State Of The Habs 2018-19

[H_T_L]

34 minutes ago, jennifer_rocket said:

I thought Hudon looked alright last night. However... is Byron back next game? Looks like one of Peca or Hudon may have to sit. I guess Julien will have ample time to decide with such a long lay-off upon us.

His suspension has now been served and he's eligible to return next game.

[maas_art]

1 hour ago, jennifer_rocket said:

I thought Hudon looked alright last night. However... is Byron back next game? Looks like one of Peca or Hudon may have to sit. I guess Julien will have ample time to decide with such a long lay-off upon us.

The problem for Hudon is that CJ seems very reluctant to use him on the 4th line.  With Byron back CJ has his top 9 (and thats even without shaw) so Hudon is probably odd man out again, with Peca and Agostino subbing in and out. DLo and Chaput will probably sit the occasional game.  Not sure what happens if/when everyone (including Shaw) is back. I assume we try to send Agostino to the minors.   The team at least seems to realize Hudon will probably get picked off of waivers but honestly, if we're not using him, does it matter?

[CANADIENS27]

The save of the game goes to the video coach.  

 

 

[26NCounting]

So at the mid season break some question.........

1) Are the habs really this good or just extremely over achieving?

2) Has MB proved us all wrong and he really is a hockey Genius or just gotten extremely lucky?

3) Is the season so far helping or hinding the habs?

 

I know how I feel as we have been discussing these at work for a week now but I am curious how everyone else feels

 

[H_T_L]

26 minutes ago, 26NCounting said:

So at the mid season break some question.........

1) Are the habs really this good or just extremely over achieving?

2) Has MB proved us all wrong and he really is a hockey Genius or just gotten extremely lucky?

3) Is the season so far helping or hinding the habs?

 

I know how I feel as we have been discussing these at work for a week now but I am curious how everyone else feels

 

1. We are once again relying on goaltending of late to win games, so maybe we are over achieving a bit, but we are nowhere as bad as we were last season 

2. Nobody will ever convince me MB is a genius. He has made a couple good deals and lucked out on others. What you have to remember are the bad deals, the over payment of fringe players while playing hardball with real talent, the Alzner and Schlemko type signings, his past coaching choices for both the main team and farm. He fails in so many ways that it's hard to justify his recent success as anything but mediocre. The five year plan has been extended to 10 years. In fairness it does seem like he has rectified some of his shortcomings,,, but the bad taste is still lingering.

3. The season is helping with the development of our younger guys. Making the playoffs and participating in them helps in that respect. I don't see it hindering us.

[maas_art]

45 minutes ago, 26NCounting said:

So at the mid season break some question.........

1) Are the habs really this good or just extremely over achieving?

2) Has MB proved us all wrong and he really is a hockey Genius or just gotten extremely lucky?

3) Is the season so far helping or hinding the habs?

 

I know how I feel as we have been discussing these at work for a week now but I am curious how everyone else feels

 

 

19 minutes ago, H_T_L said:

1. We are once again relying on goaltending of late to win games, so maybe we are over achieving a bit, but we are nowhere as bad as we were last season 

2. Nobody will ever convince me MB is a genius. He has made a couple good deals and lucked out on others. What you have to remember are the bad deals, the over payment of fringe players while playing hardball with real talent, the Alzner and Schlemko type signings, his past coaching choices for both the main team and farm. He fails in so many ways that it's hard to justify his recent success as anything but mediocre. The five year plan has been extended to 10 years. In fairness it does seem like he has rectified some of his shortcomings,,, but the bad taste is still lingering.

3. The season is helping with the development of our younger guys. Making the playoffs and participating in them helps in that respect. I don't see it hindering us.

1.  We're probably about where we should be.  At HTL pointed out, we are relying on goaltending but we were propping them up earlier in the year. I think the guys will settle down & if we can simply get our PP to 'middle of the road' quality it should be less of a fight for wins.

