Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
If Therrien is smart...
#21
Well according to reports 2 lines mention

Lehk pleks ghetto
And a 4th line of farham/mcc/ sherbak

So guessing.....
Patches/ dan/ rad
Carr/ mitch/ flynn

Can MB be so "smart" as to switch dlynn and Rad as Rad has been playing with Mitch recently?
Reply
Thanks given by:
#22
I believe Hudon is injured. If he isn't and they hadn't called him up then that would be very disappointing.

As for Lehkonen, I don't think he needs someone that needs the puck to be fed to him. He can be aggressive and is strong along the boards. Haven't seen him shy away from puck battles
Reply
Thanks given by:
#23
(2017-01-07, 10:41 AM)SeanCDNMTL Wrote: I believe Hudon is injured. If he isn't and they hadn't called him up then that would be very disappointing.

As for Lehkonen, I don't think he needs someone that needs the puck to be fed to him. He can be aggressive and is strong along the boards. Haven't seen him shy away from puck battles

I know Hudon is injured, Sean. I was just looking for a proper example (had he been healthy) involving younger players.

As for Lehkonen, I commend his appetite for the puck, but he hasn't exactly been a high end playmaking W since he joined the team. While he wins his share of battles despite the lack of size, he can surely benefit more from a playmaker on his line to exploit is uncanny ability to find open space long enough to take a quick shot.

He isn't built to be a power forward and do it all by himself.
Reply
Thanks given by:
#24
So r u guys surprised our sherbak's 1st nhl game will be on the 4th line?

Altho this may be the most talented winger mcc has had in the nhl lol. Can be goos foe the 6-8min they will play
Reply
Thanks given by:
#25
Surprised? No Disappointed. No. Expected, actually. What,s important, though, is that he is given a C like McCarron, rather than a Flynn, for example. That line does not spell 4 minutes of playing away from all of his strengths.

From scouting reports, Scherbak will likely need to be playing protected minutes as he gets used to the NHL tempo.

Also, 4th line to start the game, especially with Therrien, never means 4th line throughout the game. Scherbak's play will dictate his usage and role.
Reply
Thanks given by:
#26
I'm not disappointed or surprised. I was expecting this and also expecting that he won't see more than 10 minutes in his first game. I have a feeling he will be used sparingly and might miss a shift here or there. I think it's going to be a matter of him gaining experience and overcoming the initial nerves.

Obviously not the easiest situation coming into an injury depleted lineup and going up against a very fast team that's very hot right now.

As long as he is defensively responsible and doesn't turbot do too much on his own. Keeps his shifts shorts and gets the pucks deep when he can then he will be ok
Reply
Thanks given by:
#27
I,m not expecting Scherbak to light it up with impressive displays of skill. His comments about having improved his D-game, continuing to play a strong D-game and to bring the effort every night certainly doesn't predicate an attempt on his part to impress anyone.

I think his aim will be to show he isn't a liability and that he can be kept in the lineup. Not overly exciting...
Reply
Thanks given by:
#28
Not sure where to post or start new thread so will discuss here. Who is going to be the first players sent down.

Markov comes back it has to be Johnston, think that is a no brainer. Galchenyuk back, would think Terry is going back. Byron healthy, Farnham goes back. Then I'm not sure. Would love to keep Scherbak but maybe better having him get a taste, go back to AHL and step up there.

Going to be interesting, no way McCarron should head back this year. PP, center, wing, hit, fight, score, just seems like someone that is valuable due to the many situations he can play. May not be a concern anyway because it seems the chances of us ever being healthy this year is slim.
Reply
Thanks given by:
#29
Galchenyuk seems ready to return....
Byron might be in for next one as well....
Markov is almost there....next game maybe???

Geeeeeeez, there are that many up, I have to try and list them first:
Carr, Andrighetto, McCarron, Scherbak, Barberio, Johnston, Terry, Farnham....

Forwards:
McCarron, Carr, Scherbak, Andrighetto, Farnham, Terry....
D-men:
Redmond, Barberio, Johnston....

