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

Ben Chiarot


ahmedou
 Share

Recommended Posts

22 minutes ago, Habs_Hockey_Nutz said:

The eye test, for me at least, makes me wonder if this will become another Alzner scenario. And miss Jordie Benn on he penalty kill.

I am not sure why people keep saying that, he now has 2 points in 5 games, corsi for is over 50%, that was a sweet pass on droiun goal. I like his physical play. Its like people want him to fail. he is a big upgrade over Benn and Alzner is Alzner.....  

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, caperns61 said:

I am not sure why people keep saying that, he now has 2 points in 5 games, corsi for is over 50%, that was a sweet pass on droiun goal. I like his physical play. Its like people want him to fail. he is a big upgrade over Benn and Alzner is Alzner.....  

 

He now finds himself on the third pairing per CJ

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Just now, Habs_Hockey_Nutz said:

He now finds himself on the third pairing per CJ

Thats fine, he still had the third most minutes behind Weber and Petry, he ended the night with a plus 3, best of all deeman last night and.  

remember if you put his role in persepective there are over 110 deeman who have a cap hit of 3 million or more that so on average there are 3.5 to 4 deeman on every team that make at or over 3 million per team. He is an established deeman at a good age with good size who can play top 3 or 4 minutes  and I suspect thats what he plays most of the season. 

Would i prefer IVAN PROVOROV or VINCE DUNNE or CAM FOWLER yep i would but at what cost?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i don't understand the hate either? i am still bummed we did not get a top pairing LHD  but that is not the fault of Chiarot he has a place on this team we just need one more top tier LHD and we would have quite a good team. i like Mete but if he is on our first pairing we are going nowhere! i like Kulak with Petry somewhat, and i see Ciarot on the third pairing unless things are getting chippy in front of the net then he could move up to the second pairing. unless Mete can produce more i really don't think he is that much use to us, that is if we can trade for a top pairing replacement. he has not produced he is too small to keep the puck against larger teams once he gets hemmed in and yet he gets very little grief for it? i really like him and he was a feel good story when he got here but i think if we are going to be serious we may have to move past him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 hours ago, caperns61 said:

 

Thats fine, he still had the third most minutes behind Weber and Petry, he ended the night with a plus 3, best of all deeman last night and.  

remember if you put his role in persepective there are over 110 deeman who have a cap hit of 3 million or more that so on average there are 3.5 to 4 deeman on every team that make at or over 3 million per team. He is an established deeman at a good age with good size who can play top 3 or 4 minutes  and I suspect thats what he plays most of the season. 

Would i prefer IVAN PROVOROV or VINCE DUNNE or CAM FOWLER yep i would but at what cost?

 

10 hours ago, ramcharger440 said:

i don't understand the hate either? i am still bummed we did not get a top pairing LHD  but that is not the fault of Chiarot he has a place on this team we just need one more top tier LHD and we would have quite a good team. i like Mete but if he is on our first pairing we are going nowhere! i like Kulak with Petry somewhat, and i see Ciarot on the third pairing unless things are getting chippy in front of the net then he could move up to the second pairing. unless Mete can produce more i really don't think he is that much use to us, that is if we can trade for a top pairing replacement. he has not produced he is too small to keep the puck against larger teams once he gets hemmed in and yet he gets very little grief for it? i really like him and he was a feel good story when he got here but i think if we are going to be serious we may have to move past him.

I think you two have both raised the crux of the question: is Chiarot a 2nd or 3rd pairing defenceman? From what we've seen so far, he's a 3rd pairing D man, one who is not any better than Jordie Benn was for us the past two years. Benn was good on the 3rd pairing and he was in over his head in the top 4. We're getting hints Chiarot is the same. I don't think anyone has blamed Chiarot for that, it's more a question of Bergevin having failed to address the team's biggest weakness...