2) MB is no genius. That said, he isnt an idiot either.  He's proven he can be stubborn and pig-headed though.  I do think that GM can be something that takes a while for guys to get good at though. People talk about Poile in Nashville as a "great" gm but he has been on the job there for two decades.  He wasnt always great & made some really bad moves (especially deadline day) in the past.   I think the difference is that Nashville was a terrible team (back when expansion rules were tough on new squads) and MB inherited a decent group of assets.   The other thing is that Poile was hired with the expectations he would grow into the position.  MB was hired for his "experience" but clearly he's learned more on the job than he knew when he got here.

3) I think its been a positive season. I know guys will say "if only we got another top 5 pick" but with that comes another season of losing and the culture that develops from that.   This team bounced back from a terrible year and along the way brought in new players & by all accounts the dressing room is a very positive one.   

[habs1952]

8 hours ago, 26NCounting said:

So at the mid season break some question.........

1) Are the habs really this good or just extremely over achieving?

2) Has MB proved us all wrong and he really is a hockey Genius or just gotten extremely lucky?

3) Is the season so far helping or hinding the habs?

 

I know how I feel as we have been discussing these at work for a week now but I am curious how everyone else feels

 

1) The Habs are a mediocre team destined to be a good team if Bergevin would/could improve the defense.

2) MB is NOT a genius.

3) No doubt winning improves the attitude of the players but.....see (1)

 

[HARBORSPORT]

9 hours ago, 26NCounting said:

So at the mid season break some question.........

1) Are the habs really this good or just extremely over achieving?

2) Has MB proved us all wrong and he really is a hockey Genius or just gotten extremely lucky?

3) Is the season so far helping or hinding the habs?

 

I know how I feel as we have been discussing these at work for a week now but I am curious how everyone else feels

 

1.  we were good early, then so-so to bad for a while, now improving.....to be 1 point out of second place in the division at this point is really good if not a miracle considering all that"s gone on.

2. living proof that even a total idiot can get lucky once in a while....

3.  I'm 50/50 on this one , our division is so competitive/close that it's difficult to shine for long, yet maybe that's what's been helping us lately....you cant afford to slack off

[maas_art]

I got this from a different site but my gosh we've been offensively putrid.   Since the 97-98 season (thats roughly when the 'new' era of dead puck hockey began) we are dead last in the NHL in point per game seasons.  Meaning, in the last 21 years we've had only ONE (Kovalev) player finish the season with a point per game, while several teams have had over 20 PPG seasons by their players during that time (and then there's Pittsburgh with 46 PPG performances by their players in the last 21 years!!!).   I knew we were bad but didnt realize we were that bad. Only Minnesota (3) Nashville (3) and Arizona (4) come close to our futility.

(Since 97-98, included)

Anaheim: 20 seasons over PPG
Arizona: 4 seasons over PPG
Boston: 14 seasons over PPG
Buffalo: 8 seasons over PPG
Calgary: 14 seasons over PPG
Carolina: 9 seasons over PPG
Chicago: 11 seasons over PPG
Colorado: 23 seasons over PPG
Columbus: 5 seasons over PPG
Dallas: 15 seasons over PPG
Detroit: 17 seasons over PPG
Edmonton: 11 seasons over PPG
Florida: 5 seasons over PPG
Los Angeles: 12 seasons over PPG
Minnesota: 3 seasons over PPG
Montreal: 1 season over PPG
Nashville: 3 seasons over PPG
New Jersey: 15 seasons over PPG
NY Islanders: 6 seasons over PPG
NY Rangers: 8 seasons over PPG
Ottawa: 24 seasons over PPG
Philadelphia: 20 seasons over PPG
Pittsburgh: 46 seasons over PPG
San Jose: 14 seasons over PPG
St. Louis: 10 seasons over PPG
Tampa Bay: 20 seasons over PPG
Toronto: 14 seasons over PPG
Vancouver: 15 seasons over PPG
Washington: 29 seasons over PPG
Winnipeg/ATL: 13 seasons over PPG

[jeff33]

3 hours ago, maas_art said:

I got this from a different site but my gosh we've been offensively putrid.   Since the 97-98 season (thats roughly when the 'new' era of dead puck hockey began) we are dead last in the NHL in point per game seasons.  Meaning, in the last 21 years we've had only ONE (Kovalev) player finish the season with a point per game, while several teams have had over 20 PPG seasons by their players during that time (and then there's Pittsburgh with 46 PPG performances by their players in the last 21 years!!!).   I knew we were bad but didnt realize we were that bad. Only Minnesota (3) Nashville (3) and Arizona (4) come close to our futility.

