Alexander Romanov

[habby67]

Let's be grateful MB hasn't traded him for Dubois. I still don't 100 per cent trust the guy lol

[dreegking]

On 2021-01-22 at 4:40 PM, habby67 said:

Let's be grateful MB hasn't traded him for Dubois. I still don't 100 per cent trust the guy lol

Lol. Well, he’s considered the next stud for the Habs. It’s been awhile since we could say that. The Habs used to draft and groom very good and even Stud like dmen regularly. Or true potential studs. Not sure what’s changed this past while. It’s refreshing to see a guy like Romanov. He’s a blue chipper. 

[ramcharger440]

I really like this kid, he just got here and he has not made any really glaring mistakes when you consider this is his first couple of games around this league he does not really know the opposing players yet you get the feeling that a lot of this is instinct for this guy he is pretty much a natural and with more time he will only get better. i see him as a direct Marky replacement time will tell if he puts up the #'s but his defence is already there.

[maas_art]

28 minutes ago, ramcharger440 said:

I really like this kid, he just got here and he has not made any really glaring mistakes when you consider this is his first couple of games around this league he does not really know the opposing players yet you get the feeling that a lot of this is instinct for this guy he is pretty much a natural and with more time he will only get better. i see him as a direct Marky replacement time will tell if he puts up the #'s but his defence is already there.

This bolded part cannot be overstated.  He's looked good, he's looked creative and smart - but most importantly he just seems to "know" what to do.  There's only been one time (OT vs toronto ) where he looked even remotely lost/overwhelmed and that was just for a second.  He's the real deal.  He may not be a #1-2 (although he still might) but there's no way he's not a top 4 DMan at absolute worst. 

[H_T_L]

Really been impressed by how cool under fire he's looked out there, along with being one of our more physical guys. He's made a ton of good passes when clearing the zone and always seems to have a good feel for who's around him. He's a keeper.

[ramcharger440]

3 minutes ago, H_T_L said:

Really been impressed by how cool under fire he's looked out there, along with being one of our more physical guys. He's made a ton of good passes when clearing the zone and always seems to have a good feel for who's around him. He's a keeper.

I agree he is a breath of fresh air he can skate and hit and pass and he has a good shot too. he will only get better.

 

[kinot-2]

37 minutes ago, ramcharger440 said:

I agree he is a breath of fresh air he can skate and hit and pass and he has a good shot too. he will only get better.

 

^^^^  this. 

[electron58]

I guess he has a Weber-like shot.  Poor Gally.

[BigTed3]

Also, anyone notice how good Victor Mete has looked the past few games next to Romanov? It's refreshing to have two pairs with two guys who can both skate and move the puck (Kulak-Petry and Mete-Romanov).

[maas_art]

2 hours ago, BigTed3 said:

Also, anyone notice how good Victor Mete has looked the past few games next to Romanov? It's refreshing to have two pairs with two guys who can both skate and move the puck (Kulak-Petry and Mete-Romanov).

Yes. I apprecaite they are getting easier matchups (although nt always - they had over 3 minutes 5-on-5 against McDavid last night) but they've actually been better than Edmundson/Weber lately.   I was hoping things turned around after the break (Weber looked good) but last night that pairing looked confused and gassed most of the night.   Romanov-Mete looked quite good.  

Makes you wonder what DD does when Chairot is ready to go. I know what I'd do... 

[ramcharger440]

Meh Mete skates but not much else. some good heavy forchecking by the other team and he is on his but.

[PuckPundit]

In DD's doghouse for unknown, unspecified reasons.  Can't buy a playoff game appearance . 

[Regis22]

10 hours ago, PuckPundit said:

In DD's doghouse for unknown, unspecified reasons.  Can't buy a playoff game appearance . 

I suspect , with him being a rookie, and no playoff experience , they feel more comfortable going with the guys they are going with , Nothing more .