When you look at our roster without Chiarot, we already had players like Kulak, Reilly, Folin, Fleury, Juulsen, etc. who could fill in the 3rd pairing. What we didn't have (and still don't) is a guy who can slot next to Petry or Weber in the top 4. Like I said, if you ask Chiarot to play that role, you're setting him up for failure and criticism, similar to when Desharnais was put in the role of 1C or Gomez was on his big contract or Moen on the top line or Benn and Alzner being made to play top 4... it's not those guys' faults for accepting their contracts or for taking the ice time they've been given. It's on the GM and coach for doing things like that, but it doesn't mean fans should be satisfied. As discussed, this team is in no man's land between having aging stars and rebuilding with youngsters. If the team wants to keep Price and Petry and Weber and make a run, then they should be building around them and addressing the big hole at LHD. If you don't fill that hole, you have zero chance of winning a Cup. If you don't want to give up picks/prospects to fill the hole, then trade Weber and find a Cup window that works for you. Chiarot is a place-holder in the line-up, but he exemplifies Bergevin's lack of vision for the roster.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, BigTed3 said:

 

I think you two have both raised the crux of the question: is Chiarot a 2nd or 3rd pairing defenceman? From what we've seen so far, he's a 3rd pairing D man, one who is not any better than Jordie Benn was for us the past two years. Benn was good on the 3rd pairing and he was in over his head in the top 4. We're getting hints Chiarot is the same. I don't think anyone has blamed Chiarot for that, it's more a question of Bergevin having failed to address the team's biggest weakness...

When you look at our roster without Chiarot, we already had players like Kulak, Reilly, Folin, Fleury, Juulsen, etc. who could fill in the 3rd pairing. What we didn't have (and still don't) is a guy who can slot next to Petry or Weber in the top 4. Like I said, if you ask Chiarot to play that role, you're setting him up for failure and criticism, similar to when Desharnais was put in the role of 1C or Gomez was on his big contract or Moen on the top line or Benn and Alzner being made to play top 4... it's not those guys' faults for accepting their contracts or for taking the ice time they've been given. It's on the GM and coach for doing things like that, but it doesn't mean fans should be satisfied. As discussed, this team is in no man's land between having aging stars and rebuilding with youngsters. If the team wants to keep Price and Petry and Weber and make a run, then they should be building around them and addressing the big hole at LHD. If you don't fill that hole, you have zero chance of winning a Cup. If you don't want to give up picks/prospects to fill the hole, then trade Weber and find a Cup window that works for you. Chiarot is a place-holder in the line-up, but he exemplifies Bergevin's lack of vision for the roster.

 

 

I disagree with your assesment of Chiarot i find him to be a fair upgrade on Benn. that said i do see him as more of a third pairing guy on a good team. the crux of the problem is still our lack of a first pairing LHD as we have both mentioned.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, ramcharger440 said:

I disagree with your assesment of Chiarot i find him to be a fair upgrade on Benn. that said i do see him as more of a third pairing guy on a good team. the crux of the problem is still our lack of a first pairing LHD as we have both mentioned.

I agree Chiarot is an upgrade and 20 games in we may see him fulfill a role in the middle pairing. While we don't have a strong #4 D Kulak needs to have that spot until someone takes it away from him. We do have Juulsen back in the conversation, as well Fleury may be able to play a bigger role by midseason. I think we are taking too much time with these decisions at the moment. I would send Fleury to Laval asap to get some playing time and keep Reilly as our #7. To me the only other choice is to put Reilly on waivers and give the kid games against weaker opponents. I don't see Fleury getting in the line- up tomorrow against TB , but will say if he does than one of Reilly or Folin should go. I like what Folin brings if that is the choices and Julien and Bergevin need to make up their mind sooner rather than later.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, Habberwacky said:

I agree Chiarot is an upgrade and 20 games in we may see him fulfill a role in the middle pairing. While we don't have a strong #4 D Kulak needs to have that spot until someone takes it away from him. We do have Juulsen back in the conversation, as well Fleury may be able to play a bigger role by midseason. I think we are taking too much time with these decisions at the moment. I would send Fleury to Laval asap to get some playing time and keep Reilly as our #7. To me the only other choice is to put Reilly on waivers and give the kid games against weaker opponents. I don't see Fleury getting in the line- up tomorrow against TB , but will say if he does than one of Reilly or Folin should go. I like what Folin brings if that is the choices and Julien and Bergevin need to make up their mind sooner rather than later.

