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

Recommended Posts

Does anyone else think Pacioretty gives up the C to Weber?

Whether he gives it up or it's stripped, I don't see how anyone except the reigning Mark Messier Leadership Award winner can be the captain going forward after Bergevin's performance at the trade press conference and all the media backchannel stuff.

Link to post
Share on other sites

who can translate - from the Stu Cowan's comments, appears PK got thrown under the bus by 2 ex teammates with character

Hockey Inside/Out Retweeted

Stu Cowan

✔ ‎@StuCowan1 David Desharnais, Tomas Plekanec think #Habs better team without @PKSubban1 #Habs #HabsIO: http://tinyurl.com/hczjaqd

http://www.rds.ca/hockey/canadiens/echange-p-k-subban-shea-weber-un-mal-pour-un-bien-selon-les-joueurs-du-ch-lnh-1.3447050

In that article Danault said that they were a better team now. Plekanec and Desharnais both said good things about Weber, but said nothing bad about Subban. Plekanec said he texted Subban to wish him well in Nashville.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Tks . Cowan should change it to read " team better with Weber and Shaw " instead of " team better without Subban "

But that might not provoke a much of a response.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Speaking of captaincy, while I'll admit I know nothing about how things function in an NHL dressing room, I do wonder if this trade happens were Gionta still around last season? Obviously Subban still would have butted heads with coaches but could a better leader have held the dressing room together better? I honestly have no idea and it's impossible to quantify, but it's an interesting question to what extent - if any - the seeming lack of a strong leader in that room helped exaggerate the alleged issues between Subban and Pacioretty.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Speaking of captaincy, while I'll admit I know nothing about how things function in an NHL dressing room, I do wonder if this trade happens were Gionta still around last season? Obviously Subban still would have butted heads with coaches but could a better leader have held the dressing room together better? I honestly have no idea and it's impossible to quantify, but it's an interesting question to what extent - if any - the seeming lack of a strong leader in that room helped exaggerate the alleged issues between Subban and Pacioretty.

Its funny you mention Gionta. there were several times during 24CH where PK would play some silly joke or goof around with the guys & Gionta reacted with a "im a professional PK, im not a child" or something similar. It felt sort of in jest - but only just. you could see some irritation in Gio's body language and tone.

At the time I thought very little of it - one guy, an older one at that - probably no one else felt that way but if Bergevin truly felt there was this disconnect in the dressing room, i wonder how far back it started. PK, on draft day flamboyantly said something (paraphrasing) like "you'll know my name in a couple of years baby" - I think that sort of thing has always rubbed some guys the wrong way.

Of course even if you buy into this mentality and you actually agree he had to be traded, I cannot fathom how Shea Weber (with no picks or prospects) was the best we could do for Subban.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Their regular season stats are pretty similar, Subban loses big time in penalty minutes. Subban also loses HUGE in the Turnovers department.

13576876_10153530245992234_7053334438074

This last one is from last year:

TOI=Time On Ice. TO=Turnovers

PK: TOI: 1792, TO +/-: -83, TO/60 Min: -2.78
Weber TOI: 1979, TO +/-: -20, TO/60 Min: -0.61

Link to post
Share on other sites

Its funny you mention Gionta. there were several times during 24CH where PK would play some silly joke or goof around with the guys & Gionta reacted with a "im a professional PK, im not a child" or something similar. It felt sort of in jest - but only just. you could see some irritation in Gio's body language and tone.

At the time I thought very little of it - one guy, an older one at that - probably no one else felt that way but if Bergevin truly felt there was this disconnect in the dressing room, i wonder how far back it started. PK, on draft day flamboyantly said something (paraphrasing) like "you'll know my name in a couple of years baby" - I think that sort of thing has always rubbed some guys the wrong way.

Of course even if you buy into this mentality and you actually agree he had to be traded, I cannot fathom how Shea Weber (with no picks or prospects) was the best we could do for Subban.

