2013-2014 State Of The Habs

[jeff33]

8 Changes I think the Habs need to make to be a Stanley Cup contender next year:

1. Move Emelin to the left side: there's just no way we can continue to pair him with Markov and certainly no way we can keep using him on the right side, where he has clearly been uncomfortable. Either we shelter him next to Subban or else he plays on the third pairing with lesser minutes.

2. Trade Desharnais: and I mean no disrespect to the way DD has played for us when I say this. This isn't trading a guy who's lazy or who can't play in the NHL, this is trying to make the pieces of the puzzle fit. What goes hand in hand with this is the Habs needing to be willing to take the plunge with Eller and Galchenyuk playing more prominent roles down the middle and needing to find ice time to make that happen. As long as DD is here, it won't. As long as DD is here, we'll have to find ways to work smaller players into the line-up together. Eller and Galchenyuk give us more potential and more flexibility in the line-up.

3. Find a top 6 scoring winger: say what you want about Vanek's post-season but he gave the Habs added depth and allowed other guys to get better match-ups. Without him, we're down to 2 or 3 top 6 wingers (Pacman, Gallagher, and Galchenyuk if he doesn't move to center). To be competitive, we need to bring Vanek back or we need to bring in someone who can play that role.

4. Fix the break-out: it was perhaps our biggest downfall all season, in that we often had forwards way too far up ice and defencemen who didn't know what to do when they didn't have a clear option. Our break-out was too predictable and didn't keep the other team on its toes. When you have players like Subban, Beaulieu, and Markov, you need to be more creative and allow those guys to make plays, not confine them to nudging the puck up the boards.

5. The powerplay structure has to be better, particularly on the second wave: the 2nd shift of the PP was literally a dead zone once Subban and Markov went off. Zone entries were awful, puck movement was too one-sided instead of making the goalie and D move laterally, and there wasn't enough traffic in front for rebounds. At times, the PP worked well, but it wasn't consistent enough. That has to change. It might be necessary to look for a second guy who can shoot the puck from the back end, whether that's a D man like Wisniewski or Souray or a forward who can play the point on the PP.

6. A turn to the youth movement: in addition to Galchenyuk and Eller, I'd like to see us give more opportunity to Tinordi, Beaulieu, and Pateryn on the back end, as well as see if we can work in Louis Leblanc up front and give Bournival a bigger role. This year was a wasted year in terms of preparing the young D to play in the NHL, and we need to make sure we're able to work the relief into the line-up.

7. Turn over the leadership: again, with respect to the youth movement, there are younger guys ready to lead the way, much as there are in Chicago, Pittsburgh, and so on. I'm not ready to give Subban the "C" but I'd certainly give one of him, Pacioretty, or Eller an "A" and work the young guys into the core of the leadership as well.

8. Avoid adding dead weight: there can't be any more signings of players like Murray, Parros, or Bouillon. As much as they hurt by not playing up to par, they also took up roster space and ice time we could have used elsewhere. The focus has to be on speed, skill, and if it permits, size, but not on size alone or character alone.

lol...ted, i come on this website every now and then with something on my mind, open the thread i want, and find that you have already written the post i wanted to write in a better way than i was going to write it.

for what its worth, 2 and 3 were really the burning ones.

just as you said, DD gets full marks for his entire stint as a hab, and had a solid year and playoffs. but at the end of the day

1. hes warming that spot for galchenyuk

2. eller is simply a better player and will fill what he does plus throw hits and play some good 2 way hockey

3. he actually has trade value

has to be done IMO

as for the vanek thing, it was plain as day how much more complete this team was with the trickle down effect his addition made

at the deadline, the guy i was hoping we would get was actually gaborik to fill that exact role, i thought there was no chance we would land vanek. we did and i was overjoyed, and ironically enough look at gaborik, in the finals, racking it up.

hes a ufa next year. id make them both solid offers. as lousy as he was this playoffs ( we nicknamed him tomas vanish, feel free to use to the full extent of your amusement everyone) he fills the role to a t. id take him back and let him gain chemistry and get his heart into it. likely he goes somewhere stupid for marginally more money, as is the world we live in, but bottom line, we need a true top line RW

[Habs_Hockey_Nutz]

The state of the Habs... what has Marc Bergevin learned since he took office? I have these burning questions for him...

