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

Habs Lines


BigTed3
 Share

Recommended Posts

I seriously hope he puts PD in the press box, he desperately needs a shake up to face reality that he isn't the top line center he thinks he is.  He needs to play to his strengths!!

 

With that said I would really like to see this, and see how it works

Toffoli-Suzuki-Anderson

Drouin-Kotkaniemi-Gallagher

Tatar-Evans-Armia

Byron-Danault-Perry

 

Chiaort-Petry

Romanov-Weber

Edmundsont-Kulak

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not that happy with the lines coming into the new coach's first game. As I said, I don't care much about the forward lines because I think there will be balance there no matter what. Nor surprised to see Tatar reunited with his linemates and my gut is that this line is going to respond. They want to play together, I think they know they were thrown a lifeline to make it happen. Also interesting to see Byron used as a center, not just because it pushes Evans out but because it opens up the possibility of Evans subbing back in and Danault being the one to sit. Has to put more pressure on Danault to perform if he knows Ducharme isn't afraid to use 4 other guys as centers.

What I have a problem with is the defence. The one big thing that Ducharme had to address was the failings of Chiarot-Weber as a duo and the fact we have three slow guys in the top 4. Again, they can do okay against slower, bigger teams and maybe they'll be fine with Winnipeg. But in the long run, this is a disaster. Chiarot, as I posted elsewhere, has the worst numbers on the team and it was a telling sign as to whether Ducharme noticed this or not. There is a suggestion that Ducharme as a coach likes to tinker with lines during games, so maybe there will still be some manipulation here, but for the most part, it tells me he thinks the problem was systems and not personnel. While the first may be improvable in part, it remains that we have too many guys who can't play a modern game and it will hurt us long-term. Disappointed Ducharme didn't see this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, BigTed3 said:

Not that happy with the lines coming into the new coach's first game. As I said, I don't care much about the forward lines because I think there will be balance there no matter what. Nor surprised to see Tatar reunited with his linemates and my gut is that this line is going to respond. They want to play together, I think they know they were thrown a lifeline to make it happen. Also interesting to see Byron used as a center, not just because it pushes Evans out but because it opens up the possibility of Evans subbing back in and Danault being the one to sit. Has to put more pressure on Danault to perform if he knows Ducharme isn't afraid to use 4 other guys as centers.

Agree. I was wondering if the idea here was to show Byron can play Centre & then give us options. I cant imagine a situation where DD isnt happy with Evans - he's been terrific in his role & exactly the kind of guy DD seems to love. 

 

1 hour ago, BigTed3 said:

What I have a problem with is the defence. The one big thing that Ducharme had to address was the failings of Chiarot-Weber as a duo and the fact we have three slow guys in the top 4. Again, they can do okay against slower, bigger teams and maybe they'll be fine with Winnipeg. But in the long run, this is a disaster. Chiarot, as I posted elsewhere, has the worst numbers on the team and it was a telling sign as to whether Ducharme noticed this or not. There is a suggestion that Ducharme as a coach likes to tinker with lines during games, so maybe there will still be some manipulation here, but for the most part, it tells me he thinks the problem was systems and not personnel. While the first may be improvable in part, it remains that we have too many guys who can't play a modern game and it will hurt us long-term. 

 

1 hour ago, BigTed3 said:

Disappointed Ducharme didn't see this.

im not convinced he didnt see it but from his standpoint if he just comes in & makes massive changes, how will that affect some of the guys on the roster?  I know they are professionals but the idea of "letting them show him" may make more sense here. 

If we're still seeing Chairot-Weber, Edmundson-Petry as our top 4 in a couple of games, I'll start to worry. For now i think it might be more about him giving them a chance but fully expecting to change some things up mid-game or next game. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, maas_art said:

Agree. I was wondering if the idea here was to show Byron can play Centre & then give us options. I cant imagine a situation where DD isnt happy with Evans - he's been terrific in his role & exactly the kind of guy DD seems to love. 

 

 

im not convinced he didnt see it but from his standpoint if he just comes in & makes massive changes, how will that affect some of the guys on the roster?  I know they are professionals but the idea of "letting them show him" may make more sense here. 

If we're still seeing Chairot-Weber, Edmundson-Petry as our top 4 in a couple of games, I'll start to worry. For now i think it might be more about him giving them a chance but fully expecting to change some things up mid-game or next game. 

