Quick thoughts about last night's game
Kyle Roussel
and didn't last night...except for that long wrist shot from Stastny
that nearly fooled him like Monday's game. Now who starts on saturday?
Big game vs. the Leafs - don't want to lose this one.
2 - Komisarek had his worst game of the year. Too many giveaways, one
leading directly to the Bruins' first goal.
3 - 1st line continues to dominate, and you get the sense that if Koivu
were to get hurt, they could slide almost anyone in there and they'd be
fine, because, let's face it. Higgins is carrying that line and Ryder
is vastly improved.
4 - Teams are adjusting to Souray's point blast. I don't recall him
getting any shots through last night. Thankfully he has made the
adjustment as well and found the open man i.e. Markov. Instead of
blasting the puck in to someone's shin pads and giving up a breakaway,
he's doing the smart thing. It will be interesting come trade deadline
to see where we stand and how we will deal with him. Teams with real
contending plans will undoubtedly be lining up to snatch him away from
us. Considering he's an UFA, it stands to reason that we get something
for him while we can. But we'd be giving away our powerplay QB, a huge
minus for us in the short term.
5 - Bonk is the complete opposite of what he was last year. He's
getting involved, and chipping in the odd point here and there.
6 - Though Kovalev was ejected, Latendresse was mostly lost out there.
I'm not knocking the kid, because that's what he is - a kid. It's time
to realize that he is not a Crosby or Malkin-like talent. Not even
close. I hope for moral & ethical reasons that Carbo sticks to his word
and that Latendresse gets used to the NHL faster than he is, but the
logical side says that he needs to be somewhere else. And since I don't
believe he can be sent to Hamilton, Drummondville is the only other
option.
J.T.
Kyle Roussel wrote:
> 1 - Huet looked good. I thought he was fighting the puck vs Buffalo,
> and didn't last night...except for that long wrist shot from Stastny
> that nearly fooled him like Monday's game. Now who starts on saturday?
> Big game vs. the Leafs - don't want to lose this one.
>
Agreed. I liked Huet a lot last night...he was sharp close in and
didn't seem to be going down as early as he does when he's nervous. I
like him against TO. He needs to build up some momentum.
> 2 - Komisarek had his worst game of the year. Too many giveaways, one
> leading directly to the Bruins' first goal.
Yup. I was surprised at this, as he's been steady so far. He's got to
watch it or he'll be riding the pine when Dandenault and Bouillon get
back.
>
> 3 - 1st line continues to dominate, and you get the sense that if Koivu
> were to get hurt, they could slide almost anyone in there and they'd be
> fine, because, let's face it. Higgins is carrying that line and Ryder
> is vastly improved.
Ryder has come into his own...Demers last night was comparing his shot
to Mike Bossy's. And Higgins is great every night. He's the team MVP
right now, I think.
>
> 4 - Teams are adjusting to Souray's point blast. I don't recall him
> getting any shots through last night. Thankfully he has made the
> adjustment as well and found the open man i.e. Markov. Instead of
> blasting the puck in to someone's shin pads and giving up a breakaway,
> he's doing the smart thing. It will be interesting come trade deadline
> to see where we stand and how we will deal with him. Teams with real
> contending plans will undoubtedly be lining up to snatch him away from
> us. Considering he's an UFA, it stands to reason that we get something
> for him while we can. But we'd be giving away our powerplay QB, a huge
> minus for us in the short term.
>
That was smart on Souray's part. As he's learning, the threat of the
shot is just as potent as the shot itself. Everyone braces for it and
he dishes off to the open man. Great stuff.
I want Gainey to do whatever he has to to keep all the D. I'm sick of
running out and signing forwards to be the next offensive saviour and
who never pan out. I like the D right now, and don't see how Gainey
can improve it any cheaper. So, rather than buying expensive free
agents from elsewhere, I think he needs to sign his own.
> 5 - Bonk is the complete opposite of what he was last year. He's
> getting involved, and chipping in the odd point here and there.
Yes, I do like Bonk this year. He and Johnson look good together. Now,
if Perezhogin could just stop hitting posts and getting robbed by
overacheiving goaltenders, the line would be putting up some points.
