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

roy_133

Retired jersey/chandail retiré
  • Posts

    18,335
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by roy_133

  1. Long time, no post. Feels bad but by far most likely outcome was to move down and instead the Habs actually move up. Not half bad. Also wouldn't be stunned if the Habs took Kotkaniemi who's been moving up draft boards some have him as high at 5. Either way, it was a positive night. At this point it feels like whichever teenager we draft is more relevant to Bergevin's successor but who knows.
  2. I don't buy it, they didn't have to have a players vote. There was none with Gionta, they could have just named Max captain instead of having a fake vote that was in and of its self unnecessary. Subban seemed to generally rub enough guys the wrong way, for whatever reason, that it's pretty logical he'd lose. I just can't see why they'd waste their time holding a vote and then trying to push or manipulate players into voting for the guy they want (but didn't want to outright name). So if they did that and Subban won, then what? Hide the results and pretend Max won? If the players felt Subban was their leader, I don't think they'd have cared what Therrien said and voted him anyway. In fact, if they felt Subban was their leader, Therrien saying the things he did about Subban would have probably pissed them off. I can see why Subban would be an annoying dude sometimes, especially in a losing year. He has no off switch, it's endearing and it's why I (we) loved him, but in a year like 15-16 when EVERYTHING is going wrong to have a guy be that over the top and energetic, I could see it wearing on some of the guys who are having a harder time with all the losing. Subban is more geared for fan love and leading by example in a big game and Pacioretty is more geared to be respected by those in the hockey world, including the players in the room. I don't think they needed to fudge the numbers, it's a VERY unsurprising result. You can argue what it says about hockey culture, but it's totally unsurprising. As for player vote or not, meh, it's not exactly a huge responsibility and the C doesn't change anything. Org can do what they want with the C at the end of the day, they could strip Pacioretty tomorrow if it makes things better. They don't need to have a vote, they don't need to have a captain, completely at their discretion. Sidenote: Pacioretty looks awwwwwwwful. Maybe put him back with Danault.
  3. Right now I can't definitively say Drouin is better than Shaw at C. As for Galchenyuk, if they do move Drouin off C, which I would strongly consider, I doubt it's Galchenyuk going back there. Whether we agree or not, Julien didn't like what he saw last time Galchenyuk was there and 8 points in 23 games on the wing isn't going to change his mind. Galchenyuk is going to have to produce where he's at before we see him top 6 C again. I'd move Drouin back to wing soon-ish though. It's not going to work so better off letting him find his groove on the wing and just accepting we have no Cs and rebuilding the C and D over the next 2-3 years. This core is not going to work. Last year was the final real kick at the can and we added Ott, Martinsen and King at the deadline.
  4. Galchenyuk with an awful defensive play and then Gallagher with an ozone penalty, lots of guys will be sitting I suppose. Maybe we need more DLR
  5. Just catching up, awful defense from Drouin and especially Galchenyuk there, that line needs someone other than Byron maybe who isn't necessarily great defensively himself. I can't believe that Weber shot and lol Pleks is actually killing it tonight.
  6. I agree but obviously Julien feels if completely overexposed, Galchenyuk will give us 2-3 more often than 3-2. Whether he's right or not is an interesting debate. As for Plekanec - Byron, completely agree. I think it's nuts. I could somewhat live with Danault - Pacioretty, at least they've won a bunch of games together the last 2 years and Pacioretty scores a lot but Drouin feels made for 3 on 3 and Galchenyuk has always thrived in extra space. My theory is, you're going to give up chances 3 on 3 and get chances regardless almost of who's on the ice, so put the guys on who have the best chance of cashing their chance and ending the game first. I would guess the logic is hold them the first shift while they use their best player and try and use ours to get it in shifts 2-3? I don't know. It's hard to grasp either way. Either Julien thinks Byron and Plekanec are our best 3 on 3 players, or he has such little faith in our best skill players that he can't go shot for shot with them in a 3 on 3? I reallllllllly don't get it.