Yeah we probably do have too many same level D floating around right now. i don'r know what the big worry seems to be with Fleury he looked good to me for a rookie better than Folin Or Reilly too. Jullsen will need some time in Laval for sure to get his game up to speed but i really liked him last year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

IMO, the order of quality on our D within the organization (NHL and AHL) right now is as follows:

1. Petry

2. Weber

3. Mete

4. Kulak

5. Juulsen

6. Chiarot

7. Reilly

8. Fleury

9. Leskinen

10. Brook

11. Ouellet

12. Folin

That said, the thing about Chiarot is that I think he's not getting any better over time, whereas the guys below him (Fleury, Leskinen, Brook, etc.) have higher ceilings than he does and would benefit more from getting the playing experience. I don't think Chiarot is that far ahead of them to justify playing him regularly and I would certainly prefer to live with mistakes from rookies as they learn rather than mistakes from vets. Chiarot is in my view a 3rd pairing guy and will never be good enough to play top 4.

The other thing is that I think people forget how well Benn played for stretches on the 3rd pairing, especially the year he first got here. He was really solid there for a while. Last year, he scored a few more goals, but the problems surfaced when he started getting shifted around the line-up and playing different sides and bigger minutes against tougher opposition. I see the same thing developing with Chiarot. You leave him on the 3rd pairing and find a better partner than Folin and maybe he'll be fine. You try to overplay him and he's going to be a disaster like he has been in 2-3 games already this season.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, ramcharger440 said:

I disagree with your assesment of Chiarot i find him to be a fair upgrade on Benn. that said i do see him as more of a third pairing guy on a good team. the crux of the problem is still our lack of a first pairing LHD as we have both mentioned.

Head on the nail. 

I think most of us are actually saying the same thing.  There's nothing really wrong with Chiarot, Reilly, etc.  but the problem is that because we lack that true top pairing guy, everyone else is playing above their heads.  Mete on the 2nd > Mete on the 1st.   Kulak on the 3rd > Kulak on the 2nd etc.   Look at Nashville - the last few years they had one of the best top 4 we've seen in decades, and yet they still had guys like Yannick Weber or Emelin on their roster in a 3rd pairing role.   Id take Chiarot over either of those guys any day.

Chiarot, from what ive seen, will be fine as a #4-6 guy. I dont think he's a top 3 though. Im not convinced he gels well with Petry either.  Kulak - Petry is a solid pairing & honestly I wouldnt mess with that. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 year later...
  • 3 months later...
  • 3 weeks later...
1 hour ago, HabsRuleForever said:

He still makes mistakes but has improved immensely from the regular season.

He may be the single biggest reason we are where we are. Not that he's the most important part but he was, in the regular season, one of the weakest links on our D.  He's been rock solid many games and better than average in the rest.  A revelation this post season. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

0 points in 17 games and yet such a key piece during this run, he's playing huge minutes and does everything we could possibly expect him to. Hats off, glad we have him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, maas_art said:

He may be the single biggest reason we are where we are. Not that he's the most important part but he was, in the regular season, one of the weakest links on our D.  He's been rock solid many games and better than average in the rest.  A revelation this post season. 

 

1 hour ago, ChiLla said:

0 points in 17 games and yet such a key piece during this run, he's playing huge minutes and does everything we could possibly expect him to. Hats off, glad we have him.

He's played big minutes and done relatively well. I thought he was great down the stretch in the regular season when Weber was out and he's had some very good games in the playoffs. That said, he was a problem in a couple of games in this series and a couple against Toronto too. He's still making some soft giveaways, he's still taken a few bad penalties (especially that one boneheaded delay of game where he shot the puck out the opposite end of the ice), and he's still running into our goalie from time to time and taking them out of the play. He's done some good things, but he hasn't been consistent and Price has largely masked the errors that are happening on D. Chiarot is 2nd worst on the team in Corsi, ahead of only Merrill, and as noted, he isn't providing any offence.

Overall, I think he's still been an asset to the team, and the PK has played well, but IMO, Edmundson has really separated himself as being superior to Chiarot in the playoffs and particularly in this Vegas series. For me, if we're tinkering our Expansion Draft protection list, Edmundson has shown he has more value as a player than Chiarot right now. In the long run, I still don't like Weber-Chiarot as a duo, but as noted, Price has been doing enough to cover for them and the team is winning, which is what counts in the post-season.

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...