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

2021-22 State of the Habs


Recommended Posts

Its 2 games.LOL.....relax.  

Wait till were 15 or 20 games in and then start with this player is useless. Our dee sucks, we could have picked up better wingers. The lines dont work. 

LOL....

Like listening to the wife when I put on a first coat of paint and 5 minutes later she is sayin i dont like the color. WHAT?? Let it dry and let me give it a second coat. Then you can tell me if its what you want or not. LOL - after 2 coats time to dry - yes I like that.

Its funny how we dont want to give up on a player after 6 season i.e. Galchenyk, or a player after 3 season i.e. KK

BUT after 2 games, well the dee is bad, petry no good, why did we sign suzuki, to many french players and on and on and on. 

At least wait till were 15 to 20 games in...lol

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, habsisme said:

yeah, some good points and options there. Do you speak french? 

I do. Not sure what that has to do with this, but I'm perfectly bilingual and proud to be able to speak both French and English.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, caperns61 said:

Its 2 games.LOL.....relax.  

Wait till were 15 or 20 games in and then start with this player is useless. Our dee sucks, we could have picked up better wingers. The lines dont work. 

LOL....

Like listening to the wife when I put on a first coat of paint and 5 minutes later she is sayin i dont like the color. WHAT?? Let it dry and let me give it a second coat. Then you can tell me if its what you want or not. LOL - after 2 coats time to dry - yes I like that.

Its funny how we dont want to give up on a player after 6 season i.e. Galchenyk, or a player after 3 season i.e. KK

BUT after 2 games, well the dee is bad, petry no good, why did we sign suzuki, to many french players and on and on and on. 

At least wait till were 15 to 20 games in...lol

I'm not so concerned about Suzuki and Caufield, I think they're talented enough that they'll snap out of it. I'm not concerned about Petry, he'll easily be our best D man over the course of the season. I'm concerned about the D because the D is playing poorly for exactly the reasons most of us thought they would. Most of the Habs media has been scratching their heads and wondering why Chiarot and Savard are playing together and why MB didn't go after a top 4 puck-moving D man. These questions were being asked well before the season started and in truth, they've been asked about the construction of the D since Bergevin took over the team. Go back to Murray and Bouillon, Alzner and Schlemko, Drewiske and Benn, and now Chiarot, Edmundson, and Savard. Go back to moving up in the draft to pick Tinordi but passing on Sam Girard. This isn't a criticism of two games, it's a criticism of a philosophy over nearly a decade, and the two games are merely supporting that this is a problem.

Don't get me wrong, I fully expect the Habs to have bad stretches and great stretches during the season. There are ups and downs every year, we're just usually a team that starts strong and fades, so it's a red flag that we're starting so poorly. But when I look at this roster construction, I don't think the likelihood of sustained success is very high with the D corps we have and with the lack of center depth we have.

To address your other points, I was disappointed with AG and JK because the Habs never fully gave them a chance to realize their potential. I feel like they left something on the table not knowing how these players could have performed as a top 6 center. And as for the French-Quebecers, I'm all for finding homegrown talent, but as with hiring coaches, I don't want it forced upon us just to say we have French players and satisfy political pundits. Bergevin took a lot of heat for it last year and the team clearly made a concerted effort to reach on French players this year to try to assuage their critics. If Dougie Hamilton's last name was Houde and he spoke French, do you not believe MB would have made a bigger pitch for him? I'm not here to trash French players, I would love nothing better than to see them do well. I was a supporter of the Drouin trade in some ways and I think he's been one of our best players. I loved Desharnais when he first came up. I loved Mathieu Darche working his way onto the roster. Loved Vinnie Damphousse and Patrick Roy and Stephane Richer when they were here because those guys carried their weight. But there's a difference between choosing players because they're good and having them be French as a bonus and choosing players who aren't as good as others largely because you don't want to be caught out without French players. So again, it's a problem with the philosophy more than anything.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, BigTed3 said:

 

To address your other points, I was disappointed with AG and JK because the Habs never fully gave them a chance to realize their potential. I feel like they left something on the table not knowing how these players could have performed as a top 6 center. 

