Key Lime wrote:

---

Gianey confirmed that the Habs "don't have a number one goaltender...the situation is no different than our offensive lines; Montreal does not haev a 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th line. Hmm...is he trying to send a message that every line is equal and only team work is what will bring them success? AHH Yes! I think he's taking a page out of Demers' book...family and team work ethic takes precidence. Even though we all loved CJ, I see now how Gainey is molding this team into a future contender.

---

Good thing we do not have a number 1, 2, or 3 line..because scoring a goal and winning 1-0 does not constitute an offensive powerhouse by any means. The page that gainey is taking is this. "I really do not have any one, or any line, who seems to want to take the bull by the horns and score goals, so I guess I will pray that someone does". The fact is, both CJ and Gainey have TRIED to find a number one line. Koivu, Zendick and Kovalev were it for a time but even then, they were not strimking fear in the hearts of the opposition. So then Gainey tried a number of other things, including Ribs with Kovalev and Koivu with Higgins. Still nothing. So as much as I would like to say that this is a brilliant piece of coaching by Gainey saying that we have 4 lines, I can't swallow that. He has simply had to face the truth. He cannot yet assemble a dominant "go to line" with the personnel he has. I suspect that if the bertuzzi rumours were true, that was his intention. Get Bert up on the first line and at least try to assemble something closely resembling a consistent threat. Now Gainey will pray for scoring from someone until he can spend some cash in the summer to buy some offense.

plouf wrote:

---

I don't disagree with you Barry, but at the same time the offense hasn't been that bad since the lines got switched. We've had a couple of games where the opposing goalie was hot, but really there've been plenty of chances, and despite the poor finishing we are averaging 2.9 gpg over the last 10 games. Not spectacular, but not brutal (puts us middle of the pack). And if guys like Zednik, Koivu, Ryder start to finish the zillion chances they're getting, we should move up a few spots to, say, 10th best offense in the league. Considering the system we play, that's not half bad. Anyway, I've been saying since early this season that Montreal should be going with 4 lines.-- Edited by plouf at 15:19, 2006-03-13

---

Hey ploufy..I am no whining or complaining..a win is a win..I just worry that we do not seem to be burying chances..playing devils advocate I guess. If it helps. I golfed and drank with CJ on the weekend and he likes how the team is playing but feels we are short a stud/goal scoring forward

barry33 wrote:

---

Key Lime wrote: Gianey confirmed that the Habs "don't have a number one goaltender...the situation is no different than our offensive lines; Montreal does not haev a 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th line. Hmm...is he trying to send a message that every line is equal and only team work is what will bring them success? AHH Yes! I think he's taking a page out of Demers' book...family and team work ethic takes precidence. Even though we all loved CJ, I see now how Gainey is molding this team into a future contender. Good thing we do not have a number 1, 2, or 3 line..because scoring a goal and winning 1-0 does not constitute an offensive powerhouse by any means. The page that gainey is taking is this. "I really do not have any one, or any line, who seems to want to take the bull by the horns and score goals, so I guess I will pray that someone does". The fact is, both CJ and Gainey have TRIED to find a number one line. Koivu, Zendick and Kovalev were it for a time but even then, they were not strimking fear in the hearts of the opposition. So then Gainey tried a number of other things, including Ribs with Kovalev and Koivu with Higgins. Still nothing. So as much as I would like to say that this is a brilliant piece of coaching by Gainey saying that we have 4 lines, I can't swallow that. He has simply had to face the truth. He cannot yet assemble a dominant "go to line" with the personnel he has. I suspect that if the bertuzzi rumours were true, that was his intention. Get Bert up on the first line and at least try to assemble something closely resembling a consistent threat. Now Gainey will pray for scoring from someone until he can spend some cash in the summer to buy some offense.

---

The KKZ line at the beginning of the season looked like a line that would intimidate...it was very short lived, of course.

BUT since we don't has that dominant goalscorer, do you think that the "no #1" line philosophy should be held on to until the end of the season or should would you attempt to reunite the KKZ line again...eventhough you might screw up the chemistry that we seemed to showing?

AB Habman wrote:

---

 Why would Gainey say we don't have a number one goalie? It may keep the boys honest to limit opposition scoring chances but what kind of message will it send our goalies especially Huet? It doesn't matter how great you play, you're still just a second stringer? That couldn't be good for their confidence or moral!

---

I don't know, it's a tougher than it seems...this is damned if you do and damned if you don't.

He's probably waiting to see how Aebischer does his first few games before he says who's no. 1

If he were to say that Huet was no. 1 today, how would Aebischer feel not having a chance to prove himself? His confidence would be fried...especially when he was no.1 in Colorado.

Like I said, it's a 2 edged sword.

I don't know, this is damned if you do and damned if you don't

barry33 wrote:

