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

2020-21 State Of The Habs


H_T_L
 Share

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, campabee82 said:

I am curious to see two things over the next couple of weeks.

1. What happens with Caufield (kind of hoping He loses tonight and doesn't receive an invite to the Frozen Four Tournament or has an early exit.

2. If Harris signs his ELC and goes to Laval if he can pick up where he left off in the NCAA and earn a temp promotion to the Habs. (assuming we don't get Ekholm or someone else)

I think that CC will be the easiest upgrade for Bergy to make, even on the max rookie contract,  prorated,  ofcourse. Tonight's game will be a huge test for CC, as he is  going up against another Hobey Baker candidate in Minnesota goalie LaFontaine. So, hate to say it, but, don't they get an automatic invite to the final four? (16 actually)  The 6 division champions get an automatic entry. At least, that's what I understood. I'd still like to see CC get a few more points. This experience for him is priceless.

As for Harris, I think that,  if signed,  he goes to Laval. Maybe,  if it was early in the season,  he gets a look. But not this late.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, electron58 said:

The WHL’s Prince Albert Raiders announced Tuesday that defenceman Kaiden Guhle will be out indefinitely with a hand injury he suffered during Sunday’s 2-1 shootout loss to the Moose Jaw Warriors. Guhle is the Warriors captain.

Well that is disappointing - by all reports this guy is an absolute stud shutdown the whole side of the ice in the d zone that he is on. His mandate was to work on his creativity in the offensive zone.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, campabee82 said:

The issue we are debating is MB said in his presser that he is not looking to fill the void on D left by the Chiarot injury.

No debate from me - I NEVER said we should trade Chiarot - I was simply making the statement that he shouldn't be traded for the use of his cap room. I do think we should be trying to fill that void as I am not convinced Mete or Ouellete are strong enough to solidify our playoff position. That may require other pieces to be moved.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, claremont said:

Well that is disappointing - by all reports this guy is an absolute stud shutdown the whole side of the ice in the d zone that he is on. His mandate was to work on his creativity in the offensive zone.

Yeah definitely bad timing.  Hopefully he recovers quickly & doesnt require surgery. 

And you arent exaggerating about his shutdown abilities. He played a game the other day & allowed zero zone entries over the entire game.   Monster player, good skater too.  If he can hone his offensive game a bit we may well have a top pairing player here. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, maas_art said:

btw Byron cleared waivers again.  Im glad because i like him as a player but i do wonder if MB is trying to see if someone will take him so he can more easily make another move. 

I like Byron as a player too - He has demonstrated ability on the PK, seems to be ok on the defensive side and is likely our fastest skater. His ability to spell centre for Evans provides depth for this year while Poehling continues to progress. The issue is the value for money which he has not really delivered on from the previous promise he showed before MB overpaid him on value and term. RFA's Lehkonen and Mete seem more expendable based on results so far. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, claremont said:

I like Byron as a player too - He has demonstrated ability on the PK, seems to be ok on the defensive side and is likely our fastest skater. His ability to spell centre for Evans provides depth for this year while Poehling continues to progress. The issue is the value for money which he has not really delivered on from the previous promise he showed before MB overpaid him on value and term. RFA's Lehkonen and Mete seem more expendable based on results so far. 

Oh yeah, dont get me wrong, i wouldnt be too upset to see him claimed.  He's a valueable player and he's better than most of the replacements we have but he's still probably 12-14th on our list of forwards imho and at  $3.4m thats just too far down the lineup... and signed for a couple more years. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, kinot-2 said:

Need to practice 3 on 3's and line changes. 

For sure. 

My guess is that with the limited time DD has had to work with the team he wanted to focus on winning in regulation. Now that we're back home for a stretch I imagine they'll be working on 3 on 3s more.   I dont think its any coincidence they seem content to play out hte OT time and go to a shoot out where its basically a crap shoot anyway. That makes me think they know they havent had time to work on 3 on 3 so they are just trying to stretch things out.

Its too bad that play didnt work right before the goal though - really nice give and go between Petry and Anderson (I think it was anderson).  Petry tried that one extra move after the great save & that got him caught but cant fault them for trying.   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, maas_art said:

For sure. 

My guess is that with the limited time DD has had to work with the team he wanted to focus on winning in regulation. Now that we're back home for a stretch I imagine they'll be working on 3 on 3s more.   I dont think its any coincidence they seem content to play out hte OT time and go to a shoot out where its basically a crap shoot anyway. That makes me think they know they havent had time to work on 3 on 3 so they are just trying to stretch things out.