DD was promoted to reinstall some of the magic from the beginning of the year when he convinced CJ to play a more offensive style. Chiarot and Weber were working really well in that system, I agree the idea was to give them a chance to regain that. I agree we are not likely to see major changes for at least 3-5 games though. Here is hoping everything works as it should.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, maas_art said:

Agree. I was wondering if the idea here was to show Byron can play Centre & then give us options. I cant imagine a situation where DD isnt happy with Evans - he's been terrific in his role & exactly the kind of guy DD seems to love. 

 

 

im not convinced he didnt see it but from his standpoint if he just comes in & makes massive changes, how will that affect some of the guys on the roster?  I know they are professionals but the idea of "letting them show him" may make more sense here. 

If we're still seeing Chairot-Weber, Edmundson-Petry as our top 4 in a couple of games, I'll start to worry. For now i think it might be more about him giving them a chance but fully expecting to change some things up mid-game or next game. 

Part of me wondered if he didn't want to make widespread changes right away without giving new pairings time to practice together. But you look at the schedule the rest of the way and there isn't really a gaping opportunity to do that anyways, so why not right away? Agreed with you that he may be just giving some leeway to his veterans, but I don't get how a coach can't see how poorly Weber-Chiarot have done and how easy they are to exploit. As I said, they might do a bit better against a bigger top 6 forward group like what Winnipeg has but they're toast against teams like Edmonton and Toronto and even Ottawa.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A message needs to be sent after we return to the Bell Centre. We have to wait until then because the Habs are on one side of the country and the Rocket are on the other. So vs Ottawa on Monday my lines would be

Drouin-Suzuki-Anderson (good already)

Toffoli-KK-Yelonen (This on paper looks much like Drouin-Suzuki-Anderson)

Tatar-Danault-Gallagher (reduced I've time until they figure things out)

Lehkonen-Evans-Armia (was a really effective line earlier in the year)

Kulak-Petry

Romanov-Weber

Guhle-Mete

Allen

Price

Edmundson, Chiarot are press boxed

Perry and Byron Taxi Squad

Until then we just swap some players around.

Drouin-Suzuki-Anderson

Toffoli-KK-Gallagher

Tatar-Evans-Armia

Lehkonen-Danault-Byron

Kulak-Petry

Romanov-Weber

Edmundson-Mete

Allen

Price

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Severely disappointed in the lineup shuffles in the first 2 games of the DD era.

Todays lines at practice as per Renauld Lavoie

Tatar-Danault-Gallagher

Drouin Suzuki-Toffoli

Lehkonen-Kotkaniemi-Armia

Byron-Evans-Frolik

Chiarot-Weber

Edmundson-Petry

Kulak-Romanov

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, campabee82 said:

A message needs to be sent after we return to the Bell Centre. We have to wait until then because the Habs are on one side of the country and the Rocket are on the other. So vs Ottawa on Monday my lines would be

Guhle-Mete

 

Guhle sent back to juniors

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If Anderson does not play tomorrow. I would really shake things up. Anounncers keep talking about our speed not sure if thats the case, we look slow against, TO then Ottawa and last night Winnipeg.

Suzuki is a smart hockey player, but not overly fast

KK, when he gets up to speed is OK, but he does not have that break away speed. They get to him quickly through the neutral zone, when he has some time he has good hands

Toffili, scoring at a really good pace, not sure he can maintain that, not very quick on the blades

Armia, bit quicker than Toffoli, thats not saying alot

Perry, well he should just be wearing boots, he was ok for a game or two. But with all the other teams and players getting into game shape. well, should be taxi squad .

Our quickest skaters are on the 4th Line. Byron, Lekonen and Jake Evans and the other two, Anderson and Droiun were on the same line.

I would like to see a little shakeup, just to let the players loosen up a bitt - if no Anderson

Lekonen, Suzki and Toffoli 

Droiun KK and Gallagher

Tatar Danualt and Armia

Byron Evans and  Frolik

 

With Anderson 

Lekonen, Suzki ,  Anderson

Droiun KK Gallagher

Tatar, Danualt Toffoli

Byron Evans Armia

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, caperns61 said:

If Anderson does not play tomorrow. I would really shake things up. Anounncers keep talking about our speed not sure if thats the case, we look slow against, TO then Ottawa and last night Winnipeg.