I have no doubt there were players in the room who didn't like Subban's personality. But that's their problem more than anything else. We know there were players who definitely appeared to get along with Subban quite well, joked with him on twitter, hung out with him off the ice.... probably a good 8-10 guys that I could name, which is half the team. Subban still gave 100% on the ice, supported his teammates publicly, never called anyone out or complained about the treatment he received, was a great rep for his team in the community, and was far more consistent and effective as a player than anyone else on the squad. If PK was busy developing a clothing line or charity work or whatever else off the ice and it caused him to play poorly, I could see a reason for guys to be upset. If PK played lazy hockey and didn't do his job (like Pacioretty did many a night when we saw him take lazy penalties and miss assignments defensively; this was particularly made evident on his failed backcheck against Colorado that Subban took the wrath for from Therrien), then I could see a reason for his teammates to be concerned. But PK always did his job and did it well. The guys who are rumored to have been complaining about him (Pacioretty, Plekanec, and so on) maybe need to look at themselves and stop worrying about Subban being flashy with the puck or wearing bright-colored suits.

As I said before, I believe Michel Therrien strongly disliked Subban ever before getting the chance to know him and purposely spread a culture of pointing out all of Subban's faults and teaching the players not to be like Subban. When Therrien shows up, he tells the club that he doesn't want to see individual celebrations like the triple low five because that's a sign a player isn't putting the team first. That's utter nonsense. Again, did anyone ever complain that Larry Robinson and Patrick Roy had their own little head bump celebration after every win, and did that ever stop those Habs teams from winning the Cup? How many players have we seen turn the puck over or make plays that lost us games? Plenty. Yet Therrien only points out "individualistic plays" on the night when he can blame Subban for it. The bottom line is that Michel Therrien appeared to have a personal vendetta against PK Subban and he spent a lot of time trying to convince his players to turn on Subban as well...

Their regular season stats are pretty similar, Subban loses big time in penalty minutes. Subban also loses HUGE in the Turnovers department.

13576876_10153530245992234_7053334438074

This last one is from last year:

TOI=Time On Ice. TO=Turnovers

PK: TOI: 1792, TO +/-: -83, TO/60 Min: -2.78

Weber TOI: 1979, TO +/-: -20, TO/60 Min: -0.61

Here are a few points that those turnover stats don't reflect:

- turnover numbers are not just a reflection of ice time, they're also a reflection of how many times you touch the puck. I believe Subban was first or second in the league among defenceman last year for how many times he played puck at even strength per ice time. Shea Weber was 216th. So sure, Subban had more turnovers per ice time because he also had the puck more per ice time. Your stats don't report the denominator in that equation, and what we would really want to know is what fraction of the time that Player X has the puck does he turn it over.

- to that end, it might also be interesting to note that Subban had a much higher rater of successful passes per ice time than Weber too. He also had a higher rate of successfully skating the puck out of his own zone, and a significantly higher rate of recovering loose pucks in his own zone. So even though he turned it over more, he also did good things with the puck more than Weber. If Weber plays D by just standing still and hitting guys but doesn't really play the puck that much, he's bound to end up with less turnovers than the defenceman who's on the puck all the time. That stat is pretty useless in isolation.

- To that end, it's important to note that Subban's Corsi at 5v5 was superior to Weber's last year. His Corsi relative to the rest of his team has been superior to Weber's over the past few years as well. So even though Weber has played in a better system, Subban was still able to have a more profound effect on his team in possession and shot generation,

- Finally, Subban is playing in a system where his coach encourages a zone clearing strategy of dumping the puck out along the boards rather than trying to make short, high-percentage passes to teammates. When you play that style, you're going to end up giving the puck to the other team more. I'll be interested to see if Weber's turnover numbers per ice time and per touch go up this year under Therrien.

Is it all bad for Weber? No. He has a better shot than Subban, he's a more physical player, and he scores more goals. I think he'll be a very useful weapon on the PP, and with Muller and Radulov and McCarron in front, can hopefully turn our special teams around. But I don't ascribe much to the turnover numbers, and the more important data suggests Subban is a much more effective defender than Weber. Only reputation suggests Subban is the risky player whereas Weber is the rock in his own zone, but if one looks carefully at the data, Subban is actually the far superior and less risky defensive player, and he does more to drive possession and team offence as well. Weber may have more finish right now, but as an overall player, it's clear that Subban is already better (not to mention younger and less likely to decline going forward).