(Since 97-98, included)

Anaheim: 20 seasons over PPG
Arizona: 4 seasons over PPG
Boston: 14 seasons over PPG
Buffalo: 8 seasons over PPG
Calgary: 14 seasons over PPG
Carolina: 9 seasons over PPG
Chicago: 11 seasons over PPG
Colorado: 23 seasons over PPG
Columbus: 5 seasons over PPG
Dallas: 15 seasons over PPG
Detroit: 17 seasons over PPG
Edmonton: 11 seasons over PPG
Florida: 5 seasons over PPG
Los Angeles: 12 seasons over PPG
Minnesota: 3 seasons over PPG
Montreal: 1 season over PPG
Nashville: 3 seasons over PPG
New Jersey: 15 seasons over PPG
NY Islanders: 6 seasons over PPG
NY Rangers: 8 seasons over PPG
Ottawa: 24 seasons over PPG
Philadelphia: 20 seasons over PPG
Pittsburgh: 46 seasons over PPG
San Jose: 14 seasons over PPG
St. Louis: 10 seasons over PPG
Tampa Bay: 20 seasons over PPG
Toronto: 14 seasons over PPG
Vancouver: 15 seasons over PPG
Washington: 29 seasons over PPG
Winnipeg/ATL: 13 seasons over PPG

Yeah I would have guessed last or at best bottom 5.  Thats why when people want to compare this team to our last cup winning team I have to wonder if they actually saw that team. damphousse and muller both cracked 90 points , bellows had 88 and stephan lebeau (!) had 80.  and our top pairing was schneider and desjardins, both all star calibre players who cracked 40 points that year.

when brook, romanov, poehling, suzuki and kk are all here and contributing significantly on TOP of our mish mash of decent to good players , THEN we will be a serious contender.

 

[habs1952]

7 hours ago, maas_art said:

I got this from a different site but my gosh we've been offensively putrid.   Since the 97-98 season (thats roughly when the 'new' era of dead puck hockey began) we are dead last in the NHL in point per game seasons.  Meaning, in the last 21 years we've had only ONE (Kovalev) player finish the season with a point per game, while several teams have had over 20 PPG seasons by their players during that time (and then there's Pittsburgh with 46 PPG performances by their players in the last 21 years!!!).   I knew we were bad but didnt realize we were that bad. Only Minnesota (3) Nashville (3) and Arizona (4) come close to our futility.

(Since 97-98, included)

Anaheim: 20 seasons over PPG
Arizona: 4 seasons over PPG
Boston: 14 seasons over PPG
Buffalo: 8 seasons over PPG
Calgary: 14 seasons over PPG
Carolina: 9 seasons over PPG
Chicago: 11 seasons over PPG
Colorado: 23 seasons over PPG
Columbus: 5 seasons over PPG
Dallas: 15 seasons over PPG
Detroit: 17 seasons over PPG
Edmonton: 11 seasons over PPG
Florida: 5 seasons over PPG
Los Angeles: 12 seasons over PPG
Minnesota: 3 seasons over PPG
Montreal: 1 season over PPG
Nashville: 3 seasons over PPG
New Jersey: 15 seasons over PPG
NY Islanders: 6 seasons over PPG
NY Rangers: 8 seasons over PPG
Ottawa: 24 seasons over PPG
Philadelphia: 20 seasons over PPG
Pittsburgh: 46 seasons over PPG
San Jose: 14 seasons over PPG
St. Louis: 10 seasons over PPG
Tampa Bay: 20 seasons over PPG
Toronto: 14 seasons over PPG
Vancouver: 15 seasons over PPG
Washington: 29 seasons over PPG
Winnipeg/ATL: 13 seasons over PPG

Doesn't surprise me at all. The Habs have had mediocre lineups for the last 20 years.