I actually have said for a while we're not a super fast skating team but our 'speed' is actually more to do with our passing & overall movement.  I think thats what the coaches are wanting too - as you mentioned, Suzuki is not really a speed demon & neither are guys like Gallagher or Tatar or JK etc - but they all make quick passes  - and if you get all the 5 guys (or at least all 3 forwards) swarming as the passes fly it can make them seem very fast indeed.   

of course when the whole team looks off (like they do right now) then none of this works. I think they needs a huge injection of confidence to get things back on track. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, maas_art said:

I actually have said for a while we're not a super fast skating team but our 'speed' is actually more to do with our passing & overall movement.  I think thats what the coaches are wanting too - as you mentioned, Suzuki is not really a speed demon & neither are guys like Gallagher or Tatar or JK etc - but they all make quick passes  - and if you get all the 5 guys (or at least all 3 forwards) swarming as the passes fly it can make them seem very fast indeed.   

of course when the whole team looks off (like they do right now) then none of this works. I think they needs a huge injection of confidence to get things back on track. 

 

And i am not sure what they can do with the defense right now, Kulak? Mete?, a young Romanov are not the answer. Our dee needs more support from the forwards and stop backing off on the rush.

Chariot and Weber have been brutal. But neither are as bad as they are right now.

Joel Edmundson has been one of our better defensive defensmen for quite a few games now.

Even Petry has look bad in his own end. He had another simple play last night off the boards. but he goes up the middle????  Two games in a row. Yes he is getting points but we need him in the defensive zone as well. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, caperns61 said:

And i am not sure what they can do with the defense right now, Kulak? Mete?, a young Romanov are not the answer. Our dee needs more support from the forwards and stop backing off on the rush.

Chariot and Weber have been brutal. But neither are as bad as they are right now.

Joel Edmundson has been one of our better defensive defensmen for quite a few games now.

Even Petry has look bad in his own end. He had another simple play last night off the boards. but he goes up the middle????  Two games in a row. Yes he is getting points but we need him in the defensive zone as well. 

I think it starts with moving Chairot down to the 3rd pair. ANYTHING after that should be better.  Ideally id try Petry-Edmundson as our top pair (top minutes, top assignments) but i do worry they might have trouble.    I think that Kulak is the best choice for a partner for Weber & id try them as the second pair. 

I think pretty much any of our remaining guys can play 3rd pair.  So my ideal would be:

Edmundson - Petry -  not perfect, but our best duo this year
Kulak - Weber  - Weber has looked off. I think he still has mileage left but Im not convinced he can carry a pairing anymore. Kulak is good enough to not need carrying
Romanov/Chairot/Mete/Fleury  - take your pick. 

17 minutes ago, ramcharger440 said:

Gally has looked really slow to me this year not sure what's up with him but he looks winded a lot!

I agree, he has not looked himself. He does traditionally take a bit of time to get going but this year that coincided with our slump so hopefully its just situational & he'll be back to normal soon. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, caperns61 said:

And i am not sure what they can do with the defense right now, Kulak? Mete?, a young Romanov are not the answer. Our dee needs more support from the forwards and stop backing off on the rush.

Chariot and Weber have been brutal. But neither are as bad as they are right now.

Joel Edmundson has been one of our better defensive defensmen for quite a few games now.

Even Petry has look bad in his own end. He had another simple play last night off the boards. but he goes up the middle????  Two games in a row. Yes he is getting points but we need him in the defensive zone as well. 

Our D resources are poor, but it's an easy decision for me as to who should go where:

 

Kulak-Petry (our best functioning duo over the past few years... two guys who can skate, handle the puck, support the offence, and as I posted elsewhere, Kulak has actually been our strongest defenceman this year by the numbers; this is my minute-eating pair)

Romanov-Weber (Weber is our 3rd best D man despite his lack of speed, but he needs to play with someone who can move the puck in the transition game and get on loose pucks quicker than he can; Romanov needs veteran support; and Mete is not top 4 material, which means Romanov is really the only option here)

Edmundson-Mete (best of the rest, combining one stay at home D with one mobile D; neither is an ideal defenceman and they each have glaring deficiencies to their games, but at least they complement each other. It's clear Chiarot and Edmundson can't be on the same pairing the same way Weber and Chiarot can't play together either, so this is what's left).