[RCAF48]

How Romanov responds to his usage during these play-offs could determine his future with Montreal. His play during the last month of the season was substandard and I think he lost DD's trust so he is now # 8 on DD's depth chart. Hopefully he is working hard in practice, maintaining a positive attitude and is ready to play if needed. Next year will see at least 2 D currently ahead of him on the depth chart moving on and, if his potential is as solid as we think, he should be able to regain a starting position and continue his development into a top 4 D.  Defencemen also often take longer to reach their potential upside and I don't think Romanov is an exception to that premise. 

[BigTed3]

59 minutes ago, RCAF48 said:

How Romanov responds to his usage during these play-offs could determine his future with Montreal. His play during the last month of the season was substandard and I think he lost DD's trust so he is now # 8 on DD's depth chart. Hopefully he is working hard in practice, maintaining a positive attitude and is ready to play if needed. Next year will see at least 2 D currently ahead of him on the depth chart moving on and, if his potential is as solid as we think, he should be able to regain a starting position and continue his development into a top 4 D.  Defencemen also often take longer to reach their potential upside and I don't think Romanov is an exception to that premise. 

I agree with you that Romanov wasn't great down the stretch. But the reason Ducharme cited for not using him was that he didn't have any playoff experience and how does a guy get experience if you don't play him?

The counterpoint to Romanov being bad is that other guys have been bad too. Kulak has had a few bad games in these playoffs. Gus has added value offensively but he has made some obvious miscues as well. Merrill has looked bad in 90% of the games he's played since we acquired him and he has far less upside than Romanov. The only reason Merrill sat was because he got hurt. Weber has also looked bad in several games and though I don't expect him to sit, the point remains that this decision wasn't based on how a guy was playing, it was done because Ducharme doesn't want to play a rookie. So now look at how he sat Caufield and Kotkaniemi and then those guys became two of our best forwards. Ducharme himself is a rookie head coach. Suzuki is another youngster who has been gold in the post-season. Other teams like Colorado and Minnesota had no issue throwing out rookies too. This team needs to get over itself and play its best players, and I don't believe that Merrill or Gus is better than Romanov, just as I don't believe there are 12 forwards on this team better than CC and JK. I get it if you don't want to play Romanov every game, but right now, you're only spotting your third pairing 6-10 minutes a night and wearing down your vets, so something has to give. He should at least be in the rotation of guys, not sitting for his 10th game in a row.

[olddude]

1 hour ago, BigTed3 said:

I agree with you that Romanov wasn't great down the stretch. But the reason Ducharme cited for not using him was that he didn't have any playoff experience and how does a guy get experience if you don't play him?

The counterpoint to Romanov being bad is that other guys have been bad too. Kulak has had a few bad games in these playoffs. Gus has added value offensively but he has made some obvious miscues as well. Merrill has looked bad in 90% of the games he's played since we acquired him and he has far less upside than Romanov. The only reason Merrill sat was because he got hurt. Weber has also looked bad in several games and though I don't expect him to sit, the point remains that this decision wasn't based on how a guy was playing, it was done because Ducharme doesn't want to play a rookie. So now look at how he sat Caufield and Kotkaniemi and then those guys became two of our best forwards. Ducharme himself is a rookie head coach. Suzuki is another youngster who has been gold in the post-season. Other teams like Colorado and Minnesota had no issue throwing out rookies too. This team needs to get over itself and play its best players, and I don't believe that Merrill or Gus is better than Romanov, just as I don't believe there are 12 forwards on this team better than CC and JK. I get it if you don't want to play Romanov every game, but right now, you're only spotting your third pairing 6-10 minutes a night and wearing down your vets, so something has to give. He should at least be in the rotation of guys, not sitting for his 10th game in a row.

Totally agree with this, however I think the damage is done and Romanov will want out of here. 

[RCAF48]

16 minutes ago, BigTed3 said:

I agree with you that Romanov wasn't great down the stretch. But the reason Ducharme cited for not using him was that he didn't have any playoff experience and how does a guy get experience if you don't play him?