The Question of Space will be the issue.
Might MB have to make room?
Gallagher's injury opens a spot for one of these kids.
But, considering the play of Danault and McCarron...
Danault stepping up when given the opportunity.
McCarron proving his worth.
Does MB now have to consider room, fit and spare parts???
Reply
Thanks given by:
#30
For his first years, Bergevin had to deal with a depleted talent pool as far as prospects were concerned. He benefited of a 3rd pick (Galchenuyk) and last year injury plagued descent will give him more ammunition for the future. He did let go of a few picks to acquire Vanek, Petry and Shaw, but is still in good shape draft wise.
I think another aspect of the organization success to face a rash of injuries is the farm system. A lot of bad things are said about Lefebvre, but his first objective was to prepare kids to be able to jump in with an already good knowledge of the system in place in Montreal. With a better crop of player under hand, his job will be easier. We were surprised last year at how the prospects played and even now we are pleased with the results of the kids.
For me, it's not a surprise that our success is based in part on good management.
"Only one thing matters in life, and it's the cup"  
                                            - Caresse Crosby


Reply
Thanks given by:
#31
Well said Leb. Therrien, his coaching staff and the veteran players deserves mounds of credit for how they have been able to keep their heads above water in the past 5 weeks also.
Reply
Thanks given by:
#32
(2017-01-08, 01:20 PM)Leb7 Wrote: For his first years, Bergevin had to deal with a depleted talent pool as far as prospects were concerned. He benefited of a 3rd pick (Galchenuyk) and last year injury plagued descent will give him more ammunition for the future. He did let go of a few picks to acquire Vanek, Petry and Shaw, but is still in good shape draft wise.
I think another aspect of the organization success to face a rash of injuries is the farm system. A lot of bad things are said about Lefebvre, but his first objective was to prepare kids to be able to jump in with an already good knowledge of the system in place in Montreal. With a better crop of player under hand, his job will be easier. We were surprised last year at how the prospects played and even now we are pleased with the results of the kids.
For me, it's not a surprise that our success is based in part on good management.

I agree
Total team aspect within the Organization.
Reply
Thanks given by:
#33
(2017-01-08, 01:20 PM)Leb7 Wrote: For his first years, Bergevin had to deal with a depleted talent pool as far as prospects were concerned. He benefited of a 3rd pick (Galchenuyk) and last year injury plagued descent will give him more ammunition for the future. He did let go of a few picks to acquire Vanek, Petry and Shaw, but is still in good shape draft wise.
I think another aspect of the organization success to face a rash of injuries is the farm system. A lot of bad things are said about Lefebvre, but his first objective was to prepare kids to be able to jump in with an already good knowledge of the system in place in Montreal. With a better crop of player under hand, his job will be easier. We were surprised last year at how the prospects played and even now we are pleased with the results of the kids.
For me, it's not a surprise that our success is based in part on good management.

A lot of credit needs to be given to the Bergevin team (all the way down to the AHL affiliate), especially after many had turned against management last year like a swarm of blood-thirsty piranhas.

The draft picks spent for Petry and Shaw, I have nothing against since we were able to re-sign these impactful role players medium to long term afterwards.

The pick and B prospect given up to land Vanek, if nothing else, certainly helped establish Bergevin as a GM to be considered on the trade front. If all the Bergevin trades had ended up like this, I wouldn't be very happy but, at least he CAN make moves and is willing to take relatively decent gambles with upside to them if things work out.

I'd like to point out that, apart from the 3rd pick which resulted in Galchenyuk, there was a certain Brendan Gallagher in the system as well, unless I'm mistaken?

Bergevin has proven a few things so far, IMO. He can identify team needs and will make moves to try and address them. He doesn't make panic moves either and will address team needs over time as much as he would immediately if he could.

The one thing you get is attention to one detail -- Character -- when trying to address team needs. If character proves/becomes deficient, Bergevin isn't afraid to right a wrong, as with Cole, Ryder, Semin, Kassian, to name a few.

Nobody is perfect but, Bergevin is worth being respected for what he has attempted to build, so far, in his tenure as a Hab GM.

Therrien is surprising many with the results he is able to get from a depleted roster, especially after a miserable season plagued with adversity last year. Much has to do with the infusion of character and leadership and the disappearance of distractions that the head coach can thank his GM for; A polarizing Subban (divisive) and an unhappy Eller gone, the arrival of leadership in Weber, Shaw and, EVEN, Radulov, etc.

Still, Therrien, who I still don't see as the best strategic mastermind, has the ability to rally the troops around a strong message -- Apply Da system and Da team will win.

He's obviously progressed/evolved from the surly, taciturn coach that he had been during his first stint in Montreal. That coach wouldn't have lasted to the end of last season.

Therrien 2.0 has moved on to Therrien 3.0 after the vote of confidence he received from Bergevin last season.