  7. Also, the wordy replies may seem like we completely disagree but I think we're 95% on the same page here.
  8. Yes, I think productive players deserve more leeway than grinders, of course. I was more talking about for coaches there's a threshold of mistakes/positive players and when you fall below that threshold, you play less (depending on the type of error). We can argue about whether or not it's fair, I suppose. I completely understand confirmation bias but if that's the case with Galchenyuk, there's a lot of people who are somewhat blinded by it. I mean, Julien came in here with an attitude of putting Galchenyuk right up on line 1 and at C. I'm not sure he came in here thinking "oh he's too mistake prone". I was honestly more inclined to believe it was 90% coaching error when it was only Therrien, when the u-23 team didn't take him after his career year it gave me some pause but also attributable to usage I suppose (even though he played a big role the prior year) but when Julien started, it gave me more pause. I don't put it all on Galchenyuk at all. Also though, there's different types of mistakes, there's mistakes Galchenyuk makes when he's trying to make things happen and make plays. Certainly, that's annoying. He goes through the middle of the ice too much with passes and doesn't use his wicked shot enough but I would say you easily live with it. When it works, good things happen. That pass he made to Weber to set up the Byron goal Tuesday was by all accounts, a pretty dumb pass. A cross ice pass, through a congested middle with the DMan streaking the zone. If that gets turned around, it's an A1 rush against but it worked and we scored and he made it in a time we NEEDED a goal. No issue, eve if he turned it over, no issue. I'm not talking about the mistakes he makes like that though, or trying to make a nice play to gain the zone. The play he made on the 1st goal was awful, had a chance to get the puck out in transition, it bounced off his stick for a turnover and then he took an AWFUL route to shut off the point shot and we got scored on. There's no potential positive play there, it's a relatively little looking thing when watching on TV (unless it's a goal against) but I'm sure it drives the coaching staff nuts. The Athletic did a good piece about a few plays he made last game, the good and the really ugly of both and I'd link to it but it's a pay site, so if you're a member go look it up. But that is more the issue with him, not turning it over trying to make a play but being CONSTANTLY completely lost in the dzone. No upside there. So, be risky offensively, be risky with the puck but at least look like you have a SLIGHT idea in coverage. It's why I guess even though I'd probably put him there since we're kind of doomed either way, I understand why a coach would want him no where near C. It seems like a good idea, Julien came in here and probably thought Therrien was nuts and how long did that last? Pacioretty is pretty bad defensively, at times he's dumb but mostly he looks at least like he has a general idea of where he should be, even when going through the motions. He can be frustrating, he's also a hell of a lot more productive than Galchenyuk and he's not as lost defensively. There are times the coaching staff probably could send him a firm message and I'm sure if it ever reached the point of him flat out not listening, they would. For as much as it's 2 coaches who have had problems with Galchenyuk, it's two different voices who have loved guys like Pacioretty, Lehkonen. Although, I'll say this, if I were Drouin, I'd be worried. He looks lost a lot, starting to wonder if he's not as lost as Galchenyuk defensively at C. I don't know how long they'll give him but, jeeze. He's fantastic though, he's got elements Galchenyuk doesn't have offensively that make him better suited to C than Galchenyuk, theory. Quicker, better hands, better passer. Not that Galchenyuk has bad hands/passing but Drouin is better. Also on Galchenyuk, he should thrive on the wing in a shooting/trigger role. I don't see why he's not producing more. TLDR: He shouldn't be punished for trying to make plays, I agree but I think the bigger issue is when he's just blindly circling around the Dzone without the puck, looking like he doesn't have even the slightest guess of where he needs to be.
  9. lol, not only that but he rushed so hard to do it that he didn't have money left over to work both Radulov and Markov in, 2 key skilled players. First priority, sign those guys at a fair contract and from there, whatever you have left, find a bargain defensive D-man (if you really feel the need to acquire one). By rushing the market, he totally blew it.