Link to post
Share on other sites

Blaming Therrien for PK.s problems is ridiculous. Pk got big money to make the choices he made and Had a fairly brutal season at times. While he may not have slumped like Patches his play making and turnovers this year made him look like a rookie again. Not a five year Norris winning veteran. I wish him all the best in Nashville, but look forward to the players and mangement taking ownership of their choices. If I sign for 9 million per I would not be putting myself in a position where thecoach runs my career. PK made his choices and I do not believe he was blindsided by this at all. If he was that's on him. Ironically due to the trade, I believe Subban no longer has his no trade clause with Nashville

Bergevin has finally been allowed to put his stamp on this team by Molson and I am sure things will continue to change if the results aren't there.

Edited by Habberwacky
Link to post
Share on other sites

Blaming Therrien for PK.s problems is ridiculous. Pk got big money to make the choices he made and Had a fairly brutal season at times. While he may not have slumped like Patches his play making and turnovers this year made him look like a rookie again. Not a five year Norris winning veteran. I wish him all the best in Nashville, but look forward to the players and mangement taking ownership of their choices. If I sign for 9 million per I would not be putting myself in a position where thecoach runs my career. PK made his choices and I do not believe he was blindsided by this at all. If he was that's on him. Ironically due to the trade, I believe Subban no longer has his no trade clause with Nashville

Bergevin has finally been allowed to put his stamp on this team by Molson and I am sure things will continue to change if the results aren't there.

I'm not sure I see how it's a ridiculous statement to make. It is very clear IMO that Therrien disliked Subban before he even became coach. It is very clear Therrien treated him unfairly, called him out repeatedly in the media, benched him for mistakes that other players did not get benched for.

Every player makes mistakes on the ice. The more you're on, the more mistakes you'll make. But in Subban's case, those mistakes were amplified and publicized while other players' were not. How many times did we see Emelin lose coverage in his own zone? How many times did Desharnais fail to control a back-check in the slot? How many times did Pacioretty hook someone because he didn't move his skates to cover them properly? How many times did Condon fail to control a rebound? Why wasn't Markov derided in the post-game press conference when he fell over, turned over the puck, and led to the game-winning goal against in overtime? The fact is that PK Subban is held to a higher standard than any other player on this team, and if he fails to meet it, the coach, certain fans, and certain media members are very quick to jump on every little thing that goes wrong. And yes, you're right that we should expect more of a player making 9M, but let's not pretend that putting PK under the microscope started when his new contract kicked in, he's been an object of Therrien's ridicule from the day the coach took over.

Subban was on the ice for a higher percentage of his team's goals than just about every player in the league, I believe. He's been out-producing most of our forwards the past few years. His possession numbers are very strong, and you can see he elevates his teammates' performance on the ice (Markov, for example, goes from 52% possession with Subban to 46% possession without him). I am not saying Subban was flawless by any means, but he received a lot of undue criticism, and much of that begins with the coach directing that criticism his way and failing to defend him in the press.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Last season was a revelation for me. The Canadiens had just come off one of their best seasons in a very long time, after a multi-year run of success and they followed that up with one of the hottest starts of the 45 years I have been watching the Habs.

Then Carey Price went down. I remember stating to a friend of mine that the Canadiens had the talent to make the playoffs without Price, particularly with the start they had. All they had to do was play 500 hockey for the remainder of the season and they would have been fine. They would not have been a shoe in but they would have probably come in at one of the lower play-off positions.

Of course, that did not happen. Despite the talent on the team they tanked and the only reason for that was lack of leadership on the ice.

Many like to blame the coach because everybody wants a scapegoat and he is the easiest target. However, he does not play the game, so it is leadership from those who do that is crucial to success. After Carey Price went down the "leadership core" needed to step up. That meant Patches and Subban in particular for the forwards and defence respectively. That did not happen. The only player that really stepped up was Gallager and his going down to long-term injury marked the beginning of the last season's collapse.