Is Michel Therrien the right coach to develop the Habs youth with a willingness to utilize them with enough patience and not impede that development by using veterans so much? If Gallant moves on who will replace him as an assistant coach? Is J.J. Daigneault the best man for the job as an assistant coach?

Is David Desharnais the defacto #1 center that will continue to get so much ice-time and top-line minutes both 5-on-5 and on the power-play?

Is Alex Galchenyuk, as the top forward prospect, going to be a center or a winger?

Will Pacioretty and Desharnais continue to be attached at the hip?

Will Daniel Briere still be a Hab next year? Markov? Gionta?

Has Brandon Prust's value diminished enough to consider trading him (if he can)?

Are Lars Eller and Rene Bourque on the bubble to play a more important role as top six players?

Are Travis Moen's days done as a Hab?

Will the defensive core, starting next season, incorporate; Beaulieu, Tinordi, Pateryn and or Nygren?

Does the use of Tokarski mean Peter Budaj could be demoted or traded?

Will Louis Leblanc ever really get an extended opportunity to play for The Habs?

Will Weaver be re-signed as a 6th-7th d-man? Will Weise be re-signed?

Does Ryan White have a future with the Habs?

Should Tomas Plekanec be traded?

[careypricefan]

I think we need to re-sign Markov and that needs to be one of the first things we do. He is such a leader and is well respected.

I think if we dont make the attempt to re-sign him, I'm afraid of the impact it may have in the locker room.

This is of course after we lock up Subban

[careypricefan]

What does everyone think about Lafleur's comments about Patches and Vanek?

http://sports.nationalpost.com/2014/06/04/montreal-canadiens-legend-guy-lafleur-blames-max-pacioretty-thomas-vanek-for-failure-to-reach-final/

[BeanCountingHab]

What does everyone think about Lafleur's comments about Patches and Vanek?

http://sports.nationalpost.com/2014/06/04/montreal-canadiens-legend-guy-lafleur-blames-max-pacioretty-thomas-vanek-for-failure-to-reach-final/

I think Lafleur is a great player who every once in a while says extremely stupid things.

[Guest habs1952]

What does everyone think about Lafleur's comments about Patches and Vanek?

http://sports.nationalpost.com/2014/06/04/montreal-canadiens-legend-guy-lafleur-blames-max-pacioretty-thomas-vanek-for-failure-to-reach-final/

I'm leaning towards agreeing with him.

[NewfoundlandHab]

I'm leaning towards agreeing with him.

Really?? I can kind of understand Vanek, but Patches?

First of all 11 pts in 17 playoff games this season isn't that bad. I know he wasn't playing the best, but including those 17 games this season, he has 21 games of playoff experience. He needs to find playoff Patches just like he had to find regular season 30+ goal Patches. I think its to early to say you "cant win with himon your team."

[jennifer_rocket]

What does everyone think about Lafleur's comments about Patches and Vanek?

http://sports.nationalpost.com/2014/06/04/montreal-canadiens-legend-guy-lafleur-blames-max-pacioretty-thomas-vanek-for-failure-to-reach-final/

Bah. Lafleur. He's entitled to his opinion. I don't really have that much respect for him, though.

It must be nice to have played in an era that enabled him to be the superstar that he was, and now he can sit on the sidelines and publicly critique players who are playing in an era of parity. Pacioretty was excellent for us this season. He deserves some criticism for his slow start in October, but I wouldn't criticize his post-season performance. He had ups and downs like many of our players. Vanek had a poor post-season, but I hardly think such a small sample size is worth hating a guy over.

[BigTed3]

Bah. Lafleur. He's entitled to his opinion. I don't really have that much respect for him, though.

It must be nice to have played in an era that enabled him to be the superstar that he was, and now he can sit on the sidelines and publicly critique players who are playing in an era of parity. Pacioretty was excellent for us this season. He deserves some criticism for his slow start in October, but I wouldn't criticize his post-season performance. He had ups and downs like many of our players. Vanek had a poor post-season, but I hardly think such a small sample size is worth hating a guy over.

Not to say Lafleur didn't have a great career because he was an outstanding player, but you're right, you can't compare eras in hockey. In the eras of Lafleur and Gretzky and so on, play was more open, players weren't as big, goalie equipment wasn't as big, and guys often racked up 100-point seasons. Lafleur's right that Pacioretty and Vanek had disappointing post-seasons but they're both excellent players and you don't dismantle your core because of one average post-season. Lafleur himself wasn't that great in his first few playoffs and he played on some stacked teams.