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, BigTed3 said:

Our D resources are poor, but it's an easy decision for me as to who should go where:

 

Kulak-Petry (our best functioning duo over the past few years... two guys who can skate, handle the puck, support the offence, and as I posted elsewhere, Kulak has actually been our strongest defenceman this year by the numbers; this is my minute-eating pair)

Romanov-Weber (Weber is our 3rd best D man despite his lack of speed, but he needs to play with someone who can move the puck in the transition game and get on loose pucks quicker than he can; Romanov needs veteran support; and Mete is not top 4 material, which means Romanov is really the only option here)

Edmundson-Mete (best of the rest, combining one stay at home D with one mobile D; neither is an ideal defenceman and they each have glaring deficiencies to their games, but at least they complement each other. It's clear Chiarot and Edmundson can't be on the same pairing the same way Weber and Chiarot can't play together either, so this is what's left).

 

Seems so simple and perfect, why can’t the coaches realize this already 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wouldn't mind Kulak/Weber or Romanov/Weber. but I don"t see the need to break up Edmundson/Petry, I haven't see any pairing actually perform as well as they have on our blue line in a while. I admit I must have some deeply rooted prejudice against Kulak because when I watch him what I mostly notice is a good skater who allows his skating ability to take him completely out of position time after time and then take stupid penalties as a result. I think by minutes played his penalty rate is probably only behind Chiarot in that dubious stat and our PK can't compensate for their mistakes 

I think Edmundson is underrated in what he brings to the team while Kulak and Romanov are currently overrated by fans. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, RCAF48 said:

I wouldn't mind Kulak/Weber or Romanov/Weber. but I don"t see the need to break up Edmundson/Petry, I haven't see any pairing actually perform as well as they have on our blue line in a while. I admit I must have some deeply rooted prejudice against Kulak because when I watch him what I mostly notice is a good skater who allows his skating ability to take him completely out of position time after time and then take stupid penalties as a result. I think by minutes played his penalty rate is probably only behind Chiarot in that dubious stat and our PK can't compensate for their mistakes 

I think Edmundson is underrated in what he brings to the team while Kulak and Romanov are currently overrated by fans. 

I think everyone is seeing a little to much out of Romanov.( I do think he has the potential to be what we need.) That said I actually would like to see what he would look like along side of Weber. He is bigger than Mete (but who isn't) but where as Weber Mete didn't actually look that bad together you do need some size when playing in the top 4. Romanov isn't small more average for a defenseman , but he plays a hard game and doesn't mind the physical side. Romanov is a good skater and Weber has always played good defensively and positionally. I think he could be a good mentor and Romanov could be given a little more free range offensively working with Weber. Keep Petry/Edmondson , play Weber/Romanov and then Chariot/ Kulak-Mete. I think it would be worth a try. I think Romanov Weber on a PP unit could work well. Romanov is a good passer. Like when Markov used to gift Subban with beautiful passes for one timers. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, CaptWelly said:

I think everyone is seeing a little to much out of Romanov.( I do think he has the potential to be what we need.) That said I actually would like to see what he would look like along side of Weber. He is bigger than Mete (but who isn't) but where as Weber Mete didn't actually look that bad together you do need some size when playing in the top 4. Romanov isn't small more average for a defenseman , but he plays a hard game and doesn't mind the physical side. Romanov is a good skater and Weber has always played good defensively and positionally. I think he could be a good mentor and Romanov could be given a little more free range offensively working with Weber. Keep Petry/Edmondson , play Weber/Romanov and then Chariot/ Kulak-Mete. I think it would be worth a try. I think Romanov Weber on a PP unit could work well. Romanov is a good passer. Like when Markov used to gift Subban with beautiful passes for one timers. 

I agree, I would pair Romanov and Webber it seems to me they would compliment each other nicely. Petry and Eddy seem to work very well together that leaves the third pairing  I like Kulak but Romanov is the future so he should move up with Webber now as I said Petry's pair seems solid so leave it alone Chiarot would be fine on the third pairing and Kulak deserves to be playing. there is no place on my team for Mete i would rather bring someone else up to keep as a spare.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

22 hours ago, BigTed3 said:

Our D resources are poor, but it's an easy decision for me as to who should go where:

 

Kulak-Petry (our best functioning duo over the past few years... two guys who can skate, handle the puck, support the offence, and as I posted elsewhere, Kulak has actually been our strongest defenceman this year by the numbers; this is my minute-eating pair)

Romanov-Weber (Weber is our 3rd best D man despite his lack of speed, but he needs to play with someone who can move the puck in the transition game and get on loose pucks quicker than he can; Romanov needs veteran support; and Mete is not top 4 material, which means Romanov is really the only option here)

Edmundson-Mete (best of the rest, combining one stay at home D with one mobile D; neither is an ideal defenceman and they each have glaring deficiencies to their games, but at least they complement each other. It's clear Chiarot and Edmundson can't be on the same pairing the same way Weber and Chiarot can't play together either, so this is what's left).