PK Subban is a great hockey player, there is no denying that, but is he the leader the team needs at the moment? Does he have any leadership abilities at all? The evidence to support the idea that he does is rather sketchy.

If Carey Price's wonky knee fails him again this season do we really want the same leadership core in place to pick up the pieces? Canadiens fans vehemently insist that the Canadiens are more than just Carey Price. Last season disproved that, I believe, and that is what team management is trying to address with this trade.

By all accounts Shea Weber is a superlative leader. Is he as talented as Subban? That is debateable but we only need to look at Edmonton to see that talent will only get you so far. In fact, talent alone usually does not mean success for a hockey team.

This team has lacked a team leader that could take the team by the throat and drag it to success for over two decades and not coincidentally that is how long they have gone since they won The Cup. For me that has been the missing element for the last few years and what most stands out as the difference between The Habs and the teams that have won The Cup in the last few years. Now it has that type of leader, the roster still has a great deal of talent and the best goaltender on the planet. If said goaltender can stay healthy and the key members of the roster can do the same then this team could make alot of noise come playoff time.

Link to post
Share on other sites

https://mobile.twitter.com/Chris_LogiQ/status/749283000198766592?s=09

Some more advanced stats that help paint a different picture. Interesting that weber has a higher outlet pass success. Better defensive zone success rate and less failed possession plays per 20. Im not saying Weber is a better player but he seems to have a higher rate of success were as subban tends to control the play successful or not. Anyone who knows more about these stats able to weigh in on them

Link to post
Share on other sites

https://mobile.twitter.com/Chris_LogiQ/status/749283000198766592?s=09

Some more advanced stats that help paint a different picture. Interesting that weber has a higher outlet pass success. Better defensive zone success rate and less failed possession plays per 20. Im not saying Weber is a better player but he seems to have a higher rate of success were as subban tends to control the play successful or not. Anyone who knows more about these stats able to weigh in on them

Don't really know what to do with this, because Andrew Berkshire has a piece for sportsnet showing Subban has better stats in the defensive zone, including breakout passes and zone exits... don't know where the discrepancy is, maybe they're using different time periods (here it is anyways):

http://www.sportsnet.ca/hockey/nhl/p-k-subban-trade-may-worst-canadiens-history/

Also, a great piece from Fluto Shinzawa of the Boston Globe on Subban, Weber, and Therrien. Pretty much hits the nail on the head for me, talking about Therrien coaching boring, vanilla hockey and smoldering Subban's talent. Keep in mind, this is from a writer from Boston who has no personal stake in the Team Therrien vs. Team Subban debate, unlike most of the Montreal media. So interesting to see that outsiders like this can identify how poorly we made out in the trade and how much of an issue Therrien was in this:

https://www.bostonglobe.com/sports/bruins/2016/07/02/fluto-shinzawa-canadiens-initiate-culture-change-with-subban-trade/zzh1EczZrkxrEmLjkWl09K/story.html

Link to post
Share on other sites

Anyone who knows more about these stats able to weigh in on them

Sportlogiq's proprietary stuff (possession success rate, pass success rate, failed plays, etc) is a basically black box (other than knowing it comes from player tracking), so not a whole lot of people are actually qualified to comment on them comprehensively. The power play data are also less than convincing for the usual reasons. The rest of it is mostly fluff about shooting percentages, which are highly variable.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Many like to blame the coach because everybody wants a scapegoat and he is the easiest target.

Perhaps there are people like that, but I think you'll find that on this forum there are quite a few people who have extremely detailed and cogent reasons for assigning a majority of the blame to Michel Therrien.

PK Subban is a great hockey player, there is no denying that, but is he the leader the team needs at the moment? Does he have any leadership abilities at all? The evidence to support the idea that he does is rather sketchy.