In all fairmess to Montreal, AG hasn't succeeded with the six other NHL teams he's been with since he left

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Regis22 said:

In all fairmess to Montreal, AG hasn't succeeded with the six other NHL teams he's been with since he left

Far from the point. I'm saying I find it disappointing that the team continually trades players with high-end potential before they know if that potential can be realized. They drafted Galchenyuk as a potential top-line center. In limited time in that role, he played well. And yet in a season where they were eliminated from contention early, they refused to play him as a top 6 center. Why not see if he can fill the role? Even if you don't like the guy off the ice and you wanted to trade him, why not try to bolster his value rather than letting him languish as a bottom 6 winger? Then they rinsed and repeated with Kotkaniemi. The guy was one of the stronger players for us in the playoffs two years in a row and couldn't stick in the line-up while Eric Staal did and while Danault got top-line wingers. The team here played him with Lehkonen, Byron, Armia, and so on and decided he didn't have what it took to be a top 6 center before he turned 21.

Now look at how they handled Suzuki. They gave him a legit shot to be the 1C with a prolonged look in that role. They gave him wingers that can score. And they didn't bench him every time he screwed up or had a bad game, and they don't focus on the fact that he's the worst faceoff guy on the team. But somehow Kotkaniemi batting 49% at faceoffs is an issue while Suzuki at 44% isn't. The Finnish media claimed the Habs have an anti-Euro bias and hold European players to a higher standard than North American players, and it's easy to believe why they said that. Gomez, Desharnais, Danault... all guys who were given prolonged time as the team's 1C despite under-performing for long stretches. Eller, Galchenyuk, Kotkaniemi... all high 1st round picks with huge potential who were never given a real look in the top 6. Romanov and Norlinder criticized for needing to work on their games, with Romanov benched most of the playoffs last year. Yet Guhle praised for being mature, with much less of a story around the pre-season games where he made mistakes. Tatar mysteriously pushed aside despite being one of our best players the past few years. But welcome Mike Hoffman and his goal-scoring despite the fact he isn't a very committed defensive player and has had his share of off-ice controversy. Welcome Jonathan Drouin despite the fact he had a reputation of not being a team player and holding out on Tampa. Corey Perry and Eric Staal have no problem staying in the line-up but Lehkonen has to fight for his spot... Not to say this is universal, but I'd argue that Marc Bergevin (as many other hockey execs do) views North American players as guys who "play the right way" whereas it's harder for Europeans to project that image. Many are seen as being skilled but not tough enough or as taking nights off or so on. Not sure if that has something to do with it, but I do feel like it's a factor, and whether it's the only thing or not, I simply feel like they pulled the plug on AG and JK before giving them a chance to realize the potential they were drafted for.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, BigTed3 said:

…,I simply feel like they pulled the plug on AG and JK before giving them a chance to realize the potential they were drafted for.

I think they gave AG a chance and realized he was never going to be that player that they drafted as.  And the fact that he’s on

team 5 ( or  6 ) looks like they were correct ,  because AG still can’t catch on. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, maas_art said:

So why get Savard?  Well he's big. He's french...he's a RHD - so i guess that is good but then you need to dump one of Chiarot or Edmundson. 

That's what I'm talking about. You don't have to keep them all!  It's like when the Leafs got Tavares.  They had to get rid of one of their big three.  They didn't, and they keep paying for that mistake. We need to upgrade Chiarot. If it means overpaying , then overpay.  You can't keep everyone including all your draft picks.  You can only have 50 players with NHL contracts.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, habsisme said:

I think the fact that he's big, french, and RHD played a role, but who else was really available? I don't know if they tried hard enough for hamilton but I never thought he'd want to come here

He fit a role that was needed, a big strong right handed deeman, they new Weber was going down, forget the label of being french. 3.5 million cap hit is not bad for Savard .  Savard is an NHL calibre deeman, who has averaged over 20 minutes a game throughout  his carreer.