 

 

6 hours ago, booboo_mtl said:

Seems so simple and perfect, why can’t the coaches realize this already 

Because its not that simple :). Moving a young player like Romanov who has been struggling lately, or Kulak who at best is a 6 or 7th deeman to top pairing minutes is not the answer. 

I get Chariot and Weber have been brutal for awhile this year. But neither are as bad as they have been. 

You need someone like a  Werenski, Miro Heiskanen, Rasmus Dahlin, Dunn and we simply dont have anyone close to that. 

I did say move Romanov up there as well, but just to shake things up for a game or two. not as an answer :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, caperns61 said:

 

 

Because its not that simple :). Moving a young player like Romanov who has been struggling lately, or Kulak who at best is a 6 or 7th deeman to top pairing minutes is not the answer. 

I get Chariot and Weber have been brutal for awhile this year. But neither are as bad as they have been. 

You need someone like a  Werenski, Miro Heiskanen, Rasmus Dahlin, Dunn and we simply dont have anyone close to that. 

I did say move Romanov up there as well, but just to shake things up for a game or two. not as an answer :)

Kulak-Petry is a lot better option than Chiarot-Weber as our top pairing. Among D pairings that have played at least 100 minutes together at 5v5 over the past 3 years, Kulak-Petry is the top-ranked duo with a Corsi For of 59.1%. They're also #1 if you rank our D combos by expected Goals For, at 60.0%. And before we argue that one of those players is driving the other as much as Petry is driving Edmundson this year, our top 8 pairings all feature one of those two players:

- #2 is Schlemko-Petry

- #3 is Kulak-Weber

- #4 is Reilly-Petry

- #5 is Kulak-Romanov

- #6 is Chiarot-Petry

- #7 is Petry-Weber

- #8 is Kulak-Benn

 

FWIW, Chiarot-Weber is #10 of 21 combos over the past 3 years, while Edmundson-Petry is #12. All these pairings are positive Corsi simply because the Habs have been a strong possession team under Julien, but it's clear that Petry and Kulak are the two players driving the Habs' success from the blue line more than anyone else. Kulak-Weber is better than Chiarot-Weber and Chiarot-Petry is also better than Chiarot-Weber. It's not to say either Chiarot or Weber can't be decent NHLers, they just shouldn't be playing together.

Similarly, at 4v5 over the past 3 years, our top D pairings at preventing scoring chances on the PK have been

1. Petry-Fleury

2. Petry-Scandella

3. Petry-Kulak

4. Weber-Benn

5. Petry-Benn

 

Our worst 3 pairings have been

 

3rd worst: Chiarot-Weber

2nd worst: Petry-Edmundson

Worst: Petry-Mete

 

This tells me that Petry has done well with a large number of partners including Kulak, but isn't doing that well with Edmundson on the PK (which would lead me to conclude Edmundson and Mete are less effective there), and Chiarot-Weber have also been bad as a duo on the PK. The common theme there is that none of these players get on loose pucks very quickly and thus clear the zone less effectively.

I've previously posted numbers about Kulak alone showing he's been our most efficient defenceman this year so far. The numbers over the past 3 seasons suggest he and Petry have been our best pairing at 5v5 and a good pairing n the PK too. Conversely, Chiarot and Weber have been mediocre at 5v5 and weak on the PK. All of those things are things you can see with the eye test watching games too.

I'll agree with you that neither Kulak nor Romanov are ideal top 4 players and would be better-served by being the 3rd pairing (where they are having great success thus far). But of all the options we have given that we have only one true top 4 defenceman right now, Kulak-Petry makes the most sense and the numbers strongly support that. It's abhorrent coaching to have pulled Kulak (one of our two strongest D men by the numbers this year) for Mete (statistically our worst). As for Romanov-Weber, I have no idea how it will work and we have no data on this duo to date. But in theory, they pairing makes more sense than putting Weber with Edmundson or Chiarot. Weber fails at moving the puck out of his own zone and getting on loose pucks. Romanov has better numbers but has made mental errors and needs help with positioning. It makes sense that these two players would complement each other, rather than pairing Weber with another player who has the same faults as him.