>
> 6 - Though Kovalev was ejected, Latendresse was mostly lost out there.
> I'm not knocking the kid, because that's what he is - a kid. It's time
> to realize that he is not a Crosby or Malkin-like talent. Not even
> close. I hope for moral & ethical reasons that Carbo sticks to his word
> and that Latendresse gets used to the NHL faster than he is, but the
> logical side says that he needs to be somewhere else. And since I don't
> believe he can be sent to Hamilton, Drummondville is the only other
> option.
I think Latendresse will be there for the year, unless Carbonneau will
risk a major loss of face. I agree he's not ready though.
Disappointing, but true.
J.T.
Chuck
J.T. wrote:
> Kyle Roussel wrote:
> > 1 - Huet looked good. I thought he was fighting the puck vs Buffalo,
> > and didn't last night...except for that long wrist shot from Stastny
> > that nearly fooled him like Monday's game. Now who starts on saturday?
> > Big game vs. the Leafs - don't want to lose this one.
> >
>
> Agreed. I liked Huet a lot last night...he was sharp close in and
> didn't seem to be going down as early as he does when he's nervous. I
> like him against TO. He needs to build up some momentum.
>
> > 2 - Komisarek had his worst game of the year. Too many giveaways, one
> > leading directly to the Bruins' first goal.
>
> Yup. I was surprised at this, as he's been steady so far. He's got to
> watch it or he'll be riding the pine when Dandenault and Bouillon get
> back.
1 mistake and he is ready to ride the pine? If that is the standard
Rivet and Souray should be seeing lots of pine.
One game? Not like he had much time to fit in with his new linemates,
one of whom got kicked out of the game.
>
> J.T.
Lauri Tarkkonen
>1 - Huet looked good. I thought he was fighting the puck vs Buffalo,
>and didn't last night...except for that long wrist shot from Stastny
>that nearly fooled him like Monday's game. Now who starts on saturday?
>Big game vs. the Leafs - don't want to lose this one.
>2 - Komisarek had his worst game of the year. Too many giveaways, one
>leading directly to the Bruins' first goal.
The second goal was caused by Komissarek failing to send the puck out,
from the defensive zone, he just threw it along the boards and the
Boston defence and a move to the other side (Chara) led to the goal.
>3 - 1st line continues to dominate, and you get the sense that if Koivu
>were to get hurt, they could slide almost anyone in there and they'd be
>fine, because, let's face it. Higgins is carrying that line and Ryder
>is vastly improved.
I am afraid that they need Saku more than you believe. He is doing more
than scoring points. We have had a discussion about Lemaire's value to
LaFleur, and some try to tell Lemaire was a distraction. Of course
Higgins is a diplomat when he tells how much Saku means for his succes,
but there is some truth in this as well.
>4 - Teams are adjusting to Souray's point blast. I don't recall him
>getting any shots through last night. Thankfully he has made the
>adjustment as well and found the open man i.e. Markov. Instead of
>blasting the puck in to someone's shin pads and giving up a breakaway,
>he's doing the smart thing. It will be interesting come trade deadline
>to see where we stand and how we will deal with him. Teams with real
>contending plans will undoubtedly be lining up to snatch him away from
>us. Considering he's an UFA, it stands to reason that we get something
>for him while we can. But we'd be giving away our powerplay QB, a huge
>minus for us in the short term.
It is hard to believe that Gainey will try to get rid of an asset like
Souray. He for sure understands the importance of the defence. He played
in front of the best defensive squad in NHL history lead by the big
three: Serge Savard, Larry Robinson and Guy Lapointe, but they had
some depth behind them in Brian Engblom, Bill Nyrop etc.
- Lauri Tarkkonen
Chuck
A team that could play both offence and defence. Souray needs a
stronger defensive partner.
Kyle Roussel
> >were to get hurt, they could slide almost anyone in there and they'd be
> >fine, because, let's face it. Higgins is carrying that line and Ryder
> >is vastly improved.
>
> I am afraid that they need Saku more than you believe. He is doing more
> than scoring points. We have had a discussion about Lemaire's value to
> LaFleur, and some try to tell Lemaire was a distraction. Of course
> Higgins is a diplomat when he tells how much Saku means for his succes,
> but there is some truth in this as well.