Evidence implies there exists a method to empirically measure "leadership", or even a consistent definition of it, which there quite evidently isn't. "Leadership" seems to means whatever it needs to mean to whoever's saying it at the moment. I won't speak for anyone else, but I'm personally quite sick of hearing about it. But beside that, even granting that this mystical thing can be defined and measured, I frankly don't care a wink if P.K. Subban can't "lead". I care that he's the second best defenceman in the NHL over the last few seasons and has been the driving force in the team's success, and I care that the team is going to be tangibly and measurably worse because he was thrown away for non-hockey reasons.

By all accounts Shea Weber is a superlative leader... ...Is he as talented as Subban? That is debateable

P.K. Subban has played in two Eastern Conference Finals in the NHL, one of which largely because of his performance in a second round series. Shea Weber has never gotten further than the second round in his career. If his "leadership" is so mightily important, what explains his performance against the Sharks in this year's playoffs?

As for the latter, it isn't, actually. Subban is vastly superior to Weber in every metric that counts except goals personally scored. Shea Weber is not as good a player as P.K. Subban, and that's reality. Whatever "intangibles" some want to claim for him, he does not play as well, and his team does not do as well with him on the ice.

Now it has that type of leader... ...then this team could make alot of noise come playoff time.

I've heard this train of thought a bit recently, which has gotten me thinking. I'll ask the question of you: should the team be relatively healthy and fail to do anything in the playoffs, will you reassess the importance of "leadership"?

Link to post
Share on other sites

If Carey Price's wonky knee fails him again this season do we really want the same leadership core in place to pick up the pieces? Canadiens fans vehemently insist that the Canadiens are more than just Carey Price. Last season disproved that, I believe, and that is what team management is trying to address with this trade.

This team has lacked a team leader that could take the team by the throat and drag it to success for over two decades and not coincidentally that is how long they have gone since they won The Cup. For me that has been the missing element for the last few years and what most stands out as the difference between The Habs and the teams that have won The Cup in the last few years. Now it has that type of leader, the roster still has a great deal of talent and the best goaltender on the planet. If said goaltender can stay healthy and the key members of the roster can do the same then this team could make alot of noise come playoff time.

Just to clarify. 1st Emphasis in bold: I think it`s more a case of Canadiens fans insisting that Carey Price should not bear all the burden of making this team finally win the cup. It must have a good strong offense as well.

2nd emphasis in bold: This coach has clearly shown that he is against individualism and tends to bash and limit those who do take the lead and, or who don`t completely see things his way.

Link to post
Share on other sites

On the subject of leadership and character and how important it is to winning Cups... players are often assigned the title of "great leader" because their tea won something, be it in junior, in the NHL, or internationally. Weber was on a Gold-medal winning Canada team, and as such, he was anointed as being a great leader. He's a very good player, but if we're talking about his leadership being such a valued commodity as to have an effect on his team winning, well then it hasn't done much at an NHL level in the playoffs. And similarly, there's nothing to suggest that Subban's character was an impediment to winning the Cup.

So let's look at the last major trades we made that sent star players away for character reasons... Patrick Roy was dealt away because he didn't get along with Mario Tremblay. The club decided that Tremblay was in the right and traded Roy, who went on to win two Cups with Colorado, while Tremblay flopped as a coach and was fired without winning a single playoff series. No other team has hired him as a head coach since. As a side note, when Tremblay was charged with drunk driving last year, he allegedly told the police officer who stopped him that he couldn't arrest him "because I'm Mario Tremblay" and then proceeded to tell the officer that he was "being petty and showing poor judgment like PK Subban." So even though Tremblay was the one who made the judgment error to drive drunk, he felt himself fit to insult Subban. Tremblay and Therrien are cut from the same cloth, blame others for their poor decisions, and really aren't in a position to judge others' character.

