major shakeup at the back?

plouf · Guru

major shakeup at the back?

heet_150 · Guru

I'm not sure what you mean by testing things. I think the Habs will have to do something to address the UFA situation, like a trade or some cantract extention negotiations. I used to think that Souray was going to be the trade bait, but he is showing himself to be a defensive liabillity. Can anyone think of a player where their offensive skill outweighs their ineptitude on defense. I can only think of McCabe, and that was a Toronto deal, so not much credence there.

wright · Veteran Member

plouf wrote:

Gainey seems to be testing things out for a major shakeup on defense. Many of our guys will be UFAs at the end of this year (Rivet, Souray, Markov, and now Niinimaa), and Komisarek is an RFA. Streit, Bouillon and (I think) Dandenault are the only long-term contracts, and they are relatively cheap. I think this is the year we see who makes or breaks it in a group that's been decent, but no better than that over the past couple of seasons. (Let's hope we keep Markov at least)

Agree Plouf, the Habs defence core as a unit have been respectable and somewhat effective the past couple of years, but no more than that. There were a lot of quality free agent dmen available this past season: Chara, Mitchell,Kubina,Jovonoski, and some solid second tier guys like Kupa,Mckee to name but a few. Gainey obviously felt trying to gain more size and skill upfront was a bigger priority in terms of the free agent market. Unfortunately (not with standing our situation) there are not a lot of high profile free agent dmen to go after in the next off season. The team's best defensive prospects, O"Bryne and Emelin (if he decides to come over from Russia) are at least another year or two away.

Hard to envision that Gainey resigns all three of Rivet,Souray and Markov for next year, the budget for their anticipated pay increases probably will not be there. Souray has his attributes, but overall seems to struggle in the faster new NHL environment. Rivet is solid, but can't realistically expect alot of upside in his play at this stage in his career. Markov needs to be resigned, but the cost will be substantial. Markov, an improving Komisarek and a steady Rivet provide a good nucleus, but another elite level dman that has strong offensive skills and can handle an uptempo game is a necessity. The Habs offense could be more effective if they had another defenceman that had great vision and could make a consistently good quick outlet pass creating better positioning for the forwards.

ScottishHAB · Veteran Member

Can we settle something for a day or two?

Is an elite Dman or a #1 centre THE priority 'cause we are not going to get both(or probably in all honesty neither).

heet_150 · Guru

ScottishHAB wrote:

Can we settle something for a day or two?

Is an elite Dman or a #1 centre THE priority 'cause we are not going to get both(or probably in all honesty neither).

No.

In my humble opinion, the Habs need a bona fide centerman. Their core defensive group is (again in my opinion) solid. I don't think that one high caliber defenseman can make the same difference that one high caliber center can.

-- Edited by heet_150 at 15:39, 2006-10-10

ScottishHAB · Veteran Member

Didn't think we could!

wright · Veteran Member

heet_150 wrote:

ScottishHAB wrote:

Can we settle something for a day or two?

Is an elite Dman or a #1 centre THE priority 'cause we are not going to get both(or probably in all honesty neither).

No.

In my humble opinion, the Habs need a bona fide centerman. Their core defensive group is (again in my opinion) solid. I don't think that one high caliber defenseman can make the same difference that one high caliber center can.

-- Edited by heet_150 at 15:39, 2006-10-10

My preference would be a top centerman, all things being equal. Elite centermen are hard to acquire, though. Not to be repetitive, but last off season there was a real market for quality dmen, and not to be critical of Samsanov so early, but the free agent dollars spent on him, I feel could have been more effectively spent on a dman with good offensive skills. As sluggish as he has been in the first two games, markov is critical to the habs success. The Habs were substantially below 500 when he was not in the lineup last season. Building a cup winner is usally starts with strength down the middle, but if you can't have that, a high quality defence featuring two top tier dmen can get the job done, look at Aneheim...

Desi · Senior Member

Good question, Scotsman -- and a tough one at that. Nothing makes me madder than seeing a Habs D-man make a bad play that leads to the puck ending up in our net. It drives me absolutely crazy. So at first glance, I was tempted to say that we need a top-notch defenseman more than a top-notch center. But having thought about it for a while longer, it seems to me that even though we are thin on defense, maybe if we had another really good center it would take some pressure off that defense. Maybe an extra goal or two here and there would provide the cushion we need. Maybe it would help the whole team play with more confidence. Maybe it would allow us to have the puck in our possession more -- and on the sticks of our opponents less. It might also make for more exciting hockey. Because as much as I hate seeing our guys get scored on, I love it when WE score even more.

Les Canadiens sont la

plouf · Guru

I think the answer is: BOTH - it's a situational thing. Both are situations that will be addressed if the right player becomes available.

There is definitely going to be a big shakeup on D by next season, unless this year's group overachieves big time. The way the free agency situation stacks up pretty much demands it, and my point was that I think Bob is not totally unhappy about this. Yes, there is some risk that Markov will be lost, but I'm sure he'll be able to sign Rivet (if he wants to) to pretty much whatever contract length is appropriate for the team. And Souray and Niinimaa will have to earn their next contracts by demonstrating that they can fit in THIS year.

I can pretty much guarantee that Gainey is on the hunt for a #1 centre as we speak, no matter how Pleks does (he's still pretty young and would be better off on the 3rd line I think). Whether he can get one is another matter.