Chariot has one year left on his contract, which has been good value if you ask me 3.5 million, he will not be here next year because Guhle will be, Romanov will have another year and Norlinder. Right now Chariot is a better option then all 3. Both in development and what Chariot offers at the NHL level.

Savard has a need because our right handed pool is not that good, Julsen injuries derailed him, Fleury never pannned out, Brooks doesn't look like he has it plus injuries all righties, Weber injuries and age.  So Savard fill a hole, he is a right handed shot, lotsa of NHL experience and plays a physical game and one of the kids will be playing with him next season. 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, caperns61 said:

He fit a role that was needed, a big strong right handed deeman, they new Weber was going down, forget the label of being french. 3.5 million cap hit is not bad for Savard .  Savard is an NHL calibre deeman, who has averaged over 20 minutes a game throughout  his carreer.

Chariot has one year left on his contract, which has been good value if you ask me 3.5 million, he will not be here next year because Guhle will be, Romanov will have another year and Norlinder. Right now Chariot is a better option then all 3. Both in development and what Chariot offers at the NHL level.

Savard has a need because our right handed pool is not that good, Julsen injuries derailed him, Fleury never pannned out, Brooks doesn't look like he has it plus injuries all righties, Weber injuries and age.  So Savard fill a hole, he is a right handed shot, lotsa of NHL experience and plays a physical game and one of the kids will be playing with him next season. 

 

 

It seems like we are saying something like this every year. Don't worry JK will get a shot in the top 6 and Romanov will get a shot at top 4 next season was the mantra all last year. A few years ago it was AG. The same  was said about Eller, Mete, Hudon and Juulsen none of them actually got to play in the top 6 or top 4 (in the coaches defense Juulsen was injured) over the last few years. We said it again through the pre-season When Romanov was playing next to Petry and might I say was playing well most nights. Then all of a sudden after the last game he was dropped to the 3rd pairing for no apparent reason cause the season was approaching. Teams like Ottawa, NJ, NYR, Toronto and Edmonton are getting better because they are trusting in their young players and allowing them to play despite making mistakes or youth or European or whatever the issue the Habs seem to have with their young guys. All players make mistakes otherwise every game would end up scoreless, so give the kids a break teach them through coaching and putting them in similar situations to see how they react instead of benching them or demoting them or crucified them in the media, actually do your job as a coach.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This team while resonably good on paper really cannot afford to throw too many games away. Ducharme has quite a few new players to work with and is most likely putting in place his system since taking over from Julien and having his first preseason training camp. It appears some of these units might have needed a little more time together. My biggest concern is the defence. I have not been impressed with Wideman at all and am not sure Kulak can last playing where he is now.  I like the pick up when we got him and like his skating, but Kulak is still a work in progress. Our attack has been very disjointed and the  Perrault, Pacquette acquisitions have highlighted how much this team needs Byron back in the line-up. It will be interesting to see how Hoffman's arrival impacts the team. After two Cross ice passes that turn into 2 on 0's and bad turnovers at the blue line along with poor decision in pinching by the D and some real poor coverage in our own end. To say the least Ducharme has a lot of work to do to turn this around and in todays NHL you need to be able to compete every night. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, Habberwacky said:

This team while resonably good on paper really cannot afford to throw too many games away. Ducharme has quite a few new players to work with and is most likely putting in place his system since taking over from Julien and having his first preseason training camp. It appears some of these units might have needed a little more time together. My biggest concern is the defence. I have not been impressed with Wideman at all and am not sure Kulak can last playing where he is now.  I like the pick up when we got him and like his skating, but Kulak is still a work in progress. Our attack has been very disjointed and the  Perrault, Pacquette acquisitions have highlighted how much this team needs Byron back in the line-up. It will be interesting to see how Hoffman's arrival impacts the team. After two Cross ice passes that turn into 2 on 0's and bad turnovers at the blue line along with poor decision in pinching by the D and some real poor coverage in our own end. To say the least Ducharme has a lot of work to do to turn this around and in todays NHL you need to be able to compete every night. 