[Guest habs1952]

Really?? I can kind of understand Vanek, but Patches?

First of all 11 pts in 17 playoff games this season isn't that bad. I know he wasn't playing the best, but including those 17 games this season, he has 21 games of playoff experience. He needs to find playoff Patches just like he had to find regular season 30+ goal Patches. I think its to early to say you "cant win with himon your team."

That's one part I don't agree with which is why I didn't totally agree with Lafleur. Vanek was an absolute 'no-show' and I believe he could have done a lot more. As for Patches, it looked like Vanek rubbed off on Patches the wrong way. Both players could have done more.

[ramcharger440]

we are in good shape, if the right moves get made we should improve over this years team. I think we still have the same needs as before on defence and at forward but we have some great young players to try out at defence we really need to bolster our forward lines we need some wingers and we need to shed some dead weight but all in all we are a solid team

[Noob616]

Lafleur is just another example that having "played the game" means next to nothing about your ability to analyze it.

Liked Ray Ferraro's comments, "are you going to trade your 39 goal scorer for a guy who tries real hard and scores 12?". Other thing is that I don't really know how you could conceivably improve on him at LW. Only guys I see as a hands down upgrade are Hall and Benn, other than that you're talking about older guys like Marleau or Sharp, or younger players who either haven't proven they're an upgrade or are in to be paid more money.

[smirob]

I think the habs are in great shape. We have a great core, and need to build around that by trading surplus for needs. Bergevin should be active this offseason.

Needs: 2nd Pairing RD. Top Pairing LD. Top Line RW. 3rd Line RW

Surplus: Centremen, 2nd/3rd Pairing LD.

.

Our core is great! Very positive season overall.

[BigTed3]

Lafleur is just another example that having "played the game" means next to nothing about your ability to analyze it.

Liked Ray Ferraro's comments, "are you going to trade your 39 goal scorer for a guy who tries real hard and scores 12?". Other thing is that I don't really know how you could conceivably improve on him at LW. Only guys I see as a hands down upgrade are Hall and Benn, other than that you're talking about older guys like Marleau or Sharp, or younger players who either haven't proven they're an upgrade or are in to be paid more money.

Exactly. You want to have guys with heart and grit and toughness, but not at the expense of skill and speed. As far as left wingers go, I think Pacioretty is among the top 5 in the league right now. I'd probably throw Hall, Benn, Sharp (if he's on wing), and JVR in that group. Right behind them, I'd have guys like Lucic, Skinner, Ladd, Landeskog, Evander Kane, Saad, and Steen. You also have a few guys who are good now but who are probably hitting the downside of their careers, like Vanek, Marleau, and Zetterberg. But if I were talking about who I'd want to acquire in a trade 1-for-1 going forward, Benn would probably be the only guy I'd jump at. Hall would be a toss-up for me, and the rest are in my view, not worth dealing Pacioretty for given that Pacman is 1. still improving year to year and 2. on such as great contract. If Malkin were available, yes, I'd look at dealing Pacioretty as part of the package for him, but on a production-for-cost ratio, Pacioretty might be one of the top 5 bargains in the league right now and he's just about an untouchable for me. As far as this off-season goes, that list includes Pacioretty, Subban, Price, Galchenyuk, and possibly Eller. Throw in Beaulieu, Tinordi, Gallagher, and Bournival and that's really the core of players you're going forward with in the next few years and that MB should be trying to build around.

[Guest mrsmarkov]

What does everyone think about Lafleur's comments about Patches and Vanek?

http://sports.nationalpost.com/2014/06/04/montreal-canadiens-legend-guy-lafleur-blames-max-pacioretty-thomas-vanek-for-failure-to-reach-final/

I absolutely agree with him. He said it how it is. He said exactly what I was thinking and probably what many people are thinking, but don't want to admit.

[Guest mrsmarkov]

That's one part I don't agree with which is why I didn't totally agree with Lafleur. Vanek was an absolute 'no-show' and I believe he could have done a lot more. As for Patches, it looked like Vanek rubbed off on Patches the wrong way. Both players could have done more.

AGREED with this completely. Vanek absolutely rubbed off on Patches, I want Vanek gone now!