[Manatee-X]

18 hours ago, maas_art said:

I got this from a different site but my gosh we've been offensively putrid.   Since the 97-98 season (thats roughly when the 'new' era of dead puck hockey began) we are dead last in the NHL in point per game seasons.  Meaning, in the last 21 years we've had only ONE (Kovalev) player finish the season with a point per game, while several teams have had over 20 PPG seasons by their players during that time (and then there's Pittsburgh with 46 PPG performances by their players in the last 21 years!!!).   I knew we were bad but didnt realize we were that bad. Only Minnesota (3) Nashville (3) and Arizona (4) come close to our futility.

I wonder what we'd see if we looked at goaltending numbers instead, or even defence.  Between Theodore, Halak and Price I doubt there are many teams who could say they had as many seasons saved by goaltending over the last 20 years as we did.  We've also had some star offensive defencemen in that time (Sourray, Markov and Subban come to mind right away and I'm sure I'm missing some) so if you look at standout offensive seasons from defencemen I'm sure we'd rank quite a bit better.

 

It's kind of funny, though, isn't it, how a team can really develop a "culture".  I mean theoretically a team from 20 years ago should have virtually no bearing on the team of today, and yet after all of the various GMs/coahces/draft picks, etc. over the years here we are still icing the same sorts of rosters.

[BigTed3]

6 hours ago, Manatee-X said:

I wonder what we'd see if we looked at goaltending numbers instead, or even defence.  Between Theodore, Halak and Price I doubt there are many teams who could say they had as many seasons saved by goaltending over the last 20 years as we did.  We've also had some star offensive defencemen in that time (Sourray, Markov and Subban come to mind right away and I'm sure I'm missing some) so if you look at standout offensive seasons from defencemen I'm sure we'd rank quite a bit better.

 

It's kind of funny, though, isn't it, how a team can really develop a "culture".  I mean theoretically a team from 20 years ago should have virtually no bearing on the team of today, and yet after all of the various GMs/coahces/draft picks, etc. over the years here we are still icing the same sorts of rosters.

I think a lot of that "culture" stems from an impatient media and fanbase. It's hard to be an elite scorer in Montreal because most scorers are streaky in nature, and this city just doesn't tolerate it. Pacioretty can put up 30 goals a year, but if he struggles to start a season with 2 goals in his first 8 games, every media outlet has him on the trading block. Galchenyuk can pop 30 in but people overlook that and focus on how he can't win draws or is inadequate defensively. Instead, the media props up players like Danault an Lehkonen and Moen and so on, which is not to say those players aren't good or can't be useful in their own right, but they're "safe" players. They put in an effort every night, they aren't flashy, and while they may rarely win you games, they don't often lose them for you either. And that's the type of guy who kind of slips under the radar from media attack and survives in this town. IMO, the lack of elite point-getters is probably multi-factorial:goaltending has prevented us from having too many top 5 picks; the media and taxes have likely spurned away some of the top free agents; but a large part of it, you're right, is the culture here of rewarding guys who "play the game the right way" based on an antiquated notion of what that should be.

[26NCounting]

15 hours ago, BigTed3 said:

I think a lot of that "culture" stems from an impatient media and fanbase. It's hard to be an elite scorer in Montreal because most scorers are streaky in nature, and this city just doesn't tolerate it. Pacioretty can put up 30 goals a year, but if he struggles to start a season with 2 goals in his first 8 games, every media outlet has him on the trading block. Galchenyuk can pop 30 in but people overlook that and focus on how he can't win draws or is inadequate defensively. Instead, the media props up players like Danault an Lehkonen and Moen and so on, which is not to say those players aren't good or can't be useful in their own right, but they're "safe" players. They put in an effort every night, they aren't flashy, and while they may rarely win you games, they don't often lose them for you either. And that's the type of guy who kind of slips under the radar from media attack and survives in this town. IMO, the lack of elite point-getters is probably multi-factorial:goaltending has prevented us from having too many top 5 picks; the media and taxes have likely spurned away some of the top free agents; but a large part of it, you're right, is the culture here of rewarding guys who "play the game the right way" based on an antiquated notion of what that should be.