---

Key Lime wrote: barry33 wrote: Key Lime wrote: Gianey confirmed that the Habs "don't have a number one goaltender...the situation is no different than our offensive lines; Montreal does not haev a 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th line. Hmm...is he trying to send a message that every line is equal and only team work is what will bring them success? AHH Yes! I think he's taking a page out of Demers' book...family and team work ethic takes precidence. Even though we all loved CJ, I see now how Gainey is molding this team into a future contender. Good thing we do not have a number 1, 2, or 3 line..because scoring a goal and winning 1-0 does not constitute an offensive powerhouse by any means. The page that gainey is taking is this. "I really do not have any one, or any line, who seems to want to take the bull by the horns and score goals, so I guess I will pray that someone does". The fact is, both CJ and Gainey have TRIED to find a number one line. Koivu, Zendick and Kovalev were it for a time but even then, they were not strimking fear in the hearts of the opposition. So then Gainey tried a number of other things, including Ribs with Kovalev and Koivu with Higgins. Still nothing. So as much as I would like to say that this is a brilliant piece of coaching by Gainey saying that we have 4 lines, I can't swallow that. He has simply had to face the truth. He cannot yet assemble a dominant "go to line" with the personnel he has. I suspect that if the bertuzzi rumours were true, that was his intention. Get Bert up on the first line and at least try to assemble something closely resembling a consistent threat. Now Gainey will pray for scoring from someone until he can spend some cash in the summer to buy some offense. The KKZ line at the beginning of the season looked like a line that would intimidate...it was very short lived, of course. BUT since we don't has that dominant goalscorer, do you think that the "no #1" line philosophy should be held on to until the end of the season or should would you attempt to reunite the KKZ line again...eventhough you might screw up the chemistry that we seemed to showing? Keylime- as I said, at this stage it is not a case of coaching "brilliance" to go with the "4 even lines" pholosophy. It is a matter of neccessity. We have been trying to establish a dominant line all year without success and, to be brutally honest, we are at least one scoring/power forward away. Gainey could not pull the trigger on the right deal (I am convinced he tried to) before the deadline so we will hope for production from all 4 lines until the summer free agent shopping spree. But let's face it, ho wmany teams can you think of that had much long term success, if any, without a dominant number one line?

---

Hmmm...not very long, I suspect. I just ask myself if Calgary had that dominant no.1 line when they made the finals, the last time around. Who was along-side Iginla?

Jonny G wrote:

---

barry33 wrote: Key Lime wrote: But let's face it, ho wmany teams can you think of that had much long term success, if any, without a dominant number one line? Gainey is a fantastic GM (as proven in Dallas, and as proving in Mtl). He and Carbo are making a great coaching tandem, as proven by the Habs' recent play. C'mon Barry, why so pessimistic? The Habs are doing well and beating top teams. Why so pessimistic in the face of such strong results? Look at Carolina's cup run a few years back. They're top line (the BBC line) was nothing to write home about, at least on paper.

---

 

Just like Calgary, as mentioned in my previous post. Teams can make a run for it without that dominant #1 line. Maybe those teams just have a more balanced line up. Who know's?

Barry makes a point though, he asks "for how long?". He's right, dynasties like the Avs or Detroit both had that "go-to" line. If you want continued success, you need it!

 

barry33 wrote:

---

Key Lime wrote: barry33 wrote: Key Lime wrote: Gianey confirmed that the Habs "don't have a number one goaltender...the situation is no different than our offensive lines; Montreal does not haev a 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th line. Hmm...is he trying to send a message that every line is equal and only team work is what will bring them success? AHH Yes! I think he's taking a page out of Demers' book...family and team work ethic takes precidence. Even though we all loved CJ, I see now how Gainey is molding this team into a future contender. Good thing we do not have a number 1, 2, or 3 line..because scoring a goal and winning 1-0 does not constitute an offensive powerhouse by any means. The page that gainey is taking is this. "I really do not have any one, or any line, who seems to want to take the bull by the horns and score goals, so I guess I will pray that someone does". The fact is, both CJ and Gainey have TRIED to find a number one line. Koivu, Zendick and Kovalev were it for a time but even then, they were not strimking fear in the hearts of the opposition. So then Gainey tried a number of other things, including Ribs with Kovalev and Koivu with Higgins. Still nothing. So as much as I would like to say that this is a brilliant piece of coaching by Gainey saying that we have 4 lines, I can't swallow that. He has simply had to face the truth. He cannot yet assemble a dominant "go to line" with the personnel he has. I suspect that if the bertuzzi rumours were true, that was his intention. Get Bert up on the first line and at least try to assemble something closely resembling a consistent threat. Now Gainey will pray for scoring from someone until he can spend some cash in the summer to buy some offense. The KKZ line at the beginning of the season looked like a line that would intimidate...it was very short lived, of course. BUT since we don't has that dominant goalscorer, do you think that the "no #1" line philosophy should be held on to until the end of the season or should would you attempt to reunite the KKZ line again...eventhough you might screw up the chemistry that we seemed to showing? Keylime- as I said, at this stage it is not a case of coaching "brilliance" to go with the "4 even lines" pholosophy. It is a matter of neccessity. We have been trying to establish a dominant line all year without success and, to be brutally honest, we are at least one scoring/power forward away. Gainey could not pull the trigger on the right deal (I am convinced he tried to) before the deadline so we will hope for production from all 4 lines until the summer free agent shopping spree. But let's face it, ho wmany teams can you think of that had much long term success, if any, without a dominant number one line?

---

The only team in recent memory that had tremendous succes without a truely dominant number one line would have been the 2002-03 Devils that won the cup. their number one line consisted of Elias who had 28 goals that season,Langenbrunner with 22 and Friesen with 23. Of course they had a balanced second line and that great defence featuring Neideymer and of course Brodeur in goal. Burns rolled 4 lines very succesfully, of course that Devils team was way deeper than this habs team.

      No question to go deep in the playoffs you need a game breaking line. Can't remember when the Habs had a goal scorer in the top ten in the league, or a top ten total points player. If the Bertuzzi rumours are to be believed then Gainey clearly recognized the need for a power forward who could score, but decided the price was too high.

      For now Gainey has to go with what he has, and hopefully demoting Ryder to the "fourth line" is a wakeup call, because next to Kovalev he is the closest thing the Canadiens have to a big time goal scorer.