Nice to see that Romanov and Petry are together for the morning skate but still need to split up Chiarot-Savard

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, caperns61 said:

He fit a role that was needed, a big strong right handed deeman, they new Weber was going down, forget the label of being french. 3.5 million cap hit is not bad for Savard .  Savard is an NHL calibre deeman, who has averaged over 20 minutes a game throughout  his carreer.

Chariot has one year left on his contract, which has been good value if you ask me 3.5 million, he will not be here next year because Guhle will be, Romanov will have another year and Norlinder. Right now Chariot is a better option then all 3. Both in development and what Chariot offers at the NHL level.

Savard has a need because our right handed pool is not that good, Julsen injuries derailed him, Fleury never pannned out, Brooks doesn't look like he has it plus injuries all righties, Weber injuries and age.  So Savard fill a hole, he is a right handed shot, lotsa of NHL experience and plays a physical game and one of the kids will be playing with him next season. 

I agree that Savard fit a RHD need and perhaps some veteran leadership to compliment Petry but there are 2 issues - 1) is the 4 year term - that was a large concession to get a player that helps you in the playoffs but may not necessarily get you to the playoffs. 4 years tells me you think he is part of a core.  I would rather MB have gone vigorously after Vince Dunn who is younger and can play both sides 2) style - Savard duplicates Edmundson and Chiarot style - since Chiarot is likely gone after this season as likely replaced by Guhle, , it did nothing to improve this year. 
Our future years D of Petry, Romanov, Guhle, Edmundson and  the question marks of Norlinder, / Harris / Struble / Mailloux, Unlikely Brooks,  looks promising but I can’t help but think Savard doesn’t quite fit. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, campabee82 said:

It seems like we are saying something like this every year. Don't worry JK will get a shot in the top 6 and Romanov will get a shot at top 4 next season was the mantra all last year. A few years ago it was AG. The same  was said about Eller, Mete, Hudon and Juulsen none of them actually got to play in the top 6 or top 4 (in the coaches defense Juulsen was injured) over the last few years. We said it again through the pre-season When Romanov was playing next to Petry and might I say was playing well most nights. Then all of a sudden after the last game he was dropped to the 3rd pairing for no apparent reason cause the season was approaching. Teams like Ottawa, NJ, NYR, Toronto and Edmonton are getting better because they are trusting in their young players and allowing them to play despite making mistakes or youth or European or whatever the issue the Habs seem to have with their young guys. All players make mistakes otherwise every game would end up scoreless, so give the kids a break teach them through coaching and putting them in similar situations to see how they react instead of benching them or demoting them or crucified them in the media, actually do your job as a coach.

Im Not trying to justify the Habs' decisions regarding youth but

AG is on his 5 th ( or 6 th team ) next yr he'll probably be in the KHL as he is running out of chances / teams .

Eller was replaced by Danault ( he stayed with MOntreal for 5 1/2 yrs then wanted big money )

Mete is a 6 or 7 D man on Ottawa.

Hudon is playing with Syracuse ,

And Juulson was waived by the Habs and Florida ( but recently picked up by Vancouver ) 

It appears , at least to me , the Habs' didnt  screw anyhting up with these guys other than maybe drafting them in the first place :P 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Regis22 said:

Im Not trying to justify the Habs' decisions regarding youth but

AG is on his 5 th ( or 6 th team ) next yr he'll probably be in the KHL as he is running out of chances / teams .

Eller was replaced by Danault ( he stayed with MOntreal for 5 1/2 yrs then wanted big money )

Mete is a 6 or 7 D man on Ottawa.