The counterpoint to Romanov being bad is that other guys have been bad too. Kulak has had a few bad games in these playoffs. Gus has added value offensively but he has made some obvious miscues as well. Merrill has looked bad in 90% of the games he's played since we acquired him and he has far less upside than Romanov. The only reason Merrill sat was because he got hurt. Weber has also looked bad in several games and though I don't expect him to sit, the point remains that this decision wasn't based on how a guy was playing, it was done because Ducharme doesn't want to play a rookie. So now look at how he sat Caufield and Kotkaniemi and then those guys became two of our best forwards. Ducharme himself is a rookie head coach. Suzuki is another youngster who has been gold in the post-season. Other teams like Colorado and Minnesota had no issue throwing out rookies too. This team needs to get over itself and play its best players, and I don't believe that Merrill or Gus is better than Romanov, just as I don't believe there are 12 forwards on this team better than CC and JK. I get it if you don't want to play Romanov every game, but right now, you're only spotting your third pairing 6-10 minutes a night and wearing down your vets, so something has to give. He should at least be in the rotation of guys, not sitting for his 10th game in a row.

I bow to your knowledge that the reason Romanov isn't playing in the play-offs is because he hasn't played in the play-offs before and DD's decision isn't based on Romanov playing poorly when when given the opportunity late in the regular season and that DD feels other defencemen are more reliable over 9-12 minutes of game time. Your point seems to be that other guys are making mistakes so why not give Romanov, especially since he is a rookie, the chance to make some. I find that argument less than overwhelming but it is interesting.

I do think DD has manged the forwards, including our sole rookie forward, extremely well but I appreciate your nuanced insight.

It may shock some people but I actually believe we are playing the guys that are playing the best team hockey right now and that includes our defencemen. If Romanov shows he is better than the other choices he will play. 

 

[BigTed3]

28 minutes ago, RCAF48 said:

I bow to your knowledge that the reason Romanov isn't playing in the play-offs is because he hasn't played in the play-offs before and DD's decision isn't based on Romanov playing poorly when when given the opportunity late in the regular season and that DD feels other defencemen are more reliable over 9-12 minutes of game time. Your point seems to be that other guys are making mistakes so why not give Romanov, especially since he is a rookie, the chance to make some. I find that argument less than overwhelming but it is interesting.

I do think DD has manged the forwards, including our sole rookie forward, extremely well but I appreciate your nuanced insight.

It may shock some people but I actually believe we are playing the guys that are playing the best team hockey right now and that includes our defencemen. If Romanov shows he is better than the other choices he will play. 

 

Well one, Romanov is better than Merrill by almost every metric you can use to measure a player's performance.

Two, Ducharme was asked point blank at the start of the playoffs why he was sitting Romanov, Caufield, and Kotkaniemi and he answered that it was because the Habs wanted to go with experience in their line-up and preferred to use the likes of Staal, Byron, Perry, and Merrill for that reason. So it has nothing to do with my "nuanced insight" but rather a quote from the head coach himself.

I'll come back to the point about Romanov then... you said Romanov wasn't playing because he played poorly down the stretch. So that's your opinion of why he's not playing, and I agree with you that he did play poorly at the end of the season and I agree with you that that factors in to why he sat. BUT, if that were the only reason, then as I said, there are guys who have played (Merrill, Kulak, Gus, Weber) who have played just as poorly at times and didn't come out. And if a guy did play poorly, does it merit sitting 10 games in a row? Maybe there's more to the story that we don't know about but I'm going by what the coach told us and that's that he was hesitant to play guys without playoff experience. He's been proven wrong on that theory by Caufield and Kotkaniemi already. I think Kaprizov in Minnesota has proven that theory wrong too. Noah Dobson's holding his own with the Isles. The Lightning had no problem slotting Sergachev into their line-up on their way to the Cup last year.

The point is that if you put Romanov in, he may very well make mistakes, but if the other guys are making mistakes too, at least you're putting in a guy who's making mistakes and becoming a more experienced player who doesn't make those same mistakes for you next time he's in the playoffs. So absolutely, there's a benefit to giving ice time and experience to young guys whereas there is little to no upside to having Jon Merrill or Gustafsson go out and play bad hockey for you.

[RCAF48]

34 minutes ago, olddude said:

Totally agree with this, however I think the damage is done and Romanov will want out of here. 