  10. I know a lot of hot streaks are associated with higher SH%, that was my point. Everything about Galchenyuk's stretches suggest hot streak, not sustainability. I don't think he's even shown anything that makes me believe he could be a PPG player, despite him having played at that clip for 2 separate 20 game stretches. As for Galchenyuk shooting a higher % of his shots from high danger than Pacioretty, it's true but maybe not quite as drastic as you'd guess. Either way though, you just use their career SH% as a baseline. Pacioretty 11% and Galchenyuk 13%. Galchenyuk, regardless of where he shoots from isn't a 20-21% shooter and definitely not a 30% shooter, no one is. I don't believe his being a 30 goal, 60 point player is a bad thing either. I've said he's a good player, he tends to be IMO overrated and underrated with very little middle ground. He's a very good offensive, bad defensive player who's a net positive and can be fun to watch (although can also be physically painful to watch). As for trying him at C, I would especially if we fall out of it but I also can see why a coach wouldn't. He's one of those players, man, it's hard. Fans like him, advanced stats are pretty good on him but he just does stupid things that coaches won't live with. Flat out. There's a few different kinds of mistakes, some coaches will live with and some they won't. He makes easily fixable, repeatable mistakes. I don't necessarily think it's right to not just give in and put him there but I can empathize, I suppose. There was a lot of "It's all Therrien" and I was there too and as soon as Julien took over, first thing he did was move Galchenyuk back to C and I was reasonably excited and he played himself (in Julien's eyes) from 1st line C to 4th line LW insanely fast. I'm not trying to appeal to authority but some of this is on him. He's doing things coaches VERY clearly don't want him doing and seemingly having a hard time learning. I don't think it'll make a massive difference if he's at C production wise. He might be a bit better offensively, his awful defense becomes more of an issue to offset that though. I built that into him being potentially a 30-60 guy. I don't think he's going to outdo that but I'd love to be surprised. I think, I guess it's easy for teams to talk or leak things and who knows where that came from, I obviously trust those guys but I'll say this, I truly believe Galchenyuk was very available for even a decent offer this summer and Bergevin had every intention to move him. If those teams truly bought him as a legitimately top end C, they could have had him if they were willing to pay for him at anything near what a guy like that would go for. Yes he spent time on the 4th line but there's a chicken and the egg element. Hudon has played minutes less per game, has had worse linemates on the whole and has 4 even strength points and more shots. Galchenyuk is supposed to be a lot better. Part of it is some bad luck but, I guess my point was more that we all want these things for him and root for him but he has to do his part. He's on a good line now, they're playing pretty well (he's been better than Drouin who's been underwhelming the last little bit) but he's going to have to generate points 5 on 5 and create more if he's going to get the kinds of chances we're talking about. I think if you put Pacioretty in that role, he'd generate enough to move himself out of it. For all his warts, Pacioretty is very consistent in generating his own shots/goals, regardless of linemates. No one expects a guy in a limited role to produce relative to a 1st liner but 3 ES points in 19 games with what? 7-8 games on a line with Drouin isn't going to get him a promotion. I like Galchenyuk, think he's a good player, think at times he's gotten some bad breaks and coaches have been hard on him but there's also a large element of some of this is on him, maybe even a lot. Therrien had issues with him, the u-23 WCOH team didn't even want him as an injury replacement coming off his career year and then Julien immediately had the same problems with him. When he was made available no one has ponied up a fair amount. I don't know. I like him, I think he's good but I just don't buy the whole, it's all the world against him and he bares no responsibility for it. He's a good player, in year 6 I think that's all he'll be. Good. He's on a good contract, we need his skill. Hope it works with Drouin because both need to be better than they have been or we're totally screwed.