Its too bad that play didnt work right before the goal though - really nice give and go between Petry and Anderson (I think it was anderson).  Petry tried that one extra move after the great save & that got him caught but cant fault them for trying.   

Danault had the give and go with Petry, also I do fault Petry for trying to take on 3 guys at once while Danault was changing. That was a boneheaded play the safer thing to do in OT was to send it back to our zone even if Price had to play it, that way no one is caught up ice. You can see in the replay he actually thought about doing just that but felt pressure and thought he could reverse direction quick enough to catch the D but lost the handle altogether.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, campabee82 said:

Danault had the give and go with Petry, also I do fault Petry for trying to take on 3 guys at once while Danault was changing. That was a boneheaded play the safer thing to do in OT was to send it back to our zone even if Price had to play it, that way no one is caught up ice. You can see in the replay he actually thought about doing just that but felt pressure and thought he could reverse direction quick enough to catch the D but lost the handle altogether.

Lets be blunt, it was boneheaded to start OT with Danault/Byron as the forwards ... that was a recipe for "lets not lose" not "lets win"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, HabsAlways said:

Lets be blunt, it was boneheaded to start OT with Danault/Byron as the forwards ... that was a recipe for "lets not lose" not "lets win"

Yes but I agree with what Maas said about lack of time to work on it since DD took over. He was more concerned with fixing the forward lines and special team, then how the D pairings stood up under the new system (the reason I think we have not seen any D changes so far). 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, HabsAlways said:

Lets be blunt, it was boneheaded to start OT with Danault/Byron as the forwards ... that was a recipe for "lets not lose" not "lets win"

I didn't like using Byron to start but Danault had just played a strong game and was one of the better forwards tonight. He also is usually one of our best guys in the faceoff circle. It usually is best in 3on3 if you can start with the puck. That said it was Danault that set up Petry. If Petry had scored we wouldn't be even discussing it. I would of liked to see Danault with Taffoli to start. That said Habs Always is correct that Petry made the bad play. I really like Petry most do so he doesn't get called out very often. On the 3rd goal against Petry made a pass he shouldn't of which ended up in the back of our net. It doesn't matter who you are you can't (or shouldn't) force the play. It was a nice comeback and not a bad game. It's part of the game but I still hate the 3 on 3 or the shootout "gimmick" hockey. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can understand the reasoning for starting OT with those 3 . Danault is suppose to be the best face off man on the team ; hoping he wins it and you start with the puck . Byron the quickest /fastest skater and Petry the most mobile D man . Unfortunately I don't think they have six guys that they can throw out  that can compete with other teams 3 on 3 .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, HabsAlways said:

Lets be blunt, it was boneheaded to start OT with Danault/Byron as the forwards ... that was a recipe for "lets not lose" not "lets win"

Really? I had no problem with the starters the problem arose when Petry failed to move the puck and got challenged. Price should have made the stop also however I am not blaming Price. He played well and allowed the team to get back into the game. I am sure he would love to have that goal back. Being down two goals and fighting back against what I feel is the best team in the North division was a good effort. We took three out of four and that was after four games on the road.

Good effort and yes the 3 on 3 does need some help. Agree with "Maas" in his post. Maybe now that home he will be able to spend some time there. Overall I thought the effort was there however not sure why they seem to have these slow starts?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, kinot-2 said:

Had the Canadiens won half of the eight games they've lost in overtime or shootouts, they'd be tied for second with Edmonton and Winnipeg.

True. But on the bright side, we've only played 8 games (out of 29) where we have no points.  The OT/SO thing is not good but at least they arent all 0 point losses. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, kinot-2 said:

Had the Canadiens won half of the eight games they've lost in overtime or shootouts, they'd be tied for second with Edmonton and Winnipeg.

We'd actually be ahead of the Jets technically because they wouldn't have got those extra points that we lost to them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, H_T_L said:

We'd actually be ahead of the Jets technically because they wouldn't have got those extra points that we lost to them.

If we had beaten the Jets (3 OT losses) and Leafs (1 OT loss) in regulation then We would currently be tied with the Leafs and Jets for 2nd in the division at 38 points!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, campabee82 said:

If we had beaten the Jets (3 OT losses) and Leafs (1 OT loss) in regulation then We would currently be tied with the Leafs and Jets for 2nd in the division at 38 points!

The Jets would have 3 points less if they had not won those 3 in extra time and we would have 3 more points giving us 36 and them 35 with us still having a game in hand. That's the point i was making.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • H_T_L locked this topic
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...