Hudon is playing with Syracuse ,

And Juulson was waived by the Habs and Florida ( but recently picked up by Vancouver ) 

It appears , at least to me , the Habs' didnt  screw anyhting up with these guys other than maybe drafting them in the first place :P 

Don't think they drafted Eller.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, claremont said:

I agree that Savard fit a RHD need and perhaps some veteran leadership to compliment Petry but there are 2 issues - 1) is the 4 year term - that was a large concession to get a player that helps you in the playoffs but may not necessarily get you to the playoffs. 4 years tells me you think he is part of a core.  I would rather MB have gone vigorously after Vince Dunn who is younger and can play both sides 2) style - Savard duplicates Edmundson and Chiarot style - since Chiarot is likely gone after this season as likely replaced by Guhle, , it did nothing to improve this year. 
Our future years D of Petry, Romanov, Guhle, Edmundson and  the question marks of Norlinder, / Harris / Struble / Mailloux, Unlikely Brooks,  looks promising but I can’t help but think Savard doesn’t quite fit. 

So what Savard duplicates what Chariot and Edmunston give us. So did Weber and he is gone. Chariot is gone after this season. The right side needed an NHL ready dman that can log 20 minutes. And does not break the bank. Savard is that player. All the players you mnetioned at this very moment only two can log 20 plus NHL Minutes would be Edmunston and Petry, Some of the players you mentioned may never even make the NHL if they do and become better then Savard then trade him. Simple as that :)

You mentioned Dunn. I wonder why St louis didnt seem to mind losing him??? I heard last season eveyone jumping on the Ghost Band wagon. I wonder why he was given away for nothing? I wonder why Romanov cannot earn big minutes yet. Just because they can skate and look like they have a great skill set does not mean they are capable of big minutes.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, caperns61 said:

So what Savard duplicates what Chariot and Edmundson give us. So did Weber and he is gone. Chariot is gone after this season. The right side needed an NHL ready dman that can log 20 minutes. And does not break the bank. Savard is that player. All the players you mentioned at this very moment only two can log 20 plus NHL minutes would be Edmundson and Petry, Some of the players you mentioned may never even make the NHL if they do and become better then Savard then trade him. Simple as that :)

You mentioned Dunn. I wonder why St Louis didnt seem to mind losing him??? I heard last season everyone jumping on the Ghost Band wagon. I wonder why he was given away for nothing? I wonder why Romanov cannot earn big minutes yet. Just because they can skate and look like they have a great skill set does not mean they are capable of big minutes.  

Good analysis. & good questions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Regis22 said:

Im Not trying to justify the Habs' decisions regarding youth but

AG is on his 5 th ( or 6 th team ) next yr he'll probably be in the KHL as he is running out of chances / teams .

Eller was replaced by Danault ( he stayed with MOntreal for 5 1/2 yrs then wanted big money )

Mete is a 6 or 7 D man on Ottawa.

Hudon is playing with Syracuse ,

And Juulson was waived by the Habs and Florida ( but recently picked up by Vancouver ) 

It appears , at least to me , the Habs' didnt  screw anyhting up with these guys other than maybe drafting them in the first place :P 

The one guy on your list who really had success after he left was Eller. He's been a key cog for the Caps for the past few years and was one of their best and most important players in the Cup run in 2018. His production has actually gone up in the past couple of seasons, and he's really not getting paid big money. He still had two years left at 3.5M when we traded him, and he re-signed for exactly the same AAV. He's essentially getting paid the same thing as Armia, Byron, Chiarot, Savard, or Edmundson, and I'd take Eller over any of those players to be honest. If you're looking at cap hit, for example, you could have Eller and Romanov or Chiarot and Paquette for the same total price, and I think the former duo provides us with more bang for our buck. Let's also keep in mind that the Habs dealt Eller for a couple of picks and then used similar picks to acquire Shaw, although we got picks in a worse draft class and Timmins had said he would have used the two picks lost for Shaw on Sam Girard and Alex Debrincat (and he said that before either guy was a stud).

