OT and things would be drastically different.

 

5 hours ago, jeff33 said:

 

that ius exactly the point. we are playing the bridesmaid. the holes are clear. either go for it or accept we cant and trade a weber or a gallagher and get legit multiple pieces. otherwise we are window dressing with almost and maybe. the patches trade should be our template going forward

The other point here is that we're arguing about hypotheticals that would have allowed us to make the playoffs. We're not even talking about what it would take to be a Cup contender, and to me that's what's important. The goal shouldn't be to squeak into the playoffs every 2-3 years. It should be to be a regular challenger for the Cup and a top 5 team in the league. We want to be Washington or Boston or Tampa or so on. We don't want to be Columbus taking one run last year after squeaking in and then going back to mediocrity again. You need to deal veterans while they have value and acquire long-term assets that you can build yourself and keep on cost-controlled deals. When you're good enough to challenge, then you supplement by adding some veteran free agents or deadline acquisitions to plug certain roles, but not to be your core.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
59 minutes ago, BigTed3 said:

 

The other point here is that we're arguing about hypotheticals that would have allowed us to make the playoffs. We're not even talking about what it would take to be a Cup contender, and to me that's what's important. The goal shouldn't be to squeak into the playoffs every 2-3 years. It should be to be a regular challenger for the Cup and a top 5 team in the league. We want to be Washington or Boston or Tampa or so on. We don't want to be Columbus taking one run last year after squeaking in and then going back to mediocrity again. You need to deal veterans while they have value and acquire long-term assets that you can build yourself and keep on cost-controlled deals. When you're good enough to challenge, then you supplement by adding some veteran free agents or deadline acquisitions to plug certain roles, but not to be your core.

So if I am reading this right your suggesting that we should basically be trading the likes of Washington's Oshie,  Eller, Orlov and Carlson or Tampa's Palat, Killorn, Hedman and McDonagh. All are of roughly the same skill and age as Byron, Tatar, Weber and Petry and all play an equally important role for their clubs as our guys. The only exception is Weber who is actually much older and slower but is still a top 4 dman on pretty much any team. Also as I outlined on the state of the Habs thread your still not making this team any worse by trading them your just creating another hole on the right side of the D for MB to try which we all know how that's going to work with how well he has filled the LHD hole.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

7 hours ago, campabee82 said:

We missed last year by 2 points and could easily have gotten those 2 points had we 1. Had a decent LHD and 2. Played guys with skill over the likes of Alzner, Wiese, Schlemko, Benn, DLO, Peca and Hudon.

This year we have lost too many 1 goal games to count if we even picked up half of those points we wouldn't even be having the tank convo cause we would be up with Boston. It's not like most of the games were 5-1 or something we have been in most games all year to the end. We have lost 15 games by 1 goal. With 18 wins 15 losses by 1 goal I'd say we are in better shape than most believe just not getting the results due to lucky bounces, breakdowns in goal or on D or so on. So yes we are out of a playoff spot right now but any of those 15 games could have been ours or at least pushed to OT and things would be drastically different.

I agree with this, add all the injuries this season and well, this is just as much bad luck as anything else. I truly like the direction of this team. I like seeing Suzuki grow every game. I like KK at only 19 years old. Fleury stepping in this season. Domi  at only 24. Armia becoming a force at only 26. Poeling  seems to be finding his game recently.  We have a really good young fast core. Yes it will suck if we miss the playoffs this season again. But over the next few years i think this team will emerge as one of teh top contenders in the league for a long while. Stay the course play to win every single game. Dont teach your players to lose.

Edited by caperns61
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, caperns61 said:

I agree with this, add all the injuries this season and well, this is just as much bad luck as anything else. I truly like the direction of this team. I like seeing Suzuki grow every game. I like KK at only 19 years old. Fleury stepping in this season. Domi  at only 24. Armia becoming a force at only 26. Poeling  seems to be finding his game recently.  We have a really good young fast core. Yes it will suck if we miss the playoffs this season again. But over the next few years i think this team will emerge as one of teh top contenders in the league for a long while. Stay the course play to win every single game. Dont teach your players to lose.

