• Moderators, please send me a PM if you are unable to access mod permissions. Thanks, Habsy.

Game 65 | Canadiens vs. Coyotes | Mar. 6/14

Something really has to be done about this PP. It sucks balls. One of the bad consequences of having so many small top 6 forwards is that our puck retrieval on shoot ins is awful. Teams know this now so they stack up on the blueline and dare us to shoot it in, knowing they can outmuscle our smaller skilled forwards and win puck battles. Vanek should help the team in this regard. It was only when we gained the zone the odd time that we were able to set anything up. Watch for the same thing to happen Saturday...
 
budman89 said:
Something really has to be done about this PP. It sucks balls. One of the bad consequences of having so many small top 6 forwards is that our puck retrieval on shoot ins is awful. Teams know this now so they stack up on the blueline and dare us to shoot it in, knowing they can outmuscle our smaller skilled forwards and win puck battles. Vanek should help the team in this regard. It was only when we gained the zone the odd time that we were able to set anything up. Watch for the same thing to happen Saturday...
Click to expand...

It cant improve if 51 is on the ice most of the pp , where his puck control is brutal as a center. He does nothing down low , cant beat anyone for a loose puck , its so easy to defend us when all you have to cover the point cause all the pretzel will do is hand off a 5 foot pass to PK or Markov and they try to fire on net, or he hands it to bff Max and hope he makes a play and get a cheap assist.
He is a major reason why the pp has fallen big time ins the last 20 games.
 
Last edited:
Krustchev said:
He does have 36 pts. in his last 43 games.
Click to expand...

You cant go far in the playoffs with a player with his liabilities as a top 2 center playing his minutes and we all know it , he is on pace for about 49 points regardless what he has done .

We dont need 3 years as a body of work to see what he is .
 
49 points is pretty darn good for a number 2 centre. Look around the league.

He can't be a number 1, but there is no reason he can't be a number 2 or number 3.
 
BKerr said:
49 points is pretty darn good for a number 2 centre. Look around the league.

He can't be a number 1, but there is no reason he can't be a number 2 or number 3.
Click to expand...

He doesnt have the game or the role of a prototypical 2 or a 3 . He is simply a stop gap filler as a serviceable small offensive center until someone replaces him .

A 2 is Mike Richards or Bergeron , who play 200 feet and play solid 2 way hockey , and perfect playoff types to win.

A 3 is a Stoll type from the Kings , big physical defensive types , kill penalties , etc... and can still chip in 30-40 points a year .

DD has too many flaws to be either of the above , and we arent winning squat with him utilized the way he is .

No contender would have a DD as a 2, or a 3 .
 
We have a legitimate #2 center, his name is Thomas Plekanec.

We need a legitimate #1 center. Getzlaf should have been drafted in 03.
 
Starting to have my doubts. He needs a coach that'll trust him at center and accept the growing pains that come with the job.
 
Habsy said:
Starting to have my doubts. He needs a coach that'll trust him at center and accept the growing pains that come with the job.
Click to expand...

Keep the faith. MT will crash and burn and any other coach will recognize Chucky's true strengths
 
It is possible a prospect's development gets ruined by the time the brain-trust has this epiphany.
 
Well you're mental too and we have to sometimes wonder. It comes with the territory you know.
 
Habsy said:
We have a legitimate #2 center, his name is Thomas Plekanec.

We need a legitimate #1 center. Getzlaf should have been drafted in 03.
Click to expand...

dont think Getzlaf was even rated top 10 in 03 , we would of turned him into a third line checker

but agreed to many misses in the 03 draft
 
GEEMAN said:
He doesnt have the game or the role of a prototypical 2 or a 3 . He is simply a stop gap filler as a serviceable small offensive center until someone replaces him .

A 2 is Mike Richards or Bergeron , who play 200 feet and play solid 2 way hockey , and perfect playoff types to win.

A 3 is a Stoll type from the Kings , big physical defensive types , kill penalties , etc... and can still chip in 30-40 points a year .

DD has too many flaws to be either of the above , and we arent winning squat with him utilized the way he is .

No contender would have a DD as a 2, or a 3 .
Click to expand...

There is no one set way to build a hockey team.... Chicago didn't even have a number 2 and they were the best team in the league last year both in the season and the playoffs.

Tomas Plekanec can play the tough matchups.

I do believe that with Pleks playing those matchups, and if Galchenyuk is a true number 1, there is no reason why DD can not be part of a winning club. None whatsoever given the way he's played over his last 50 games.

He's not a number 1, but its all about who you surround him with.

If Galchenyuk is the number 1, there is no reason why DD and Pleks can't be 2a and 2b. The other thing to add is a coach who would use those three lines appropriately.

Its not 1993 anymore... you don't need the Guy Carbonneau type if Pleks can match against the other team's best line and kill penalties. You don't need a jarrett Stoll.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top