Before Roy, there was Chris Chelios. He too was dealt for character issues. In this case, there were actually some real issues there, so the trade in this case was somewhat more understandable. The Habs won the Cup with the man he was traded for, but Denis Savard had little to do with the win. Chelios himself took the Hawks to a Cup final and won two more Cups with the Wings, despite those character issues. Phil Kessel was deemed by the Torono media to be too soft and lazy and only interested in eating hotdogs. His character was often questioned and he was frequently fighting with the Toronto media. Yet he has been one of the most successful playoff performers of his generation and he probably should have won the Conn Smythe this year as he led the Pens to a Cup. Patrick Kane was accused (wrongfully it turns out) of ***** a woman but has several Cups to his name with the Hawks and was the Hart winner this past season. Jeff Carter and Mike Richards were run out of Philadelphia because they had supposed issues with their teammates, and they've been Cup champions in LA. How about another player the Habs traded because of character problems, Claude Lemieux, who was as big a pest as you can be but who was also a key member of 4 Cup wins with 3 different organizations?

The point is very clear: that just because players don't always have the best reputations in the media or with their teammates, it doesn't mean they can't be valuable to their teams on the ice and it doesn't impede teams from winning Cups. Saku Koivu was an ultimate team player and captain here and he has no Cups to show for his name, because he simply wasn't surrounded by enough talent. Skill will win out every time. Now there are extreme exceptions, with players like Mike Ribeiro and so on who have come through here and been extremely disrespectful to authority or had substance abuse problems, but there is no evidence that was Subban's case. On 24CH, you see Subban getting yelled at and replying politely to Therrien or Daigneault. In his media interviews, Subban is always praising his coaches and teammates.

So as it stands, I'll argue this: there is no evidence that suggests Subban's character should prevent us from winning the Cup, in fact, there is evidence the other way that it should be a non-factor. There is also no evidence that Shea Weber has any sort of outstanding leadership quality that contributes to Cup-winning. If he couldn't make it happen in a good system in Nashville, what are realistic expectations that it would suddenly happen here in Montreal under Therrien? Even past Cup winners like Gomez, Gionta, Gill, Moen, and Kovalev weren't able to make the ultimate dream come true in Habs uniforms. Not because they aren't winners, but because there's more that goes into winning than just being able to rah-rah guys or tell people you've won something before. Subban has the skill to be a winner on the ice, and to me that matters more than the unprovable belief that Weber has magical abilities above what we've actually seen him accomplish.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not sure I see how it's a ridiculous statement to make. It is very clear IMO that Therrien disliked Subban before he even became coach. It is very clear Therrien treated him unfairly, called him out repeatedly in the media, benched him for mistakes that other players did not get benched for.

Every player makes mistakes on the ice. The more you're on, the more mistakes you'll make. But in Subban's case, those mistakes were amplified and publicized while other players' were not. How many times did we see Emelin lose coverage in his own zone? How many times did Desharnais fail to control a back-check in the slot? How many times did Pacioretty hook someone because he didn't move his skates to cover them properly? How many times did Condon fail to control a rebound? Why wasn't Markov derided in the post-game press conference when he fell over, turned over the puck, and led to the game-winning goal against in overtime? The fact is that PK Subban is held to a higher standard than any other player on this team, and if he fails to meet it, the coach, certain fans, and certain media members are very quick to jump on every little thing that goes wrong. And yes, you're right that we should expect more of a player making 9M, but let's not pretend that putting PK under the microscope started when his new contract kicked in, he's been an object of Therrien's ridicule from the day the coach took over.

Subban was on the ice for a higher percentage of his team's goals than just about every player in the league, I believe. He's been out-producing most of our forwards the past few years. His possession numbers are very strong, and you can see he elevates his teammates' performance on the ice (Markov, for example, goes from 52% possession with Subban to 46% possession without him). I am not saying Subban was flawless by any means, but he received a lot of undue criticism, and much of that begins with the coach directing that criticism his way and failing to defend him in the press.