Exactly 100%. At this time we're not that far away and hopefully Romanov and others will work out...…..which is not a given but NONE of the "magical" tank picks or 1st rounders everyone is sure we get for so and so are for sure either! Also if we do trade older players the teams that are going to take them are going to be contenders so what is that draft pick 25-31? Those are for sure picks? The young guys are playing now also. How many do we have on our roster of 1st or 2nd year players? All the teams mentioned Boston/Tampa(who had great success last year?)Wash ect. how many rookie 1st year 2nd year players are playing every night and in top roles? Ovie is old so is Stamko's , Bergeron so they should trade them now while their value is high? A mistake we made was when Halak was available as backup. We should of picked him up. I don't know if Price would of liked it but Boston was smart with that move. Solid goaltender Rask gets rest. Anyway lets NOT QUIT until we are 100% eliminated. 

 

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, campabee82 said:

So if I am reading this right your suggesting that we should basically be trading the likes of Washington's Oshie,  Eller, Orlov and Carlson or Tampa's Palat, Killorn, Hedman and McDonagh. All are of roughly the same skill and age as Byron, Tatar, Weber and Petry and all play an equally important role for their clubs as our guys. The only exception is Weber who is actually much older and slower but is still a top 4 dman on pretty much any team. Also as I outlined on the state of the Habs thread your still not making this team any worse by trading them your just creating another hole on the right side of the D for MB to try which we all know how that's going to work with how well he has filled the LHD hole.

But Washington and Tampa are using those players (other than Carlson and Hedman) as supporting cast players. TB has Stamkos and Point and Vasilevskiy and Kucherov, so the other guys you listed are complementary players. Washington has Ovi and Backstrom and Kuznetsov and so on. In our case, Tatar, Petry, and Weber are three of our strongest assets. So the teams are in much different positions. If we had Stamkos and Point and Kucherov on top of what we already have, then I wouldn't be trading anyone away either.

As for the holes on the right side of the D, my point is that those holes are going to be there in 2021 anyways. Petry will be a 34 year-old UFA looking for a last big payday. Weber will be 36. I don't believe we're going to be able to rely on those two to play 50 minutes a night combined so you're going to need a Brook or a Juulsen or a Fleury or someone else to be able to develop and step in anyways. Maybe those guys can do it, maybe they can't. But why not give them a bit more experience now to improve your odds? Why not try to acquire some younger assets so you have more chances of finding players who can fill those holes? The hole on the left side of the D now wasn't created because we let Markov and Emelin go, it's because we didn't have any assets in the pipeline to fill the void left by those two players no longer being useful.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, CaptWelly said:

Exactly 100%. At this time we're not that far away and hopefully Romanov and others will work out...…..which is not a given but NONE of the "magical" tank picks or 1st rounders everyone is sure we get for so and so are for sure either! Also if we do trade older players the teams that are going to take them are going to be contenders so what is that draft pick 25-31? Those are for sure picks? The young guys are playing now also. How many do we have on our roster of 1st or 2nd year players? All the teams mentioned Boston/Tampa(who had great success last year?)Wash ect. how many rookie 1st year 2nd year players are playing every night and in top roles? Ovie is old so is Stamko's , Bergeron so they should trade them now while their value is high? A mistake we made was when Halak was available as backup. We should of picked him up. I don't know if Price would of liked it but Boston was smart with that move. Solid goaltender Rask gets rest. Anyway lets NOT QUIT until we are 100% eliminated. 

 

I'm agreed with you that we have no idea if Romanov or another prospect will work out, nor whether a 1st rounder will pan into anything. But we do know that the more high picks and blue chip prospects you have, the more likely you are to hit on one or several.

The idea that we teach players to lose by rebuilding or retooling is a fallacy. Yes, you can always have a team like Edmonton that just putzes around, but look at Colorado... they traded away a few bigger names and they acquired prospects and picks and went through a couple of difficult seasons. But they hung on to some younger core players like McKinnon and Landeskog and Raantanen and they added a few veteran pick-ups and drafted well and now they are back in the mix for a Cup. Look at Vancouver and Ottawa having "tanked" and re-built and now they're building around promising youngsters like Pettersson and Hughes and Chabot. Look at the Rangers dealing away their top vets and acquiring a host of 1st rounders and turning one of those into Kaapo Kakko. Or the classic example of Pittsburgh blowing goats and then building their franchise around high picks like Crosby, Malkin, and Fleury. Being bad in the short term doesn't equate to being bad in the long-term and I'd rather be bad for two years and then great for five instead of being middle-of-the-pack for seven.