I agree with this 100%!!  Our fan base while passionate is also quite rabid.  If people "heckled" any of us as much as we do our own team we would walk

[jennifer_rocket]

It's a shame that no one on team right now looks like a PPG player over 82 games. Kovalev was brilliant. What exciting seasons when he was dangling on the PP, sniping goals for us.

[Manatee-X]

16 hours ago, BigTed3 said:

I think a lot of that "culture" stems from an impatient media and fanbase. It's hard to be an elite scorer in Montreal because most scorers are streaky in nature, and this city just doesn't tolerate it. Pacioretty can put up 30 goals a year, but if he struggles to start a season with 2 goals in his first 8 games, every media outlet has him on the trading block. Galchenyuk can pop 30 in but people overlook that and focus on how he can't win draws or is inadequate defensively. Instead, the media props up players like Danault an Lehkonen and Moen and so on, which is not to say those players aren't good or can't be useful in their own right, but they're "safe" players. They put in an effort every night, they aren't flashy, and while they may rarely win you games, they don't often lose them for you either. And that's the type of guy who kind of slips under the radar from media attack and survives in this town. IMO, the lack of elite point-getters is probably multi-factorial:goaltending has prevented us from having too many top 5 picks; the media and taxes have likely spurned away some of the top free agents; but a large part of it, you're right, is the culture here of rewarding guys who "play the game the right way" based on an antiquated notion of what that should be.

That's a fair point that I hadn't really considered.  It also fits with the fact that we have had star defenders.  I mean everyone loved when Markov was scoring, but if he went a few games you never heard anybody say "oh Markov has really gone cold" the way you would with a star forward.  

It doesn't explain goaltending quite so well, since there's easily as much pressure on goaltenders in Montreal as there is on the forwards.  But maybe there's more focus on the positive side with them when they're playing well?  With so many top-notch goaltenders in our team's history, the ones who stand out for even a short moment tend to be lionized.

[jennifer_rocket]

Curiously, how does everyone rate our young guys on D? It seems like we have some interesting prospects, but I have no idea where they stand on our depth chart... or how likely they are to turn into regular NHL players.

Victor Mete seems like he's in the process of establishing himself as a regular NHLer. I suppose Noah Juulsen has done a good job, too. What about Josh Brook and Cale Fleury? David Sklenicka?

[26NCounting]

I really like the look of Brooks and think he will develop into a nice 2 way 2nd line player, certainly will help us down the road.  Fleury on the other hand is a great offensive D man who could run a PP with the best of them, however his draw back is the holes in his D, when he is on the ice in his own end it's more like a gong show.  No idea about defensive coverage's and plays a really "light" game.  I think his deficiencies will limit his NHL potential. 

[tony5775]

Comment on Fanside really got me to thinking.

Zack Cook: It’s too late in the seasons to consider the Habs a fraud. I don’t want to say the Montreal Canadiens will finish top three in the Atlantic because I believe the Bruins, Leafs and Lightning are all better teams. On the other hand, I’m trying to imagine a Canadiens team with a powerplay around 18% efficiency, instead of 13%. Combine that with substantially good play at 5-on-5 and good goaltending, and have yourselves a contending team.

[maas_art]

1 hour ago, jennifer_rocket said:

Victor Mete seems like he's in the process of establishing himself as a regular NHLer. I suppose Noah Juulsen has done a good job, too. What about Josh Brook and Cale Fleury? David Sklenicka?

Just my 2¢ from what ive seen and read.  It looks to me like:

Mete(LD):  Probably a lock for top 4d.  Loftiest Ceiling:  #2-3d man
Brook(RD):   Probably a lock for top 4d.  Loftiest Ceiling:  #1-2d man
Juulsen(RD):  Probably a lock for top 4d.  Loftiest Ceiling:  #1-2d man

Fleury (RD):  Probably a lock for top 6d.  Loftiest Ceiling:  #3-6d man

Sklenicka (LD) is tougher because he is a little bit older so its tough to know if there's much more ceiling but I think he's shown he can probably be a pretty effective third pair guy at worst.

So with those 5 D we've got a solid core (with only 1 in the NHL right now).  We also have guys like Romanov, Harris and Walford who are all still on the radar as future NHLers.