If he is that sensitive he might be better off returning to the KHL or playing for the Maple Leafs. If he wants to be a regular defenceman in the NHL I believe he has an excellent opportunity to do so in Montreal. I like him and I hope he continues to work on becoming the best player he can be.

I guess I'm an outlier on here in that I don't see the urgency to get Romanov in the lineup considering our recent games and that the dressing room seems pretty tight right now.

I can live with being an outlier because I don't think my opinion on anything is the definitive one. 

[RCAF48]

15 minutes ago, BigTed3 said:

Well one, Romanov is better than Merrill by almost every metric you can use to measure a player's performance.

Two, Ducharme was asked point blank at the start of the playoffs why he was sitting Romanov, Caufield, and Kotkaniemi and he answered that it was because the Habs wanted to go with experience in their line-up and preferred to use the likes of Staal, Byron, Perry, and Merrill for that reason. So it has nothing to do with my "nuanced insight" but rather a quote from the head coach himself.

I'll come back to the point about Romanov then... you said Romanov wasn't playing because he played poorly down the stretch. So that's your opinion of why he's not playing, and I agree with you that he did play poorly at the end of the season and I agree with you that that factors in to why he sat. BUT, if that were the only reason, then as I said, there are guys who have played (Merrill, Kulak, Gus, Weber) who have played just as poorly at times and didn't come out. And if a guy did play poorly, does it merit sitting 10 games in a row? Maybe there's more to the story that we don't know about but I'm going by what the coach told us and that's that he was hesitant to play guys without playoff experience. He's been proven wrong on that theory by Caufield and Kotkaniemi already. I think Kaprizov in Minnesota has proven that theory wrong too. Noah Dobson's holding his own with the Isles. The Lightning had no problem slotting Sergachev into their line-up on their way to the Cup last year.

The point is that if you put Romanov in, he may very well make mistakes, but if the other guys are making mistakes too, at least you're putting in a guy who's making mistakes and becoming a more experienced player who doesn't make those same mistakes for you next time he's in the playoffs. So absolutely, there's a benefit to giving ice time and experience to young guys whereas there is little to no upside to having Jon Merrill or Gustafsson go out and play bad hockey for you.

OK, put Romanov in because he will make us better in the future. I can live with that and you can move on.

 

                                                                                                        - 30 -

 

 

[electron58]

2 hours ago, olddude said:

Totally agree with this, however I think the damage is done and Romanov will want out of here. 

And the Russian purge could continue?

[MALMACIAN_CRUNCH]

Lol… I also wonder if there isn’t something behind the scenes that has led to Romanov not playing. It does seem strange to me that he would play the whole year only to be benched for the playoffs. So when DD says it’s because of lack of experience, I take that with a grain of salt. It’s believable to an extent, since Romanov wasn’t the only kid to be benched to start with. But there wasn’t a lot of hesitation to get KK and Caufield back in there when the opportunity knocked either. And with the way Meril and Gus have struggled since the beginning, it’s not hard to make an argument in favour of putting Romanov in, but it just doesn’t seem to be considered an option. 
With all of that said, I also agree that his play fell off as the season went on. He should have been sent to Laval. I don’t mind that he’s not playing, and I understand why he’s not. Believe it or not, our Habs actually believe we can win this dang trophy. That’s what their out there playing for. They’re not treating this as a learning experience for the children. Also, not all rookies are created equal, comparing rookies that are playing with their teams like they’re apples to apples isn’t genuine. Kaprizov is like 24 years old, Dobson is similar in age, but has been playing North American hockey his whole life, and clearly their development throughout the season has been different than Romanov’s. I know those were just two “off the top of your head” examples, my point is just that they are all unique. 
So like I said at the start, I do wonder if there’s more to the story than just Romanov’s lack of experience. I also don’t mind him not playing if the coach doesn’t think it’s the right move. And personally, and especially if it’s physicality that we think we’re missing, I wouldn’t mind at all seeing Fleury getting a look. I still don’t know what I missed that had him sent down, never to be called back up again….