Personally, I have confidence that if we can keep a young leadership group of Danault, Gallagher, Domi, Lehkonen, and so on (and probably not even trade Price for now given I don't think we'll get value back at present), that we have enough to help the youngsters develop.I don't think that's teaching them to lose.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, CaptWelly said:

Exactly 100%. At this time we're not that far away and hopefully Romanov and others will work out...…..which is not a given but NONE of the "magical" tank picks or 1st rounders everyone is sure we get for so and so are for sure either! Also if we do trade older players the teams that are going to take them are going to be contenders so what is that draft pick 25-31? Those are for sure picks? The young guys are playing now also. How many do we have on our roster of 1st or 2nd year players? All the teams mentioned Boston/Tampa(who had great success last year?)Wash ect. how many rookie 1st year 2nd year players are playing every night and in top roles? Ovie is old so is Stamko's , Bergeron so they should trade them now while their value is high? A mistake we made was when Halak was available as backup. We should of picked him up. I don't know if Price would of liked it but Boston was smart with that move. Solid goaltender Rask gets rest. Anyway lets NOT QUIT until we are 100% eliminated. 

 

Ok so Romanov comes over next year ... to play next to 35 year old Weber?   Romanov matures into a top LD by season 3 ... Weber is now 37 ... Who's your RD now?

And your comparing other teams vets .. who are STARS to what?  What do we have?   

Bergeron has 36pts in 33 games at 34.

Stamkos 37pts in 36 and on pace for 40 goals at 29 ... so not old

Ovechkin 40pts in 42 .. but on pace for 45-50 goals at 34.

So yeah, if we had any of those three guys ... we wouldn't be having this conversation.    Context is important.   Our aging core is nowhere near as talented as Bostons, Washington's or Tampa's.     Outside of Weber and Price we have nobody that is considered elite and those two alone would get us a bucket of assets that would all be maturing around the same time our current group of excellent prospects were maturing.    The current group becomes the core, and the new prospects become the supporting cast.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, HabsAlways said:

Ok so Romanov comes over next year ... to play next to 35 year old Weber?   Romanov matures into a top LD by season 3 ... Weber is now 37 ... Who's your RD now?

And your comparing other teams vets .. who are STARS to what?  What do we have?   

Bergeron has 36pts in 33 games at 34.

Stamkos 37pts in 36 and on pace for 40 goals at 29 ... so not old

Ovechkin 40pts in 42 .. but on pace for 45-50 goals at 34.

So yeah, if we had any of those three guys ... we wouldn't be having this conversation.    Context is important.   Our aging core is nowhere near as talented as Bostons, Washington's or Tampa's.     Outside of Weber and Price we have nobody that is considered elite and those two alone would get us a bucket of assets that would all be maturing around the same time our current group of excellent prospects were maturing.    The current group becomes the core, and the new prospects become the supporting cast.

 

OUr star player Carey Price only 32 years old, who is  paid the money to win us games,  If he played up to his salary like the players you mentioned above, we would be easily over 50 points, but he is playing like a second string goalie.. 

And what is wrong with Romonov playing a year or two or even three with a top 10 NHL defensman, what better way to learn the game at the highest level.  IF one of our kids on the right side outplays Weber in one or 2 or 3 years then Weber moves down the lineup or traded then. 

If we trade Weber now and lose Petry next season who does Romanov play with in 1 or 2 or 3 or 4 or even 5 years time on the right side?

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Reading through the last few pages of replies, it seems to me like "tank" means different things to different people, and that's where some of the disagreement seems to be coming from.

If we take tanking to mean intentionally losing games in order to get a higher draft pick, I am completely opposed.  But I think that almost everyone would agree with me.  Coaches and players should be (and, I believe, almost always are) focused on winning as many games as possible.  It's trite to say, but these guys really are professionals.  I've got to believe that there's too much pride in an NHL dressing room for a whole team to decide that they're going to throw a game - people just don't think that way.