As for the others, agreed that none of the ones you listed has come back to bite us yet, but also hard to know if we just really screwed up their development. For example, if Hudon had been given a shot in the top 6 instead of sporadic chances on the 4th line, maybe he develops more experience and maybe success breeds more confidence and better results. Hudon was our best player in the AHL for several years but never got a real chance here. So maybe he never amounts to anything anywhere, but if any one of us had a job where we did it well and never got promoted and were passed over for others and had our names run through the mud by our bosses, it's hard to imagine us having success either. I find it odd that people overlook this and just assume that a guy who was trodden on for 5-6 years here can just go elsewhere and act like they're a clean slate without any baggage or lost time. I could equally list a bunch of players who were never given much chance as a Hab and went on to have success elsewhere: Grabovski, Hainsey, Beauchemin, McDonagh, Robidas, Tucker, Sergachev, etc. It's not universal that every player we've dumped has sucked in other pastures.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, BigTed3 said:

The one guy on your list who really had success after he left was Eller. He's been a key cog for the Caps for the past few years and was one of their best and most important players in the Cup run in 2018. His production has actually gone up in the past couple of seasons, and he's really not getting paid big money. He still had two years left at 3.5M when we traded him, and he re-signed for exactly the same AAV. He's essentially getting paid the same thing as Armia, Byron, Chiarot, Savard, or Edmundson, and I'd take Eller over any of those players to be honest. If you're looking at cap hit, for example, you could have Eller and Romanov or Chiarot and Paquette for the same total price, and I think the former duo provides us with more bang for our buck. Let's also keep in mind that the Habs dealt Eller for a couple of picks and then used similar picks to acquire Shaw, although we got picks in a worse draft class and Timmins had said he would have used the two picks lost for Shaw on Sam Girard and Alex Debrincat (and he said that before either guy was a stud).

As for the others, agreed that none of the ones you listed has come back to bite us yet, but also hard to know if we just really screwed up their development. For example, if Hudon had been given a shot in the top 6 instead of sporadic chances on the 4th line, maybe he develops more experience and maybe success breeds more confidence and better results. Hudon was our best player in the AHL for several years but never got a real chance here. So maybe he never amounts to anything anywhere, but if any one of us had a job where we did it well and never got promoted and were passed over for others and had our names run through the mud by our bosses, it's hard to imagine us having success either. I find it odd that people overlook this and just assume that a guy who was trodden on for 5-6 years here can just go elsewhere and act like they're a clean slate without any baggage or lost time. I could equally list a bunch of players who were never given much chance as a Hab and went on to have success elsewhere: Grabovski, Hainsey, Beauchemin, McDonagh, Robidas, Tucker, Sergachev, etc. It's not universal that every player we've dumped has sucked in other pastures.

 

 

Yeah we should have never traded Eller. He remains a 3rd line center but maybe the best in the game. We could really use exactly that right now. And what did we do with those 2 picks? Probably nothing came out of it

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, BigTed3 said:

The one guy on your list who really had success after he left was Eller. He's been a key cog for the Caps for the past few years and was one of their best and most important players in the Cup run in 2018. His production has actually gone up in the past couple of seasons, and he's really not getting paid big money. He still had two years left at 3.5M when we traded him, and he re-signed for exactly the same AAV. He's essentially getting paid the same thing as Armia, Byron, Chiarot, Savard, or Edmundson, and I'd take Eller over any of those players to be honest. If you're looking at cap hit, for example, you could have Eller and Romanov or Chiarot and Paquette for the same total price, and I think the former duo provides us with more bang for our buck. Let's also keep in mind that the Habs dealt Eller for a couple of picks and then used similar picks to acquire Shaw, although we got picks in a worse draft class and Timmins had said he would have used the two picks lost for Shaw on Sam Girard and Alex Debrincat (and he said that before either guy was a stud).