[MuddyWaterMoose]

1 hour ago, RCAF48 said:

If he is that sensitive he might be better off returning to the KHL or playing for the Maple Leafs. If he wants to be a regular defenceman in the NHL I believe he has an excellent opportunity to do so in Montreal. I like him and I hope he continues to work on becoming the best player he can be.

I guess I'm an outlier on here in that I don't see the urgency to get Romanov in the lineup considering our recent games and that the dressing room seems pretty tight right now.

I can live with being an outlier because I don't think my opinion on anything is the definitive one. 

You are not an outlier. I see no reason at this point to rush the young D-man. I also don't believe that what is said in public is the entire story, nor does it need to be. 

I've also heard that the players all really like DD and enjoy playing for him. 

[BigTed3]

18 minutes ago, MALMACIAN_CRUNCH said:

Lol… I also wonder if there isn’t something behind the scenes that has led to Romanov not playing. It does seem strange to me that he would play the whole year only to be benched for the playoffs. So when DD says it’s because of lack of experience, I take that with a grain of salt. It’s believable to an extent, since Romanov wasn’t the only kid to be benched to start with. But there wasn’t a lot of hesitation to get KK and Caufield back in there when the opportunity knocked either. And with the way Meril and Gus have struggled since the beginning, it’s not hard to make an argument in favour of putting Romanov in, but it just doesn’t seem to be considered an option. 
With all of that said, I also agree that his play fell off as the season went on. He should have been sent to Laval. I don’t mind that he’s not playing, and I understand why he’s not. Believe it or not, our Habs actually believe we can win this dang trophy. That’s what their out there playing for. They’re not treating this as a learning experience for the children. Also, not all rookies are created equal, comparing rookies that are playing with their teams like they’re apples to apples isn’t genuine. Kaprizov is like 24 years old, Dobson is similar in age, but has been playing North American hockey his whole life, and clearly their development throughout the season has been different than Romanov’s. I know those were just two “off the top of your head” examples, my point is just that they are all unique. 
So like I said at the start, I do wonder if there’s more to the story than just Romanov’s lack of experience. I also don’t mind him not playing if the coach doesn’t think it’s the right move. And personally, and especially if it’s physicality that we think we’re missing, I wouldn’t mind at all seeing Fleury getting a look. I still don’t know what I missed that had him sent down, never to be called back up again….

I agree that maybe there's something we're not being told. The public reasoning from DD is that he wants to go with experience, or at least that's what he said before the playoffs started. But then he back-tracked and turned to JK and then Caufield, and he's left out Tatar for those guys. I get D is a bit of a riskier position, but it's not like Merrill or Gustafsson are without risk. If the reasoning is experience alone, then playing Merrill over Romanov would be akin to taking Kotkaniemi or Caufield back out and sliding in Jordan Weal in their place. Yes, it's a more experienced player, but clearly one who brings less upside now and less benefit for the future via giving them experience.

Karpizov is older, yes, but again the question was NHL playoff experience... Romanov played in a men's league in the KHL prior to coming over, so he's not coming straight from junior, and he was in the bubble around the team last year, so it's not like the experience of watching the playoffs is something he's taking in for the first time. The next step for him is to actually play. Dobson, like Romanov, is 21. They came from the same draft, and he had all of 1 game of NHL playoff experience last year and this was his first full season in the NHL. Other players from that same draft: Dahlin, Quinn Hughes, Tkachuk, Kotkaniemi, Rasmus Sandin (who played 5 of 7 games against us in Round 1), Svechnikov, etc. My point remains not that Romanov is a star who should be playing but that he's better than Merrill by a longshot and you didn't take Merrill out, and he's no worse than Gustafsson, who made a few gaffes and got to stay in the line-up. If you're going to play guys who are making mistakes, you may as well play guys who learn from it and can apply that to later years for you. The Habs have always been bad at building experience for their youngsters unless they're forced to by necessity. It's not universal, but it's a pattern. Currently, it's clear the bottom 2 D men don't have the coach's confidence so it's not like Romanov could fare worse there either. Something just kinds of smells funny about this whole thing.

[ramcharger440]

Well looks like it's time.