I won't argue that point. They are clearly better with Saku there than
not there. But I don't think they would be unproductive and lost if he
wasn't there.
>
> >4 - Teams are adjusting to Souray's point blast. I don't recall him
> >getting any shots through last night. Thankfully he has made the
> >adjustment as well and found the open man i.e. Markov. Instead of
> >blasting the puck in to someone's shin pads and giving up a breakaway,
> >he's doing the smart thing. It will be interesting come trade deadline
> >to see where we stand and how we will deal with him. Teams with real
> >contending plans will undoubtedly be lining up to snatch him away from
> >us. Considering he's an UFA, it stands to reason that we get something
> >for him while we can. But we'd be giving away our powerplay QB, a huge
> >minus for us in the short term.
>
> It is hard to believe that Gainey will try to get rid of an asset like
> Souray. He for sure understands the importance of the defence. He played
> in front of the best defensive squad in NHL history lead by the big
> three: Serge Savard, Larry Robinson and Guy Lapointe, but they had
> some depth behind them in Brian Engblom, Bill Nyrop etc.
>
Well there's your problem. With Gainey being a part of the best defense
of all time, and being a great defensive player himself, he knows
better than anyone what Souray's value is. As a defender it isn't much.
As a power play weapon, it's immense. He's also a good team guy, which
helps. Note that of Souray's 10 points, 9 have come on the powerplay.
That's where his real value is.
Chuck
As long as he does produce that counters his defensive lapses. The same
can not be said about his defensive partner. A stronger defensive
defenseman, might free Souray up a little, unfortunately he plays with
a partner, that has enough trouble covering his own weaknesses, then to
effectively compliment any offensive style defenceman.
Lauri Tarkkonen
>> >3 - 1st line continues to dominate, and you get the sense that if Koivu
>> >were to get hurt, they could slide almost anyone in there and they'd be
>> >fine, because, let's face it. Higgins is carrying that line and Ryder
>> >is vastly improved.
>>
>> I am afraid that they need Saku more than you believe. He is doing more
>> than scoring points. We have had a discussion about Lemaire's value to
>> LaFleur, and some try to tell Lemaire was a distraction. Of course
>> Higgins is a diplomat when he tells how much Saku means for his succes,
>> but there is some truth in this as well.
>I won't argue that point. They are clearly better with Saku there than
>not there. But I don't think they would be unproductive and lost if he
>wasn't there.
As longa as this is the only cosistent production line, the Habs need
about one goal per game from both Ryder and Higgins, but yoy do not
realistically expect them to score some 70 goals per season, even though
I have nothing against it, as it would promise Saku more than 100
assists, which is beyond realism as well. :-).
>> >4 - Teams are adjusting to Souray's point blast. I don't recall him
>> >getting any shots through last night. Thankfully he has made the
>> >adjustment as well and found the open man i.e. Markov. Instead of
>> >blasting the puck in to someone's shin pads and giving up a breakaway,
>> >he's doing the smart thing. It will be interesting come trade deadline
>> >to see where we stand and how we will deal with him. Teams with real
>> >contending plans will undoubtedly be lining up to snatch him away from
>> >us. Considering he's an UFA, it stands to reason that we get something
>> >for him while we can. But we'd be giving away our powerplay QB, a huge
>> >minus for us in the short term.
>>
>> It is hard to believe that Gainey will try to get rid of an asset like
>> Souray. He for sure understands the importance of the defence. He played
>> in front of the best defensive squad in NHL history lead by the big
>> three: Serge Savard, Larry Robinson and Guy Lapointe, but they had
>> some depth behind them in Brian Engblom, Bill Nyrop etc.
>>
>Well there's your problem. With Gainey being a part of the best defense
>of all time, and being a great defensive player himself, he knows
>better than anyone what Souray's value is. As a defender it isn't much.
>As a power play weapon, it's immense. He's also a good team guy, which
>helps. Note that of Souray's 10 points, 9 have come on the powerplay.
>That's where his real value is.