  11. Yes but the question is what is that indicative of? He scored 16 goals over 22 games shooting 31% on a team that was already out of playoff contention and just lived with his defensive play. Good players have hot stretches, last year Pacioretty lead the league in goals for a what? 40-45 game stretch? Why? because he had been shooting like 7% leading into it and got red hot and had a very high SH% for a stretch. The 2 Galchenyuk stretches he had were driven both by incredibly high on ice SH%. I'm not bashing him, he's good but meh. I'm also not giving up on him but by year 5/6, it's unlikely for huge development. He's basically in his prime right now and he has 3 even strength points in 19 games lol. Good players have stretches. I find it hard to fathom being at C makes or breaks him to that degree, it logically makes no sense. I look at those 2 hot stretches and just see a ton of aspects there's no way he can keep up. Normalize the averages and he's probably still a 55-60 point, bad defensive player. A very useful asset so that's not an insult. I'd have no problem with him at C but he's very likely going to end up as a winger on any team he plays on, it's not just 1 coach now who sees it that way. All I'm saying though is that at this point his ceiling is a 60 point, bad defensive player. I'm not sure there's much of an argument. Yes, if he has a crazy on ice SH% or shoots 30% himself he'll outproduce that. The only way he's going to get himself back to C is by playing himself there and he's not doing that, he's played well enough, looks fine, whatever but he's not forcing anyone's hand. Like I said, 3 even strength points in 19 games. Not generating enough shots, looks lost defensively quite often (that 1st CBJ goal last night, yeesh). He's polarizing, he's over criticized and over defended. He's good but we're in year 6.
  12. Yes but that's mostly unique to the market, which was my point, which I think is incredibly silly. It's not the same anywhere else, Montreal places undue stress on captains and goalies relative to any other market in the league. In say, Toronto, they'd be more apt to be hard on management or coaches. As for Subban, he was good at dealing with pressure but he also seemed to rub several of his teammates the wrong way and created stupid controversies for no reason. He got a lot of (irrelevant) heat for the Crosby finals stuff, that kind of crap doesn't play any better. Really, anyone they named, half of the fan base would be aggravated with, which is the problem but at the end of the day, the most important aspects of a captaincy are things we don't see, so it's pretty easy to just defer to the player vote. Who knows, really? Also, I firmly believe that it truly doesn't matter. If it was Subban doing silly goofy things or Pacioretty getting stressed out, I don't think it matters. Pacioretty's performance hasn't dropped with the C, that's all I care about. I don't think him having it over Weber has accounted for any points gained or lost in the standings. The rest is Montreal noise. FWIW, I don't think Pacioretty is a good or bad captain, he might be bad. I just don't know and I don't think anyone else knows and I think we try too hard to make it a story. Pacioretty the player has warts that deserve criticism, I just think we're over analyzing the other stuff. I don't know that Subban would be any better, I don't think it would have any impact on our record. I think Subban was a better player, but not sure what that would mean. Do I think players would work harder because Subban was the C? Subban seemed pretty, polarizing, in the locker room. Also, the players had every chance to vote him captain and didn't. If they thought they were costing themselves big wins by voting Pacioretty, I'm sure they wouldn't have. Strip of the C, give it to Weber, whatever. See if it makes a difference, I'd just be surprised because I don't think captaincy matters. It only matters for the guy who has to go through it because it makes his job harder and if you think the stress is getting to Max, okay fine but his production is the same. It's hard to see where.
  13. I'm not even sure he has top level skill, he's good with the puck but he's not a complete wizard or anything, he's not on the same level as Drouin. He has a really good shot/release but he doesn't use it NEARLY enough 5 on 5. The game seems too fast for him, he doesn't have a quick first skating stride, he doesn't make quick decisions, his hockey sense isn't great. He's great in controlled situations where he has a lot of time (PP, 3 on 3) but otherwise he's just good. I mean, it's not to say he's bad, he's certainly good but it's what? year 5 or 6 now? I've stopped holding my breath that he's going to be great. He's had hot stretches yes but that's just par for the course, I wouldn't look for deeper meaning. He has had a couple of VERY high on-ice SH% driven stretches but it's a weird sport like that. Last year Pacioretty had an insanely hot stretch in the middle of the season, like best goal scorer in the league hot and yet he ended up with numbers he always ends up with. I just think we're at the point where, embrace Galchenyuk for what he is, possibly a consistent 60 point winger and possibly not even that and stop thinking or hoping for him to be more, I just don't see it. At least not year in year out.