I'll confess, though, I still have trouble looking at his mug, but I consider that he must be doing something right. To say otherwise would be disingenuous at best.

Despite the injuries, this year's version of the Habs is an inspiring story that brings hope for the immediate future.
Reply
Thanks given by:
#34
(2017-01-08, 01:20 PM)Leb7 Wrote: For his first years, Bergevin had to deal with a depleted talent pool as far as prospects were concerned. He benefited of a 3rd pick (Galchenuyk) and last year injury plagued descent will give him more ammunition for the future. He did let go of a few picks to acquire Vanek, Petry and Shaw, but is still in good shape draft wise.
I think another aspect of the organization success to face a rash of injuries is the farm system. A lot of bad things are said about Lefebvre, but his first objective was to prepare kids to be able to jump in with an already good knowledge of the system in place in Montreal. With a better crop of player under hand, his job will be easier. We were surprised last year at how the prospects played and even now we are pleased with the results of the kids.
For me, it's not a surprise that our success is based in part on good management.

The focus in ahl was to get kids to play same system as habs. Prob the reason they have done poorly is becauze they didnt have ths right players for that system. In nhl ur gm can trade and sign ufas that would fit. But in nhl u have kids drafted years prior and kids that are evolving/developing. By time they r in ahl, mtl's system may not be what gets the best of that player. But even there, all the signings and dropping of ahl player that mb has done the last few years are better suited for the system then the guys mb inherited at that level. Finally his picks r in ahl, mb firat few years here it wasnt his kids in the ahl.
Reply
Thanks given by:
#35
(2017-01-08, 03:15 PM)Scriptor Wrote:
(2017-01-08, 01:20 PM)Leb7 Wrote: For his first years, Bergevin had to deal with a depleted talent pool as far as prospects were concerned. He benefited of a 3rd pick (Galchenuyk) and last year injury plagued descent will give him more ammunition for the future. He did let go of a few picks to acquire Vanek, Petry and Shaw, but is still in good shape draft wise.
I think another aspect of the organization success to face a rash of injuries is the farm system. A lot of bad things are said about Lefebvre, but his first objective was to prepare kids to be able to jump in with an already good knowledge of the system in place in Montreal. With a better crop of player under hand, his job will be easier. We were surprised last year at how the prospects played and even now we are pleased with the results of the kids.
For me, it's not a surprise that our success is based in part on good management.

A lot of credit needs to be given to the Bergevin team (all the way down to the AHL affiliate), especially after many had turned against management last year like a swarm of blood-thirsty piranhas.

The draft picks spent for Petry and Shaw, I have nothing against since we were able to re-sign these impactful role players medium to long term afterwards.

The pick and B prospect given up to land Vanek, if nothing else, certainly helped establish Bergevin as a GM to be considered on the trade front. If all the Bergevin trades had ended up like this, I wouldn't be very happy but, at least he CAN make moves and is willing to take relatively decent gambles with upside to them if things work out.

I'd like to point out that, apart from the 3rd pick which resulted in Galchenyuk, there was a certain Brendan Gallagher in the system as well, unless I'm mistaken?

Bergevin has proven a few things so far, IMO. He can identify team needs and will make moves to try and address them. He doesn't make panic moves either and will address team needs over time as much as he would immediately if he could.

The one thing you get is attention to one detail -- Character -- when trying to address team needs. If character proves/becomes deficient, Bergevin isn't afraid to right a wrong, as with Cole, Ryder, Semin, Kassian, to name a few.

Nobody is perfect but, Bergevin is worth being respected for what he has attempted to build, so far, in his tenure as a Hab GM.

Therrien is surprising many with the results he is able to get from a depleted roster, especially after a miserable season plagued with adversity last year. Much has to do with the infusion of character and leadership and the disappearance of distractions that the head coach can thank his GM for; A polarizing Subban (divisive) and an unhappy Eller gone, the arrival of leadership in Weber, Shaw and, EVEN, Radulov, etc.

Still, Therrien, who I still don't see as the best strategic mastermind, has the ability to rally the troops around a strong message -- Apply Da system and Da team will win.

He's obviously progressed/evolved from the surly, taciturn coach that he had been during his first stint in Montreal. That coach wouldn't have lasted to the end of last season.

Therrien 2.0 has moved on to Therrien 3.0 after the vote of confidence he received from Bergevin last season.