When the teams were playing with regularly three lines, they had some
penalty killing and power-play specialists. If it is deemed that Souray
is a defensive liability (do the Canadiens have a defenceman, who from
time to time is not?) then if they dress 7 defencemen they could have
one (Souray) having the majority of his ice time on the powerplay. Using
their speed they could force the opponent into hooking and tripping and
obstruction penalties, and Souray could have enough icetime to keep him
happy. Actually I do not believe that Souray would accept this sort of
plan, he has too much pride to accept a reduced role.
Anyway, the role of defensive play, perhaps I have to stress, smart and
clean defensive play is more important with the zero tolerance of
hooking, clutch and grab and obstruction. As long as it was acceptable
to hook the speed away from the opponent, everybody was on the same
level, as it did not demand much skill to hook, but when you have to do
your defensive work within the rules, it demands more brains, speed and
anticipation. Then there will be diffrences between the teams and the
smart ones come ahead. I as you to pay some attention to the succes of
Minnesota. Do you think their material is any better than the material
of the Canadiens? Could it perhaps be the brains behind it, Jacques
Lemaire. Even if you have an aversion against him, like I have an
aversion against Bobby Clarke, and fail (according to Gerry) give full
credit oh his smarts, some of you do not give Lemaire full credit of his
achievements. Gainey and Lemaire share so much common history and past
experience, that they must understand the game with the same terms.
- Lauri Tarkkonen
Lauri Tarkkonen
So who would be a better defensive partner?
- Lauri Tarkkonen
Mike
season
Koivu line - A really fun line to have. Playing well and connecting.
Perhaps the first true line combination for Koivu's talents.
Souray - 2 assists - he played well even with the crackdown on his shot.
Looking like a keeper for sure.
Bonk - Really happy with his play this year.
Gui needs more seasoning for sure. Not ready for prime time.
Chuck
They are not playing that well defensively as a pairing so what risks
exist to try different partners with Souray? Makes no sense to play two
defencemen together who have very little open ice checking skills.When
they are on the ice, playing defence, the other team will get scoring
chances. That pairing helps to keep Montreal's shots against totals
high, since niether can strip the puck from an attacking forward, and
pass it effectively to escape the zone, more of back up, and hope it
either hits me or the goalie saves it style of defence.
Unless a trade could be made, they can`t do much unless the injured
players come back, or Janceski / O'Bryne start playing like they earn a
shot in the NHL.
Lauri Tarkkonen
I do not object to anything you say, but what about putting it into
practice, by giving some names.
You admitted that there is not much they can do without a trade of
getting some of the injured back. So how would you use the defencemen
after Boullion and Dandenault come back?
- Lauri Tarkkonen
Chuck
If both are healthy enough to play, Rivet sits in the pressbox. If they
prove they are game ready, Rivet gets shipped out. I do not believe you
can develop defensemen, splitting their playing time among two other
5th or 6th defencemen. If Streit continues to play steady hockey, he
needs to keep playing regular shifts. Komisarek needs as much icetime
as he can get. Markov will have more good games then bad. Souray is
scoring goals. They do not have anyone who would remain an asset as a
part timer. They will have to make a decision and commit to 6 regular
full time players. I think they should invest the time in players who
will be here for the next 2 or three years.
Lauri Tarkkonen
Interesting idea, you would shuffle the defence pecking order
completely. The common wisdom is that Rivet is a dependable, stay at
home defenceman, with less offensive potential. I understand that you
were complaining that Souray does not have too much defensive help.
You really challenging the common understanding of the experts around.
Streit was regarded more offensive promise than defensive one. To me it
is difficulot to buy the idea of getting rid of any of the defencemen
without getting something better in return. I just do not believe that
there are many GM:s willing to trade rivet to a better defenceman.
- Lauri Tarkkonen
Gerry
all 8 of our guys ever did happen to be healthy at the same time (which
would surprise me), then we should count our lucky stars.
Trading one would be silly. Beyond silly... invitationally suicidal.
Obviously Streit and Niinimaa sit, but there is nothing that says you
couldn't pick and choose who was playing well and who wasn't. Bouillon
and Dandenault are not necessarily better (or worse) than Streit and
Niinimaa IMO. Komisarek is young and won't die if he takes a night or
two in the pressbox. Markov, Souray, and Rivet are the unquestioned
Top-3, and while they would never be candidates to sit down for no
reason, there are always bumps and bruises and wear and tear from the
grind (such as Rivet played through with his foot injury last week) and
if you have the option of not forcing these guys into the lineup if
they're hurt, then why not take advantage of it.
