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

jedimaas

Members
  • Posts

    4,993
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

jedimaas's Achievements

MVP / Joueur par excellence

MVP / Joueur par excellence (5/6)

0

Reputation

  1. Im really totally confused about what Id do if i was coach. This roster is really a mess because we have a bunch of young guys who may or may not be better than the older established guys in their positions. I *think* id go with this: Price / Montoya Condon would be fine too but i think Montoya gives us a better chance to rest Price a little. Goal is (obviously) the one place we really have no concerns. Beaulieu - Weber Markov - Petry Barberio - Pateryn Emelin But what if Juulsen or Sergachev are ready? Do we move Emeiln now? Pacioretty-Galchenyuk-Radulov Andrighetto-Plekanec-Gallagher Lehkonen - Desharnais - McCarron Carr - Mitchell - Shaw Danault To me those top 2 lines are perfect. A great, true #1 line, a very capable #2 line (you could swap McCarron with Andrighetto but I think Ghetto is better suited to the left side). Our bottom six is a mess though. Are we going to have a checking line? Can we keep Lehkonen with the habs? (he goes back to europe if not, AHL is not an option). I would rather not have shaw on the roster at all tbh, but on the 4th he might be ok, if we werent paying him so much. MB seems to think he's Gallagher/Marchant 2.0 but he is severely below either of those 2 players' talent level. And, of course, MT wont do this. Shaw will most likely be on the 2nd like and Danault will probably be on the 3rd. Markov may well be on the first pairing. These are all big mistakes imho. We have good players. If I had as much faith in our professional development / talent analysis as I do in our junior scouts I think we'd probably be ok, but you know that we are going to bury some good young kids for the sake of the Shaws, Byrons and Flynns on the roster. I wonder if we'll see another trade or 2 from MB before the season starts. Emelin is looking like he may have lost his spot & apparently there's still interest out west for him...
  2. With his skating i think he can. He and Weber should, on paper anyway, really compliment each other well. It may not only be a great match for Beau but it may signal a bit of a reprieve on some of Weber's flaws. Of course the big obstacle is MT.... i see he was trying Petry on his offside now too. Gah.
  3. This. The other thing is that 29 teams lose every year. People look at the 90s devils & say "yeah it was boring but they won" but forget how bad the years they didnt win were. Id rather watch a skilled and entertaining team than a vicious and dirty team, especially if my team doesnt win at the end of the season.
  4. Its not an overstatement to say that when he's motivated, he's potentially one of the top 15-20 forwards in the game. He has incredible vision and hand-eye coordination and he can play a finesse or power game. he's very much like Kovalev 2.0 If you listen to what he's said in interviews, he's "changed" - lets hope he has because if thats true, he's going to have a monster season for us. Even Therrien will have little to fault him on as long as he produces.
  5. Mitchell also has way better vision than most 4th liners. He's not a bad roster player at all & I dont mind him in our top 12. To be honest, most of our 3rd and 4th liners are pretty good - they serve a purpose - the problem is that we should really only keep 1 or 2 of them in the bottom 6 but instead we keep 6 role players & let our developing youth sit.
  6. I honestly think they looked at the that cup-winning habs bunch from the early 90s & thought 'we'll just do that" - because Demers (and Burns before him) basically built a team around Patrick Roy. There are, of course, huge differences in the game nowadays - but much more important than that is that back then we actually had a system. Sure, Roy faced a lot of shots, but they were calculated low-percentage shots. Every now and again he'd have a bad night & let in 6 or 7 but for the most part, if he could see it, he could stop it. The defense would collapse clog up areas where shots were likely to become goals and clear rebounds. Roy would do the rest. If we built some system like this (it would be boring) we'd probably do fine too but we dont have a "system." Instead, we let the opposition outshoot us and offer little to no 'calculated support' for price. We play bad offensive hockey and even worse defensive hockey, relying on Price to play all-world hockey. Unless something changes drastically, I think we're going to have a hard time contenting, which is a shame really because even with PK gone, this is a good solid roster. We will most likely squander another year of it.
  7. I know most people are saying this stuff in Jest but lets be fair: Shea Weber is still an elite defensman. He's a first pairing guy on any team in the league. In the last little bit Ive seen him compared to Murrary, Boullion, Gil etc - but he's so much better than all of them its a bit silly. Shea Weber on your team is a very very good thing. Shea Weber on your team for the price of Subban sucks, thats all.
  8. Absolutely Agree. The concern is that A) MT may not give Beau that chance, MB may trade him or C) Beau cant handle the minutes. Thing is, if beaulieu-weber works as well as i think it might, we may actually have a pretty solid 1st pairing. Then we get Petry - Markov which should also be a very good 2nd pairing and theres no shortage of 3rd pairing guys. If Petry plays with Weber (i suspect he could) then our whole grouping is messed up & I think it will end very badly.
  9. My only hope is that Beaulieu is given a fair chance with Weber & makes the most of it. I think he may be the most important part of our d-corps next year because finding the right partner for Weber could be the key to the season to be honest.
  10. 29 points in 65 games = 37 over a full year, pretty close the 40 I said. And he didnt play that many 1st line minutes last year. Previous 4 years: 48, 52, 48 (prorated), 60. I stand by my statement that $3.5m is not a bad value for a 40 - 50 point player. He's just not a good fit with us. Wait, im defending DD?
  11. i think McCarron will have a spot. MT seems to like him and he's got the size MB and MT love. I dont understand the fascination with turning him into a centre although with the loss of Eller we probably need him there now. FWIW Danault is 23 so Id probably still call him a "youngster" and i think there's still an outside chance he hasnt quite shown all he has (although I dont see him ever reaching more than a 3rd line role). With Eller gone he may have to start taking on that role now... not sure who else is suited to it... DLR maybe but for whatever reason he seems to have fallen out of favour. Byron is what he is. We know what that is (he aint getting 'better' at 27 imho) and should definitely not be a 'given' over younger players with more potential.
  12. Dont misread what people are saying: the USA team had some terrific players. In fact, Id probably argue they would be a stanley cup contender (if not favourite) if they were playing in the NHl (they wouldnt fit under the cap mind you) The reality is that even if Team USA picked the absolute best roster they could, they probably couldnt have beaten Canada or Sweden or maybe even Russia. They just arent that good right now (especially with their young guys on team NA). The problem is that they, arguably, didnt do that. They didnt ice the best team possible. If they did, guys like Kessel, Faulk, Ryan, Statstny would have been there (instead of Dubinsky, Callahan, Abdelkader etc) and therefore people are left speculating that they went for grit over skill. Either way I dont think they would have been a top 3 finisher but i would have expected them to at least qualify.
  13. It doesnt make sense for him to say it but it even makes less sense for a reporter to report it, if it didnt happen. I mean this is the sort of thing, if every other witness there said "no, he never said that" which could end a journalists' career. you dont make claims like that unless you really did hear it. Now, context could be everything - maybe it was in jest, maybe it was said sarcastically - but no matter what, it was a pretty stupid thing to do if in fact Therrien did it.
  14. Thing is though, we're building a big, tough, gritty team that can beat the opposition with brute force. To see a better example in action look at the USA team at the world cup. In many cases they picked gritty players over skilled ones because this way they could dominate other more skilled teams, physically. Oh wait...
×
×
  • Create New...