You have to figure Weber (and probably Petry) will be around as long as they are still effective and guys like Kulak and Reilly, while not ideal, are doing ok in support roles. Olofsson, if he can ever stay healthy, is probably better than either of those 2 guys too - but his health is a huge question mark. 


To me, we have a pretty good looking foundation but it sure would be nice to add 1 or 2 more guys who have true top-pairing potential - especially at left D.   I think between Juulsen and Brook you probably have a decent chance at a #1 RD  but other than Romanov (who im still not convinced is a true #1LD) we are slim in that area. 

[jennifer_rocket]

Thanks for the response maas. I forgot about Romanov!  Given the pool of defensive prospects we have, is there a rush for us to make a deal for a top-4 LD? I mean, I feel like it's something the team will be looking at (if not now, than in the summer)... but, I wonder if we need to sacrifice at one position to get better at another if we feel these young guys can make an impact in the next 1-3 seasons. Unless we're talking about trading a LD prospect and something else (maybe a pick) for a clear, ready-now, top 4 LD. That's something I could get behind. Juulsen + 2nd for something. Or Mete + 2nd for something. Maybe even a 1st pick instead of a 2nd.

[maas_art]

18 minutes ago, jennifer_rocket said:

Thanks for the response maas. I forgot about Romanov!  Given the pool of defensive prospects we have, is there a rush for us to make a deal for a top-4 LD? I mean, I feel like it's something the team will be looking at (if not now, than in the summer)... but, I wonder if we need to sacrifice at one position to get better at another if we feel these young guys can make an impact in the next 1-3 seasons. Unless we're talking about trading a LD prospect and something else (maybe a pick) for a clear, ready-now, top 4 LD. That's something I could get behind. Juulsen + 2nd for something. Or Mete + 2nd for something. Maybe even a 1st pick instead of a 2nd.

I guess it really comes down to asking price.  Its a tantalizing idea: getting a top pairing LD NOW - because really, if you got one & everyone else slotted back, this defense is suddenly sooo much better.

-Top LD -  Weber
Mete - Petry
Kulak/Reilly-Juulsen/Benn

Thats a solid group right there. You have no one playing above their heads and a good mix of skill, age and experience.   But what does it cost to get that guy?  If its something that wont hurt our top 9 or our future, great but how likely is that?   

So I agree with you, id be much more inclined to stand pat unless the right deal is out there.  I didnt want Muzzin (Not because hes' a bad player but because of the cost) and I dont really want any of the other guys we're rumored to be in on - except for a few of the younger guys whose names have come up lately.     I could totally see MB taking a chance on a guy like Bouwmeester for this year's playoffs.   As long as the price isnt too high i guess it wont hurt but i still dont think its ideal. 

[maas_art]

FWIW, since December 1, Carey Price sits second in the League with a 2.04 goals-against average and .933 save percentage. Only Robin Lehner has been better in that timeframe.

[jennifer_rocket]

52 minutes ago, maas_art said:

So I agree with you, id be much more inclined to stand pat unless the right deal is out there.  I didnt want Muzzin (Not because hes' a bad player but because of the cost) and I dont really want any of the other guys we're rumored to be in on - except for a few of the younger guys whose names have come up lately.     I could totally see MB taking a chance on a guy like Bouwmeester for this year's playoffs.   As long as the price isnt too high i guess it wont hurt but i still dont think its ideal. 

I'm okay with acquiring Bouwmeester if it's like, Michael McCarron and Calgary's 4th rounder. I wouldn't be interested in him if it's a pick in the first three rounds or a quality prospect... I think that would be a big ask of St. Louis. I'm sure someone will toss something better at them. I'm kind of in for a low-risk, low-reward (low-cost) move heading into the play-offs (assuming we'll make it). Just getting some of our players the first round experience will be totally worth it.

[kinot-2]

Karl Alzner recalled from Laval.

 

The move was expected as the team never formally announced him being sent down. It was effectively a “paper transaction” - a transaction done for administrative purposes without needing the player to report. In this case, the Canadiens have two extra days to send him back down without needing waivers but that seems unlikely at this point.