I have coached many players I didn't like but as long as they did what I wanted them to do I was fine. Players making far less than 9 mil are buying in and I hope PK didn't think because they pay him that much and he contributes to the community he can do what he wants, because if he did he has it backwards. Again if I pay 9 mil to somebody then they better have the inetestinal fortitude to deal with it and if they don't they aren't worth their paycheck. No excuses. Do your job and if you want the other guys to get yelled at throw away the letter on your jersey and go play in another league. This is the NHL. Radulov left for 6 years and now he supposedly gets it. I have respect for that. I'm not going to stand up for a player who the owner backed and the team worked with for 5 years and still did some of the stuff he did. Sorry I have not been impressed by the play and as for the stats. It won.t help him this year as every year is a new one. I don't think asking someone you pay 9 mil to do what you ask is ridiculous. We' ll see how the boring old non creative Habs fair this year under Therrien. I feel the same way about MT this year. The changes have been made and it is time for the players to put up or shut up as they say.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Regis2

It's Steve Simmons

Trading P.K. Subban for Shea Weber a smart deal for Canadiens

http://www.torontosun.com/2016/07/02/trading-pk-subban-for-shea-weber-a-smart-deal-for-canadiens

It is easy to love and admire P.K. Subban, with all his flash and bravado and show and all the fun he brings to every hockey game he plays. He makes us smile.

He is not just unique in how he dresses or makes appearances or how he seems to be the centre of attention no matter where he is or when he plays. That’s great for fans, journalists, local charities, the game, for the sport, just not what the Montreal Canadiens wanted — and they are not alone.

There is, and may always be, a clash between style and substance in the staid, non-individual culture that is hockey. We don’t want to be noticed. We don’t want to stand out. We are part of a team, not the face of it.

It is no accident that hockey fans in Montreal and in Canada are upset about the trade that sent Subban to the Nashville Predators for Shea Weber, barely for a second considering that some of hockey’s wisest men — Mike Babcock, Joel Quenneville, Steve Yzerman, Doug Armstrong, Ken Hitchcock — would probably make the same deal for Weber in a heartbeat.

Weber played top-four minutes for Team Canada in Sochi against the best in the world while Subban barely dressed. He was named early to Team Canada for this September’s World Cup team and Subban was left off the roster. The fancy numbers favour Subban: The veteran eyeballs with championship pedigree prefer Weber.

In hockey, to its detriment, dull and team always seems to triumph over dash and individual.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have coached many players I didn't like but as long as they did what I wanted them to do I was fine. Players making far less than 9 mil are buying in and I hope PK didn't think because they pay him that much and he contributes to the community he can do what he wants, because if he did he has it backwards. Again if I pay 9 mil to somebody then they better have the inetestinal fortitude to deal with it and if they don't they aren't worth their paycheck. No excuses. Do your job and if you want the other guys to get yelled at throw away the letter on your jersey and go play in another league. This is the NHL. Radulov left for 6 years and now he supposedly gets it. I have respect for that. I'm not going to stand up for a player who the owner backed and the team worked with for 5 years and still did some of the stuff he did. Sorry I have not been impressed by the play and as for the stats. It won.t help him this year as every year is a new one. I don't think asking someone you pay 9 mil to do what you ask is ridiculous. We' ll see how the boring old non creative Habs fair this year under Therrien. I feel the same way about MT this year. The changes have been made and it is time for the players to put up or shut up as they say.

To some degree, I get your point about employees following the boss' orders, but there are some exceptional circumstances in this case:

1. Subban has adapted his game to the coach's wishes. He carries the puck much less than he used to, he takes the safe dump out a lot more often, and he goes for big hits far less often than he did when he first came into the league. And that's fine. But Subban is every bit as talented as someone like Erik Karlsson, who has been given free reign by his coaches in Ottawa to jump into the rush and take chances as he sees fit. Karlsson isn't ridden one bit by the media as being a risky player, even though he makes a lot more defensive mistakes than Subban. Therrien has put the reigns on Subban, and Subban has changed his game as a result, for better or for worse. I think we'll see him get more freedom in Nashville under Laviolette, and we'll see what he can do.

2. It's one thing to take orders from a guy who has shown he knows what he's doing. It's a whole other when the "boss" is a coach like Therrien, who has made a ton of errors himself. Therrien is basically preaching the "do as I say, not as I do" method. He tells Subban not to put himself ahead of the team, but wasn't it Therrien who got a bench minor from Kerry Fraser in his first stint here as coach that cost us a playoff series against Carolina? Therrien banned the triple low five and stated he didn't want players doing things to put their own egos first. But Therrien has made it a personal issue for himself to "work with Subban and make him a better player and person." His whole battle with Subban is an ego trip for him, to prove to his buddies on Anti-Chambre that he could win.