[Guest mrsmarkov]

Maybe the problem is that I rely on Patches far too much, I expect more than what he did in the post season. Maybe it's too much pressure haha I don't know, but I wanted MORE! But then again I wanted more from just about everyone..almost. But I expected it from Patches, it what like a given. Just like I expect Gally to play hard every single night, which he does.

[habs_93]

When we see the players wearing the CH on CBC or TSN or RDS on any particular night, we're not seeing those players as the individual people they are in any other situation. We're seeing simulacra created by the sport and the media around it. How do we know there's supposed "tension" between a player and a coach? Because Darren Dreger tweets about it, or Ron MacLean mentions it on Hockey Tonight. How is it enhanced for the television audience to keep people interested? The producer tells the technical director to keep two cameras on the coach and the player at all times, and he cuts between the shots dramatically during a lapse in play. Or he'll call up a graphic showing ice time amounts for the player's last few games. Then Bob Cole mentions it during an icing. After that, cut to the rink-side reporter to speak for 30 seconds and say nothing of particular clarity or import. Etc. We're not even seeing the gameplay itself without inbuilt bias. Camera position, which plays to replay and from what angle, shots taken during play, and so on all have an impact, some of it very subtle. As well, many of us aren't particularly enamored with the play-by-play, colour, and studio personalities in hockey, but unless you mute every single game, you're going to hear their cliches and snap judgments repeated over and over. And it has a subconscious impact.

The art of television sports directing is somewhat melodramatic and manipulative by nature, and to an extent that's what we like and expect. And rumour-mongering is pretty much the human condition. But one has to maintain a reasonable perspective on it. Our perceptions of players, coaches, teams, and situations in sports is unavoidably distorted by our distance from them. It's easy to feel closer in the 21st century, sure, but remember: We may watch 24CH, but we're not actually in the room, and we may follow a player on twitter, but we're not actually his friend. We can't have a high level of confidence in the information we're getting a lot of time, so we perhaps shouldn't have a high level of conviction in our opinions.

I picked that particular "coach and player at odds" example because it happens so often, but nearly everything can be exaggerated on television, if only due to the sheer amount of it that gets produced these days. Bell and Rogers know there's enough interest in the NHL to sustain multiple 24 hour channels with wide viewership. They have to fill that time with something—and sometimes, with anything. And that's just the TV networks. There's always been less-than-scrupulous newspaper columnists trashing people they don't like. Now there's blogs and twitter feeds all over the spectrum of seemliness. Taking this stuff at face value isn't always the wisest choice.

I've pause about declaring a player "a cancer in the room" because of anonymous twitter feeds and analysts, all of whom have an overarching agenda. Ditto with "lazy" based on a small sample size of games. Particularly when many of those games were broadcasted with little features here and there about why a player "isn't doing more".

About Lafleur: the guy's being something of a clown. Although his glory years were before my time, I have reverence for him, of course, as I do all Habs greats. That reverence extends to his performances on the ice in the 70s and 80s. While there's plenty of athletes I like comprehensively as people for their non-sports achievements, after a few instances of my sports heroes acting somewhat less than heroic, I've become open to separating the players from their performances. His skills as a hockey analyst are not why I like Guy Lafleur.

[RicochetII]

I think the habs are in great shape. We have a great core, and need to build around that by trading surplus for needs. Bergevin should be active this offseason.

Needs: 2nd Pairing RD. Top Pairing LD. Top Line RW. 3rd Line RW

Surplus: Centremen, 2nd/3rd Pairing LD.

.

Our core is great! Very positive season overall.

Needs:

- Top line C/RW would be ideal. Someone that can play C, or move over to RW if Galchenyuk takes C.

- Top 4 RD. I think we can be patient this year and see if someone is able to fit with Subban before deciding we need a top 2.

Wants:

- Top pairing LD.

- 3rd line RW. Between Briere, Bourque, Bournival, Prust, and Weise, I think we are pretty much covered on the 3rd line wings, so I wouldn't consider that a "Need" either.

Surplus:

- Agreed. We don't need 8 out of 12 forwards capable of playing C.

------------

That means we only really "Need" to add two players this off-season. Other moves can wait until mid-season or deadline.

Otherwise our biggest priority is sorting through our current roster, and determining who we need to go farther, and who is expendable in order to improve the team.

[Larry-Launstein-Jr]

When this thread has run its course let me know - I want it to be a tradition of mine to start the State Of The Habs threads every season.