As for the others, agreed that none of the ones you listed has come back to bite us yet, but also hard to know if we just really screwed up their development. For example, if Hudon had been given a shot in the top 6 instead of sporadic chances on the 4th line, maybe he develops more experience and maybe success breeds more confidence and better results. Hudon was our best player in the AHL for several years but never got a real chance here. So maybe he never amounts to anything anywhere, but if any one of us had a job where we did it well and never got promoted and were passed over for others and had our names run through the mud by our bosses, it's hard to imagine us having success either. I find it odd that people overlook this and just assume that a guy who was trodden on for 5-6 years here can just go elsewhere and act like they're a clean slate without any baggage or lost time. I could equally list a bunch of players who were never given much chance as a Hab and went on to have success elsewhere: Grabovski, Hainsey, Beauchemin, McDonagh, Robidas, Tucker, Sergachev, etc. It's not universal that every player we've dumped has sucked in other pastures.

 

 

Yes. It was & is frustrating,  when some players never get the chance to play with quality players. Eller was one of those players and he still performed well, in whatever role they put him in, which was usually as a checking center. Then the Habs traded him for 2 very low 2nd round picks. Then picked up Shaw for 2 very high 2nd round picks. That was bad asset management. Hudson was not only one of our top minor league prospects,  but during one of our really bad years,  he was one of our best players.  Then the following year, inexplicably,  he was forgotten/ignored. Also, the rest of your commentary,  BigTed3, is spot on.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/13/2021 at 12:23 PM, BigTed3 said:

 

1. Poehling was very average. He wasn't overly involved and he didn't create much offensively. Overall, he just didn't look like he wanted it very much. There was no extra effort, there was no sense of urgency or motivation in his game. Maybe he was just nervous, but there wasn't anything that told the Habs they had to keep him. He was also waiver-exempt, so it was an easy decision to send him down rather than have to put another player on waivers. The only saving grace for Poehling is that he'll be the 1C in Laval and get to play with Ylonen again, and those two had success last year. So there will be opportunity to dominate at the AHL level again and warrant a chance when his confidence is higher. 

from Blain Potvin

"Tonight, Poehling has played in all situations, won the majority of his faceoffs, and played with more confidence and desire. It's one game, but this is the Poehling fans were hoping to see in camp"

Let's hope he figures it out. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, caperns61 said:

So what Savard duplicates what Chariot and Edmunston give us. So did Weber and he is gone. Chariot is gone after this season. The right side needed an NHL ready dman that can log 20 minutes. And does not break the bank. Savard is that player. All the players you mnetioned at this very moment only two can log 20 plus NHL Minutes would be Edmunston and Petry, Some of the players you mentioned may never even make the NHL if they do and become better then Savard then trade him. Simple as that :)

You mentioned Dunn. I wonder why St louis didnt seem to mind losing him??? I heard last season eveyone jumping on the Ghost Band wagon. I wonder why he was given away for nothing? I wonder why Romanov cannot earn big minutes yet. Just because they can skate and look like they have a great skill set does not mean they are capable of big minutes.  

RHD Weber duplicated LHD Chiarot and LHD Edmundson? Shea might have slowed down but he could still play the power play on the 2nd unit and had a shot beyond being an effective hitter or net presence chopper. I don't think Chiarot or Edmundson could be on the 2nd unit PP, so I debate your first statement. If anything Edmundson and Chiarot were and still are duplication in styles.

I will wait and see on David Savard, as to whether he helps get us to the playoffs. I acknowledge he is cost effective on the cap, and can handle 20 minutes at a soon to be 31 in 6 more days, but how many years beyond this year, will that hold true? Will he play those 20 minutes well? He has a lot of mileage. I think it was short sighted of MB to extend Savard to 4 years. If he's dead weight in a couple of years, he's not tradeable - Alzner deux? I would have preferred a younger RHD defenceman albeit they don't grow on trees, and would have given up some assets or draft picks rather than the easy way of just paying $3.5million and term for Savard. Perhaps next year is a better evaluation with Chiarot expired and Savard becomes the work horse hitter for the right side to align (not necessarily play with) Edmundson. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

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