3. I think the emphasis you're putting on the salary is largely irrelevant. You've mentioned several times that the fact Subban makes 9M is a key factor as to why he should shut up and toe the company line. But the ordeal with Therrien goes back several years. When Therrien took over the team, Subban made 2M in that year. And to boot, that was on a bridge deal because MB had already decided Subban had to prove himself, unlike players like Pacioretty, Gallagher, Desharnais, Prust, and Byron, who just got multi-year longer-term deals right off the bat. When Michel Therrien was busy bashing Subban and his personality on Anti-Chabre on a weekly basis, Subban was a 1st- and 2nd-year player making 875k a season. This coach's vendetta against Subban started long ago and has nothing at all to do with Subban's salary. He disliked Subban even before he met him. He disliked Subban when he was making near league minimum. So the intolerance to PK Subban has to be something else. Is it that he doesn't like a player who carries the puck and plays a flashy game? Is it that he doesn't like a player who is cocky and confident, even if said player can back it upon the ice and even if the player's confidence never came at the expense of putting down his teammates? Or is there a possibility that some of this comes down to race, which is not to say Therrien is overtly racist, just that there are many people in this world who don't know how to handle people of different backgrounds and cultures and behaviors or who have certain expectations of how people should act that are not necessarily the same for all...

The bottom line for me is that Therrien came into his job with the intent of trying to break PK Subban. He wasn't interested in developing Subban's talents. He wasn't interested in adapting his coaching or game plan to take advantage of Subban's skills. Rather, Therrien has been completely inflexible and asked all of his players (not just Subban, as we've seen this same rigidity affect the play of Galchenyuk, Sekac, Semin, PAP, Diaz, and so on) to fit into his mould of what a hockey player should be. I'm sorry, but that's not a good coach. A good coach figures out how to take advantage of each player's unique skillset. He figures out what situations to put players in to give the team the best shot at winning. He doesn't ask all the players to dump and chase. He doesn't ask all the players to use the boards to clear the zone all the time.

I won't absolve PK of everything, but to me, if a better coach had given him more freedom to play his game on the ice, we wouldn't be in this situation. Coming back to your toe-the-line policy, sure it's fine, as long as what your boss is doing makes sense and works. Imagine for a second that all the players were employees at McDonalds and Therrien was the manager. And despite having a menu, Therrien decided that his McDonalds would only serve Big Macs to customers. Now some people are happy and want Big Macs. but maybe others ask for different items off the menu. As an employee working the cash, is Subban supposed to refuse to give them the other items forever, even if it's costing the franchise sales and money and customer satisfaction? So yeah, sure, it's the boss' decision as to what he wants to do, but unlike the "real world" hockey players are bound by a contract and they're not allowed to just quit and find a new employer of their liking freely. So Subban has to put up with a coach who hasn't had success establishing any type of possession game, who hasn't been able to create a working PP for several years despite changes in which assistant is running it, whose success has relied heavily and almost solely on getting all-star goaltending, and who didn't have any answers at all when his goalie got hurt. And oh yeah, who has treated him worse than any other player since the day he showed up. So as a player, what do you owe to that coach? Subban has toed the company line more than anyone can reasonably expect. He stopped the triple low five, he stopped carrying the puck up ice as much, he says all the right things to the media and even compliments the coach who rides him regularly. The problem wasn't Subban. It was and remains Michel Therrien.

Link to post
Share on other sites

never seen an organization treat a player so badly, hope PK enjoys life in nashville, sad to see him go, but would things have improved for him with a GM and Coach that clearly disliked him

Link to post
Share on other sites

never seen an organization treat a player so badly, hope PK enjoys life in nashville, sad to see him go, but would things have improved for him with a GM and Coach that clearly disliked him

I hope he wins the Norris this year, just to make MT/MB feel like they made a bad trade (to put it mildly :ph34r: ).

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...