Personally, I don't think it's an issue that keeps Carbo and Gainey
awake at night. I imagine they'd be doing cartwheels if they had this
"problem".
l8r,
Gerry
Chuck
If Montreal signs both Markov and Souray add Komisarek, Dandenault,
Boullion and Nini.. and Streit. Where is the space to develop and
additional players in the future? If Rivet is displaced as one of the
top two pairs of defencemen, unless the development system comes to a
complete halt, is he the type of defenceman you would want to pair a
rookie with? Rivet, I doubt would be directly involved in a trade for a
better defenceman, but his position could be. Plays a steady amount of
minutes, but he still is not the type of defenceman, you want on the
ice with the game on the line. Watching him, doesn`t give me any more
confidence that the team will hold on vice any of the other defencemen
on the team. He plays a style that allows too many scoring attempts, if
he was effective at taking the puck from an attacker, without allowing
a shot, and turning it into a play up ice, I would change my opinion. I
just wish they would get away from parking themselves just at the edge
of the net and trying to block the shot, to being able to challenger a
attacker, take control of the puck and get it up ice, without giving up
a series of shots on goal.
Chuck
Gerry wrote:
> Every NHL team should try to carry 8 NHL-calibre defensemen, IMO. If
> all 8 of our guys ever did happen to be healthy at the same time (which
> would surprise me), then we should count our lucky stars.
>
> Trading one would be silly. Beyond silly... invitationally suicidal.
> Obviously Streit and Niinimaa sit, but there is nothing that says you
> couldn't pick and choose who was playing well and who wasn't. Bouillon
> and Dandenault are not necessarily better (or worse) than Streit and
> Niinimaa IMO. Komisarek is young and won't die if he takes a night or
> two in the pressbox. Markov, Souray, and Rivet are the unquestioned
> Top-3, and while they would never be candidates to sit down for no
> reason, there are always bumps and bruises and wear and tear from the
> grind (such as Rivet played through with his foot injury last week) and
> if you have the option of not forcing these guys into the lineup if
> they're hurt, then why not take advantage of it.
>
> Personally, I don't think it's an issue that keeps Carbo and Gainey
> awake at night. I imagine they'd be doing cartwheels if they had this
> "problem".
>
> l8r,
> Gerry
>
NHL quality defencemen need ice time. Komisarek has one of the best +/-
totals on the defence. He will not improve in the pressbox, nor will
the player replacing him periodically getting only a marginal amount of
icetime.
Lauri Tarkkonen
>Every NHL team should try to carry 8 NHL-calibre defensemen, IMO. If
>all 8 of our guys ever did happen to be healthy at the same time (which
>would surprise me), then we should count our lucky stars.
It would really surprice me, if they had for longer periods of time all
8 healthy. But having 8 NHL caliber defencemen, would allow for anyone
sit out for even smaller injuries and preventing agravation of the small
ones and having half fit skaters on the ice.
>Trading one would be silly. Beyond silly... invitationally suicidal.
>Obviously Streit and Niinimaa sit, but there is nothing that says you
>couldn't pick and choose who was playing well and who wasn't. Bouillon
>and Dandenault are not necessarily better (or worse) than Streit and
>Niinimaa IMO. Komisarek is young and won't die if he takes a night or
>two in the pressbox. Markov, Souray, and Rivet are the unquestioned
>Top-3, and while they would never be candidates to sit down for no
>reason, there are always bumps and bruises and wear and tear from the
>grind (such as Rivet played through with his foot injury last week) and
>if you have the option of not forcing these guys into the lineup if
>they're hurt, then why not take advantage of it.
I agree with you that Markov, Rivet and Souray must really mess it up,
before they sit out, but I would be surprised if Niinimaa would sit out
ahead of the rest of the bunch. They will most likely dress 7 defencemen
if they have so many healthy.