Traveling Hab · Veteran Member

Guys,

We are scoring and we are looking dangerous all the time. We are getting scored on like crazy though. The fact is our offense is above average so far and is clicking (except the second line, but they will find each other, trust me) and our defense is just as bad as our offense is good.

To say we need an elite centre is ludicris. We need to plug holes on defense. Is the answer a number one defenseman? Is the answer several number 2, 3, and 4 defensemen completely overhauling our D? Is the answer picking up another two-way winger for the second line a la Jere Lehtinen (I know he's not available) so that we have at least one per line (Higgins, Johnson, and Begin/Murray being the others)? I don't know, but the fact is our offense is way better than last year, and our defense is not. When I say our offense is way better, I don't mean slightly better, I mean incredibly improved. Our offensively gifted rookies of a year ago are a year older, · of our 4 lines have chemistry, there is talk (premature albeit) of our first line being one of the best in the league, and our depth in Hamilton is much stronger than a year ago when we emptied the system.

I know our wingers are much better than our centres, but that is just our team. Some teams have better centres (Pittsburgh) and others have better wingers (Atlanta). Rarely are teams stocked in all three forward positions. To be stocked in 2 out of 3 is a blessing, not a weakness. And it's not like Koivu, Plekanec, and Bonk are a weak 1-2-3 down the middle, they just aren't a particularly strong one.

Aebischer won't have games like he did against Toronto all season, and to ask Huet to do what he did last season for the rest of his career is just dreaming in technicolour. If we don't give them some help we will be losing a lot of games 6-5 and 5-4. To say that adding a centre will take the pressure off our defence is a fallacy when teams can score at will against us.

I guess in the end what I am saying is that if you want to look at pretty highlight real goals, let's upgrade our very good forwards. If you want to have playoff hockey in Montreal, let's fix our problem, which is our defensive game.

Hands up those who want to be in the playoffs.

Fatherhab · Senior Member

Traveling Hab wrote:

Guys,

We are scoring and we are looking dangerous all the time. We are getting scored on like crazy though. The fact is our offense is above average so far and is clicking (except the second line, but they will find each other, trust me) and our defense is just as bad as our offense is good.

To say we need an elite centre is ludicris. We need to plug holes on defense. Is the answer a number one defenseman? Is the answer several number 2, 3, and 4 defensemen completely overhauling our D? Is the answer picking up another two-way winger for the second line a la Jere Lehtinen (I know he's not available) so that we have at least one per line (Higgins, Johnson, and Begin/Murray being the others)? I don't know, but the fact is our offense is way better than last year, and our defense is not. When I say our offense is way better, I don't mean slightly better, I mean incredibly improved. Our offensively gifted rookies of a year ago are a year older, · of our 4 lines have chemistry, there is talk (premature albeit) of our first line being one of the best in the league, and our depth in Hamilton is much stronger than a year ago when we emptied the system.

I know our wingers are much better than our centres, but that is just our team. Some teams have better centres (Pittsburgh) and others have better wingers (Atlanta). Rarely are teams stocked in all three forward positions. To be stocked in 2 out of 3 is a blessing, not a weakness. And it's not like Koivu, Plekanec, and Bonk are a weak 1-2-3 down the middle, they just aren't a particularly strong one.

Aebischer won't have games like he did against Toronto all season, and to ask Huet to do what he did last season for the rest of his career is just dreaming in technicolour. If we don't give them some help we will be losing a lot of games 6-5 and 5-4. To say that adding a centre will take the pressure off our defence is a fallacy when teams can score at will against us.

I guess in the end what I am saying is that if you want to look at pretty highlight real goals, let's upgrade our very good forwards. If you want to have playoff hockey in Montreal, let's fix our problem, which is our defensive game.

Hands up those who want to be in the playoffs.

Agree to Disagree Traveling Hab: In another post, when the discussion was about trading a forward to strengthen us up the middle, your response was "Huet has yet to hit his stride" and "so I need to need to panic." I say that we have some young "D" like Komi and Streit who also have a year under their belts now, and Komi is stepping it up. Bouillon is out injured right now, but when he gets back he is going to settle things down to an extent. Niinamaa gives us more mobility back there, and once he becomes accustom, will do fine. I have no doubts about our goalies. I have seen what our offense can do, I don't see Kovalev improving his contributions to this team much beyond 25 goals per game. He plays the offensive side of the ice and is rarely back to assist. His plus/minus is -3 after 2 games. Only Begin has a similar plus/minus.

I say get every player to play both ends of the ice to their best abilities and not to their willingness and support our "D". We need every player fighting for the puck like someone had just stolen their lunch money.

MC Girl · Guru

Fatherhab wrote:

...... I have no doubts about our goalies. I have seen what our offense can do, I don't see Kovalev improving his contributions to this team much beyond 25 goals per game. He plays the offensive side of the ice and is rarely back to assist. His plus/minus is -3 after 2 games....

If he did that... no one would be b!tchin'... that's for sure

-- Edited by MC Girl at 10:39, 2006-10-11

Traveling Hab · Veteran Member

Agree to disagree, but just to clarify, I still don't think Huet has hit his stride, but I also don't think his stride will be a shutout every 5 games like it was last season. Allowing Toronto to shoot as much as it did with as many great chances is unacceptable.

And I know you meant 25 goals per season, but when you say things like "I don't see Kovalev improving his contributions to this team much beyond 25 goals per game" you make me salivate way too much.

Here's hoping I'm right about Kovy and that you're right about our D.