I'll confess, though, I still have trouble looking at his mug, but I consider that he must be doing something right. To say otherwise would be disingenuous at best.

Despite the injuries, this year's version of the Habs is an inspiring story that brings hope for the immediate future.

But is it fair to give MT credit for this season and no blame for last year?

Is it not the same system? Why can they play it this season while mostly the same roster couldnt win with this system last year

So either....
Sysyem is different
PK and Eller were the problem
This roster is a last place team without Price
Muller is more in charged then we know
The 3 new players MB got takes a bad team and makes them elite

I just cant forget how he failed misserably as a coach last year. I will not forget how bad a coach he was while thanking him for not being as bad this year.

I am just not sure he deserve to be overly praised.
Reply
Thanks given by:
#36
PK leaving has a lot to do with the team applying the system better this season. Want to or not, with PK's style and him playing almost 30 minutes a night, it would be hard to apply the system half the time.

This whole Muller is more in charge than we know is just in the style of modern conspiracy theories and doesn't amount to much, although he may well be an important component in assisting Therrien to get the head coach's message across to the payers.

Therrien is a big rah-rah speech coach but, not a one-on-one specialist, IMO. That's where Muller steps in as the big brother type to help smooth things over where they would've otherwise offered a little resistance at first that, left unchecked, would've grown into larger resistance and spread, perhaps, to other players.

Bergevin, obviously, deserves credit for providing Therrien with more players that are more willing to buy into the system. Better leadership, overall, amongst the players, also helps tow the line.

That said, it's overly simplistic to always exclude the coach when things go right, giving the credit solely to the players, and then heap the blame on the coach's shoulders when things go bad.

If players didn't need a coach, owners wouldn't pay Millions for one.
Reply
Thanks given by:
#37
I am just at a lost how he can be so bad last year and now so good.

I am not saying blame him when things bad and give him no praise when things are good.

I just don't understand how he could not coach/lead almost the same team with the same system last year....and this year we are rolling like crazy. What is he doing differently? If the answer is "nothing"....then you need to wonder how much of a role he has in any success or failure.

Is it simply that the situation is better this year (ie that list I gave above) and he is therefore in a better position to succeed? If so, then is he simply an average coach who can not coach when things go bad but can coach when things go well?

I just don't get it.

As a fan, I still believe he should have been fired for last year. I 100% believe it was his and the players fault. Both. And some changes were done to the roster. So far so good. But MB gave no blame to MT. To that I will never agree with.
Reply
Thanks given by:
#38
(2017-01-09, 11:56 AM)Haba-daba-do Wrote: I am just at a lost how he can be so bad last year and now so good.

I am not saying blame him when things bad and give him no praise when things are good.

I just don't understand how he could not coach/lead almost the same team with the same system last year....and this year we are rolling like crazy.  What is he doing differently?  If the answer is "nothing"....then you need to wonder how much of a role he has in any success or failure.

Is it simply that the situation is better this year (ie that list I gave above) and he is therefore in a better position to succeed?  If so, then is he simply an average coach who can not coach when things go bad but can coach when things go well?

I just don't get it.

As a fan, I still believe he should have been fired for last year.  I 100% believe it was his and the players fault.  Both. And some changes were done to the roster.  So far so good.  But MB gave no blame to MT.  To that I will never agree with.
I really don't agree with this.
I don't believe that MT was as bad last year as some believe he was.
Last year's problems were a combination of several factors and I doubt very much any other coach would have done much better in the situation.
The Habs lost Price and had to rely on a rookie goalie with no NHL experience and playing in Montreal where everyone and move is put under a microscope.
Then they lost other key players and one very important leadership player, Gallagher, for an extended period of time.
The Habs were lacking in leadership after these key injuries and although you had the talented PK, who was suppose to be a leader, he was far from a team leader as you could get.   He didn't intentionally fail, and although he is talented and exciting, at times, he can also hurt the team in many ways.  He often tried to do things on his own and couldn't work within the system and this had a negative impact on the team, in more ways than one.  In rough times he didn't help bring calmness to the team, but instead made things worse.
Hockey is a team sport and the majority of times you win as a team and not because of an individual.
The Habs also had a player like Eller who was always blaming the Habs coaching staff for his failure and not really wanting to do what was asked to help the team.
This year the Habs have brought in some character players like Weber, Shaw and Radulov who understand what it takes to win and whose leadership has led the rest of the team to work together and not individually, for the team and have a good work ethic.
I would also mention that Pacioretty has matured as captain and I believe that all the players on the team respect him whereas that might not have been the case last year.
So, last year's failures shouldn't be blamed on MT solely, just as this year's successes shouldn't be credited to MT alone.
A coach can only do so much with his players and if not all the players cooperate, especially players considered as stars and leaders, then there isn't much that you, as coach, can do.
Reply
Thanks given by:
#39
Life is difficult that way. There has to be blame on Therrien as well for last year. AND Bergevin. AND the players. Bergevin, who knows better what the dynamics in the room and on the team, as a whole, are, probably decided that most of the problem stemmed from the players and figured he believed that Therrien and his system could work, with the right troops at hand.