>Personally, I don't think it's an issue that keeps Carbo and Gainey
>awake at night. I imagine they'd be doing cartwheels if they had this
>"problem".
Some problems are such that you really beg to have them.
- Lauri Tarkkonen
Gerry
Chuck wrote:
>
> NHL quality defencemen need ice time. Komisarek has one of the best +/-
> totals on the defence.
+/- is not relevant in and of itself, however...
> He will not improve in the pressbox,
Nor will he fall to pieces...
> nor will
> the player replacing him periodically getting only a marginal amount of
> icetime.
Which isn't really the point. All you need to do is keep the rust off.
In this extremely hypothetical and unlikely scenario of having all 8
guys healthy, we might hypothetically swap the occasional player in our
"bottom 5" out of the lineup even if they are playing perfectly
respectable hockey. We're not asking for them to play significant
minutes and improve to further their development as players. We just
want to win hockey games today. Komisarek is the only one of them who
the improvement question could even remotely apply to, and him missing
a few games would hardly make a difference to his development, if it
ever came to that.
l8r,
Gerry
Lauri Tarkkonen
>l8r,
>Gerry
In the "old days" the Canadiens had Claude Ruel in a way of a personal
trainer for young players coming up and needing help in transition from
junior to NHL hockey. I understand Jacques Laperriere was working with
many young defencemen and tutoring them. What kind of "special tutoring"
would they get while "eating hotdogs" at their turn?
One difference between the Canadian and European youth developing
systems is, that the relation of games and practice is much higher in
Canada.
- Lauri Tarkkonen
Chuck
It would not hurt him to sit a game, my point is I do not see how it
helps the team if he did.
Ian Merrithew
> It would not hurt him to sit a game, my point is I do not see how it
> helps the team if he did.
It helps if you're in one of those 3-in-4-night scenarios and you don't
want to bang up all of your players. Swapping out a couple of your
bottom-4 defencemen, or bottom-6 forwards, in that situation's perfectly
reasonable.
--
Ian Merrithew - ADM Systems Engineering
ian.merrithew "at" ieee.org
Ian Merrithew
> 4 - Teams are adjusting to Souray's point blast. I don't recall him
> getting any shots through last night. Thankfully he has made the
> adjustment as well and found the open man i.e. Markov. Instead of
> blasting the puck in to someone's shin pads
Interestingly I thought Markov wasn't having a particularly strong game at
the point up until he scored the winner - he shot a fair number of pucks
into shin pads. The Bruins definitely focused on taking away the point
shot; expect to see more of that from opponents in the near future.
Lauri Tarkkonen
>On Fri, 27 Oct 2006 06:13:05 -0700, Kyle Roussel wrote:
>> 4 - Teams are adjusting to Souray's point blast. I don't recall him
>> getting any shots through last night. Thankfully he has made the
>> adjustment as well and found the open man i.e. Markov. Instead of
>> blasting the puck in to someone's shin pads
>Interestingly I thought Markov wasn't having a particularly strong game at
>the point up until he scored the winner - he shot a fair number of pucks
>into shin pads. The Bruins definitely focused on taking away the point
>shot; expect to see more of that from opponents in the near future.
If the teams try to take the point shots away, the forwards must play
closer to the blue line and the box will be bigger, then there is room
for a forward to sneak in and get a shot from between the face of
circles. So they must work out a play, where the other defenceman
instead of passing to Souray will fake a pass and if the box opens up,
then a winger (Ryder or Kovalev) sneaks in and gets a onetimer from the
"million dollar shooting point". Or if Souray already has the puck and
he winds up, slow enough for the forwards to come up a few steps and
then gives a pass to either the othe defenceman or Saku at the boards
and again the other winger comes for the shot in the slot.
If he is a threat it can be used.
- Lauri Tarkkonen
Chuck
If you are swapping in players with a real chance of a future in the
NHL otherwise I see little point, if the only change is there are
different lower tiered players in the line-up. I just disagree more
with the statement earlier in the thread, that Rivet should never sit.
Markov is missed when he doesn`t play, Souray is missed if he doesn`t
score otherwise I see nothing wrong with sitting any of them out, just
so long as it eventually gives a potential replacement a shot at making
his stay in the line-up permament