FWIW, I agree with you that we don't have a Werenski or Heiskanen or Makar, but Kulak-Petry as a duo is a strong pairing and better than the sum of their parts. By Corsi, they have been the 6th most-effective D pairing in the entire league over the past 3 years. So absolutely, it's worth going back to.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, BigTed3 said:

Kulak-Petry is a lot better option than Chiarot-Weber as our top pairing. Among D pairings that have played at least 100 minutes together at 5v5 over the past 3 years, Kulak-Petry is the top-ranked duo with a Corsi For of 59.1%. They're also #1 if you rank our D combos by expected Goals For, at 60.0%. And before we argue that one of those players is driving the other as much as Petry is driving Edmundson this year, our top 8 pairings all feature one of those two players:

- #2 is Schlemko-Petry

- #3 is Kulak-Weber

- #4 is Reilly-Petry

- #5 is Kulak-Romanov

- #6 is Chiarot-Petry

- #7 is Petry-Weber

- #8 is Kulak-Benn

 

FWIW, Chiarot-Weber is #10 of 21 combos over the past 3 years, while Edmundson-Petry is #12. All these pairings are positive Corsi simply because the Habs have been a strong possession team under Julien, but it's clear that Petry and Kulak are the two players driving the Habs' success from the blue line more than anyone else. Kulak-Weber is better than Chiarot-Weber and Chiarot-Petry is also better than Chiarot-Weber. It's not to say either Chiarot or Weber can't be decent NHLers, they just shouldn't be playing together.

Similarly, at 4v5 over the past 3 years, our top D pairings at preventing scoring chances on the PK have been

1. Petry-Fleury

2. Petry-Scandella

3. Petry-Kulak

4. Weber-Benn

5. Petry-Benn

 

Our worst 3 pairings have been

 

3rd worst: Chiarot-Weber

2nd worst: Petry-Edmundson

Worst: Petry-Mete

 

This tells me that Petry has done well with a large number of partners including Kulak, but isn't doing that well with Edmundson on the PK (which would lead me to conclude Edmundson and Mete are less effective there), and Chiarot-Weber have also been bad as a duo on the PK. The common theme there is that none of these players get on loose pucks very quickly and thus clear the zone less effectively.

I've previously posted numbers about Kulak alone showing he's been our most efficient defenceman this year so far. The numbers over the past 3 seasons suggest he and Petry have been our best pairing at 5v5 and a good pairing n the PK too. Conversely, Chiarot and Weber have been mediocre at 5v5 and weak on the PK. All of those things are things you can see with the eye test watching games too.

I'll agree with you that neither Kulak nor Romanov are ideal top 4 players and would be better-served by being the 3rd pairing (where they are having great success thus far). But of all the options we have given that we have only one true top 4 defenceman right now, Kulak-Petry makes the most sense and the numbers strongly support that. It's abhorrent coaching to have pulled Kulak (one of our two strongest D men by the numbers this year) for Mete (statistically our worst). As for Romanov-Weber, I have no idea how it will work and we have no data on this duo to date. But in theory, they pairing makes more sense than putting Weber with Edmundson or Chiarot. Weber fails at moving the puck out of his own zone and getting on loose pucks. Romanov has better numbers but has made mental errors and needs help with positioning. It makes sense that these two players would complement each other, rather than pairing Weber with another player who has the same faults as him.

FWIW, I agree with you that we don't have a Werenski or Heiskanen or Makar, but Kulak-Petry as a duo is a strong pairing and better than the sum of their parts. By Corsi, they have been the 6th most-effective D pairing in the entire league over the past 3 years. So absolutely, it's worth going back to.

 

 

With Romanov's strong game last night ( i know its only 1 game but he's shown flashes of it all year when he isnt too busy overthinking things) id really love to move him into the top 4.  My ideal right now would be some form of Petry, Kulak, Weber & Romanov.   Either Weber-Romanov or Weber-Kulak  etc

That gives you Edmundson/Chairot/Mete/Fleury for your bottom pair. 

I think its extremely unlikely though. The best we can probably hope for right now would be one of Kulak or Romanov (not both) supplanting Chairot in the top 4. I I think edmundson is safe next to petry for a while in the coaches' eyes. 

 

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...