  14. I think at this pointing his ceiling is what? 30 goals, 60-65 points as a bad defensive winger. So maybe a poor man's Pacioretty with more flash and less possession. Last night was his 3rd even strength point in 19 games. I just don't know.
  15. Good old PJ Stock, Pacioretty's shot location charts doesn't show a bad perimeter player. He had a lot of chances last night, actually played well. Led the team in chances. He's had some ugly games to start the season but he's been better lately. As for the captaincy, it's so hard for me to assess/care, it just seems to come with the territory, I moderated here when Saku was here and A LOT of people thought he was a bad captain but he seems to be remembered much more fondly in hindsight. IF the captain has a relevant role, most of it goes on behind closed doors. I'm not really sure it's relevant, the letter doesn't mean Weber or Price can't be a or even the leader on the team. It feels like Montreal is the only market that overrates it to the degree it does. Even Toronto isn't as bad. Should Subban have been captain? I don't know, he has a lot of positive on-ice passion but some of the stuff he does could shine an, unnecessary light maybe on a very controversial position already. That stupid mouthwash story, for example. Did it matter? No, was it discussed to death? Yes. If he did it as captain of the Canadiens in the finals and it played out that way it would still be blowing up. I don't know, also he seemed to have a lot of problems with different teammates and it being a team vote, he was probably not winning lol. I just think, who cares? The team voted for Pacioretty so whatever. Was Gionta a GREAT captain? He was a good dude, so is Pacioretty. He looked serious, I suppose. Who knows, though really. Everyone has a preconceived notion of what a captain should be, but whatever the reason they voted Pacioretty for is fine. If the team is lacking leadership, go get more leaders I guess. I really don't buy a guy can't be a leader without a letter. Weber can be the leader. Imagine him with the C if it makes people feel better. Max deserves criticism at times but a lot it is tied to things that are rumors or seem made up. He's not playing well AND he ran Subban out of town. I don't think he had nearly enough pull to run Subban out of town, the only player they respect enough to have that kind of power is Price, who I also don't think ran Subban out of town. He's not scoring right now AND he's a bad captain. He's got warts, he deserves heat. I just wish the tabloid stuff wouldn't be tied in but it's Montreal.
  16. I mean, since 11-12 (first full season) he's 3rd in the NHL in goals. I'm not saying he's clutch or uncluch but his distribution of goals seems pretty reasonable to me, some ENGs for sure but he plays the last minute of tight games. Not a crazy amount of ENGs or anything. A huge amount of GWGs which doesn't prove clutchness or anything to me, just shows what a high % of our goals he scores due to him being our only legitimately consistent finisher for a long time. We've won a lot of close games over the last few years and he leads the team in goals every single year. Seems like an obvious by-product of that. As do the ENG for a guy who plays on a team that plays a lot of close games and is trusted to play in the final minutes. People look into his goals too much, probably because he's our only player who scores. There's nothing really that stands out about his distribution. He's an elite 5 on 5 goal scorer every year. He generally scores okay on the PP but really, he should be on the 2nd unit. Or at the least not on the half wall on the first unit but that's another issue and it's a coaching issue. He does well with advanced metrics, scores a lot of goals at 5 on 5 and guys who score 5 on 5 are difficult to find. He's not necessarily the most graceful and can be rough to watch sometimes. Frustrating but 35 goal, 300 shot, good possession wingers making 4.5 million a year are always going to be insanely valuable. He's an insanely valuable player and has been for a long time. I'd be careful with a long term contract through his 30's and we should have been careful with it for Price and taking on Weber's already but it's been hard to argue his value. I'm not romantic about him, he's really good on a great contract. This deadline might be his peak value trade wise, a year and a half at 4.5 million. Next year in season he just becomes another really good rental but you sort of diminish the value of the contract. If the things are going badly, he's one of a few guys I would seriously consider cashing in (along with Galchenyuk, Shaw and maybe Gallagher).
  17. The more I watch Galchenyuk, the less I'm convinced he's anything other than a 2nd line LW.
  18. Is it legally a follow through if you don't shoot, don't think I've ever seen that lol.
×
×
  • Create New...