An analysis was likely made from Gallant there and Gallant not there as an assistant coach and that led to Muller being hired back. Credit to Therrien for, allegedly, reaching out to Muller in the first place. A manager's value is not only in their management style but. also, in there ability to surround themselves with competent assistants/workers/teams.

I blamed Therrien last year based on one thing -- not getting the players to apply the system once Price was out of the lineup. There obviously was resistance from Subban to applying the system which lead to the unfortunate tossed under the bus moment when Therrien pointed the finger directly at Subban even though the blame could've been placed on Paciorrety not back checking for the goal scored.

Surely, there was also resistance from other players as well.

I pointed, last year, that Therrien was surely asking players to play a different way than they were playing but, the team, as a whole, wasn't responding to this request.

It started out with players leaving Condon to himself as they had done in the past with Price, cheating on the offensive side of the spectrum, with long bomb passes that often lead to turnovers, cherrypicking, as you say, Haba, pinching without defensive accountability, passive back-checking, etc.

Montreal actually had tons of scoring opportunities in many games after Price went down but, weren't able to buy a goal to save their own necks. Surely, with Therrien yapping in their ears to play a sounder defensive game and wait for the opponents' mistakes to counter-attack and take advantage of the team's speed, that players were telling themselves to keep playing the way they were playing instead. Surely, percentages would swing back in their favour like a pendulum and pucks would start going in.

Then there were more injuries, a bigger slip backwards in the standings.

Players started pointing fingers at themselves, in private, while publicly stating that this team was united and so in love you'd have thought they were high on ecstasy!

PK became a focal point for blame, amongst the players who found him a overly abrasive, and found it easy to blame PK who clearly didn't follow the system. It certainly served as an excuse for them not to follow the system if the other guy was going to screw it up anyhow.

What people let themselves believe, especially in a time of crisis, isn't necessarily what's really going on. I blame the players for looking for excuses (Yes, with a motto on the wall that said: NO EXCUSES) rather than coming together and rallying as a team with the purpose of winning by self-sacrifice.

Who knows, maybe players are following the coach and his system because they want to convince themselves that PK was the root of the problem last year. An easy way to deflect the blame away from themselves.

Maybe they are following the coach and his system precisely because Bergevin stood behind the coach and the players realize that the coach wasn't going to be used as a scapegoat to save the GM's job. Maybe they realize they need to take responsibility for the way that they play.

And surely, the arrival of Weber, Shaw and, even, Radulov have gone a long way towards reshaping the team's mindset. You just have to see that GIF that's floating around the Net where the players on the bench are all standing and complaining after a play/a call, until it looks like Weber says, "Enough we sit," while he tugs on Emelin. as he sits, everyone follows suit and sits back down. Influence? Clearly.

I hate to say it, but the departure of Subban surely brought more credibility to Therrien, along with the support of Weber. When a star player doesn't listen to a coach and the coach, in a losing cause, doesn't really have any power over that player, other players start trying to get away with things, if even only to a lesser extent, because why should one guy get to do what he wants with impunity when others need to listen to the coach's directives? Why should one player get to pad his offensive stats while other players need to hold back and play more defensively sound hockey?

A larger than life player like Subban not applying the system creates a sentiment of injustice among the other players. Players start playing for themselves rather than for the team.

It's like that in every sphere of society. I see it at work with people becoming little cry-babies whenever another employee is perceived to have received preferential treatment.

A bunch of reasons why the players follow Therrien's system this year, Haba. The coach is good because, if the players thought he was that bad, they would have started off badly this year to try and get him canned with enough time to turn things around whether he got canned or not.
Reply
Thanks given by:
#40
A 0-5, 0-6 record to start the year and I'm pretty sure Therrien would've been gone.
Reply
Thanks given by:


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)