On the other hand, it's a different thing if we're talking about a management-level "tank" that involves trading away your veteran players in order to get a return for them, even if it means losing more games this year.  At a certain point it's just taking a realistic approach to good long-term planning - if you're not going to at least threaten to compete for the cup, what's the point of holding on to someone if getting rid of them could improve things in the future?

Now don't get me wrong, I'm sure even the latter situation is going to be frustrating to the players on the team.  When your manager all but says "we're throwing in the towel for the year", it's got to be frustrating as all get-out.  But these guys live in the real world - they already knew that they were losing and that the year was over.  Managers don't become wholesale sellers if that's not the case.  So to say that this sort of "tanking" will hurt the term long-term or promote a culture of losing, I just don't see it.  Players know the score - if anything, it shows a commitment to making the team better in the long run, and that's a better signal to a young player on the team than seeing management miss the playoffs and do nothing.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is Lafrenie(SP) worth tanking for?? It's not like he is a "generational" talent or is it just because he is french?  Would rather see us move players for picks and still compete, I don't think we need a whole rebuild just a core and culture change.  That begins in the front office!

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, Manatee-X said:

Reading through the last few pages of replies, it seems to me like "tank" means different things to different people, and that's where some of the disagreement seems to be coming from.

If we take tanking to mean intentionally losing games in order to get a higher draft pick, I am completely opposed.  But I think that almost everyone would agree with me.  Coaches and players should be (and, I believe, almost always are) focused on winning as many games as possible.  It's trite to say, but these guys really are professionals.  I've got to believe that there's too much pride in an NHL dressing room for a whole team to decide that they're going to throw a game - people just don't think that way.

On the other hand, it's a different thing if we're talking about a management-level "tank" that involves trading away your veteran players in order to get a return for them, even if it means losing more games this year.  At a certain point it's just taking a realistic approach to good long-term planning - if you're not going to at least threaten to compete for the cup, what's the point of holding on to someone if getting rid of them could improve things in the future?

Now don't get me wrong, I'm sure even the latter situation is going to be frustrating to the players on the team.  When your manager all but says "we're throwing in the towel for the year", it's got to be frustrating as all get-out.  But these guys live in the real world - they already knew that they were losing and that the year was over.  Managers don't become wholesale sellers if that's not the case.  So to say that this sort of "tanking" will hurt the term long-term or promote a culture of losing, I just don't see it.  Players know the score - if anything, it shows a commitment to making the team better in the long run, and that's a better signal to a young player on the team than seeing management miss the playoffs and do nothing.

This.  In no way shape or form do i believe the players or the coaches should actively try to lose games.     Tanking has to come from a management level (ie trade away guys like Weber, Petry, Tatar etc knowing full well you'll be worse for the rest of the year).
 

14 minutes ago, 26NCounting said:

Is Lafrenie(SP) worth tanking for?? It's not like he is a "generational" talent or is it just because he is french?  Would rather see us move players for picks and still compete, I don't think we need a whole rebuild just a core and culture change.  That begins in the front office!

I think there's a strong sense that he might well be a generational talent.  He's been talked about as the #1 pick for like 2 years prior to draft eligibility.  Its entirely possible he ends up as a John Tavares rather than a Sidney Crosby but right now i think you'll still find a lot of scouts saying he's the next big thing. 

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Manatee-X said:

Reading through the last few pages of replies, it seems to me like "tank" means different things to different people, and that's where some of the disagreement seems to be coming from.

If we take tanking to mean intentionally losing games in order to get a higher draft pick, I am completely opposed.  But I think that almost everyone would agree with me.  Coaches and players should be (and, I believe, almost always are) focused on winning as many games as possible.  It's trite to say, but these guys really are professionals.  I've got to believe that there's too much pride in an NHL dressing room for a whole team to decide that they're going to throw a game - people just don't think that way.

On the other hand, it's a different thing if we're talking about a management-level "tank" that involves trading away your veteran players in order to get a return for them, even if it means losing more games this year.  At a certain point it's just taking a realistic approach to good long-term planning - if you're not going to at least threaten to compete for the cup, what's the point of holding on to someone if getting rid of them could improve things in the future?

Now don't get me wrong, I'm sure even the latter situation is going to be frustrating to the players on the team.  When your manager all but says "we're throwing in the towel for the year", it's got to be frustrating as all get-out.  But these guys live in the real world - they already knew that they were losing and that the year was over.  Managers don't become wholesale sellers if that's not the case.  So to say that this sort of "tanking" will hurt the term long-term or promote a culture of losing, I just don't see it.  Players know the score - if anything, it shows a commitment to making the team better in the long run, and that's a better signal to a young player on the team than seeing management miss the playoffs and do nothing.

100% agreed with this. You don't purposely make bad plays or ask your players to throw games. But at the management level, you have to ask yourself what moves can be made to maximize the success of the team in future years. To me that means two things:

1. Giving opportunity and experience to younger players who will be here long-term. That means JK at center in the top 6. It means Poehling at center in the bottom 6. It means Suzuki continuing in the top 6 somewhere. It means looking at line combinations you think you might use next year. It means maybe recalling a player like Evans who is playing well in the AHL and seeing where he is in terms of his ability to see that translate to the NHL. It means giving Lindgren or Primeau some more games than you would if you were in a tight playoff race.

2. Showcasing veterans that you would hope to trade in order to maximize their value. We would expect veteran players like Danault, Gallagher, Domi, Lehkonen, Armia, Mete, etc. to be here into next year and maybe beyond. There's not much to be gained by over-playing them. But if we're looking at moving the likes of Tatar, Kovalchuk, Petry, Weber, Scandella, Kulak, Byron, or so on, you have to inflate their stats. To me, that means those guys get quality ice time, PP time, healthy O-zone starts, etc. Most GM's are looking and saying Player X scored 25 goals or has 50 points or so on but they aren't scratching their heads figuring out if those points were had because that player had 70% O zone starts whereas another player with 35 points had only 20%. Maximize the value of what you have and try to trade guys like Tatar and Weber now while their value is as high as it has ever been in a Habs uniform.

Somewhat funny but true comment that's going round right now is that the Habs' odds of landing the #1 overall pick (currently 6.5%) is higher than their odds of making the post-season (4.2% according to sportsclubstats), never mind the odds of winning a Cup. So it's pretty clear the goal should be player evaluation and preparing your future rather than trying to run players into the ground to win now.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Habs' playoff chances now down to about 2.5%. Right now the prediction for how many points it will take to make the playoffs is about 96-97, so to get there, the Habs would need to go 27-10 the rest of the way. They are coming off two separate 8-game losing streaks now (and counting for the second one) and the rest of their opponents before the ASG break (and any chance of getting help back from IR) would be at Ott, vs. Cgy, vs. Chi, at Phi, vs. LV. You'd have to figure we're underdogs in at least the Cgy, Phi, and LV games and probably even up against Ott and Chi... coming out of the break, we play vs. Was, at Buf, vs Fla, vs Clb, at NJ, vs Ana, vs Tor, vs Ari. It's really not the toughest schedule, but it's also hard to see the Habs playing .700 hockey to push for the post-season.

 

 

 

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, BigTed3 said:

Habs' playoff chances now down to about 2.5%. Right now the prediction for how many points it will take to make the playoffs is about 96-97, so to get there, the Habs would need to go 27-10 the rest of the way. They are coming off two separate 8-game losing streaks now (and counting for the second one) and the rest of their opponents before the ASG break (and any chance of getting help back from IR) would be at Ott, vs. Cgy, vs. Chi, at Phi, vs. LV. You'd have to figure we're underdogs in at least the Cgy, Phi, and LV games and probably even up against Ott and Chi... coming out of the break, we play vs. Was, at Buf, vs Fla, vs Clb, at NJ, vs Ana, vs Tor, vs Ari. It's really not the toughest schedule, but it's also hard to see the Habs playing .700 hockey to push for the post-season.

 

 

 

Thanks for the pep talk.  :lol:

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, kinot-2 said:

Thanks for the pep talk.  :lol:

Yeah,,,, i feel better.:freu1:

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.