Here are my Canadiens Express thoughts on the Canadiens 3-0 win over the Lightning, the condensed version, courtesy of Gary 'Blackout' Bettman.
1) Just for my ease of reference, I want Phillip Danault to wear #21, in the tradition of Doug Jarvis and Guy Carbonneau. If Phillip is going to fill that role, of the defensive centreman, let’s give him the jersey number that fits.
Stefan Matteau can get Claude Lemieux’s #32 or Sergio Momesso’s #36, those would work for me too.
2) Loving the kids on the blue line. I thought Darren Dietz was stalling a little bit, not taking that next step in the AHL, but he’s looking pretty solid now, considering.
Same for Joel Hanley, I thought he was padding the roster upon his acquisition, bringing in a left shot on the blue line, but he seems really smart and mobile, a Jeff Petry Jr. Lite.
3) Happy that Brett Lernout is recalled, hope he gets a game or two. He hasn’t really stooded out when I watched the IceCaps, neither good nor bad, which is fine for his style of play. I haven’t seen him blow a fuse yet either, which I guess is okay too, that he’s concentrating on hockey, not fisticuffs, but I want to see him clear the front of the net like Mr. Plow on Saturday, when Gregory “Sonny Boy” pokes his revolting snout into our business.
And then I want to read Daddy Campbell’s emails afterwards.
4) Steven Stamkos is overrated, didn’t do anything Jacob de la Rose can’t do. I’d give four mill, four and half, tops.
5) Alex Tanguay to play right wing with Max Pacioretty and Alex Galchenyuk next season? Left shot, but great passer, really brainy player, who could be the setup man on the wing. Decent size, great shot too. Could probably be had on a reasonable UFA deal in July.
6) I like how Greg Pateryn shoots the puck with confidence, gets it on net. Short quick backswing, keeps the puck low, gets his forwards to trust him and stand in front of the net with confidence, not wince in fear when they see him wind up.
We should send P.K. to the Greg Pateryn Artillery Academy.
Friday, 1 April 2016
Duncan Keith should get a minimum 40 games suspension for his latest outrage.
I’m seeing too many apologies and excuses for Duncan Keith. Since his axe swing at Charlie Coyle, the networks have been showing two previous incidents, when he elbowed Daniel Sedin in the head and knocked him out for essentially the rest of that season and all of the next, and when he harpooned Jeff Carter in the face.
The narrative is building towards ‘an excellent player who’s had a couple lapses of judgment, and now this one’. Which is false. He’s had more than that.
I remember watching live when he took a gigantic, completely gratuitous slash at Daniel Sedin’s back, while Daniel was strides ahead of him and about to score on a breakaway. There was no strategic reason for it, no upside, it wasn’t that kind of harrying little slashes on the player to try to put him off his game, but also while not drawing a ref’s whistle. It instead was a completely cynical hack, at the player he’d assaulted before, and probably felt misplaced resentment for, for having caused him to get suspended.
Watching Duncan Keith play, at the 2010 and 2014 Olympics, for example, is to see a player fully displaying his skill and intelligence, he makes you marvel at how smart and aware and in charge he is. He’s a true quarterback, a general with the puck.
He’s also a miserable son of a betch, an unprincipled basturd who loses his head. He has impulse control issues, anger management issues. He’s just a big jerk, and that’s an understatement.
When a female reporter asked him a direct question about that hack at Daniel Sedin, he demeaned her as a person and a reporter, ridiculed her knowledge of the game. Instead of answering her question, he lost his cool, got all mean and snarky. And refused to admit it or apologize afterwards.
So seeing talking heads trying to tease apart dirty plays and dirty players, it’s just more colincampbelling to me, the constant minimizing and deflecting of the issues.
Duncan Keith is a dirty player who does this kind of stuff all the time, rarely gets called for it, and the book should be thrown at him. I cringe at the whole “Well, maybe five games, and another one or two games, they’re playoff games, after all, …” This was a clear, voluntary strike in the face of the opponent, with a stick, with intent, with motive. The discussion should start at a minimum twenty or thirty games, that should be the floor to start any discussions. Duncan Keith is no better than Matt Cooke or Raffi Torres, other serial offenders and threats to health and safety.
Except that Duncan Keith is better at that whole hockey thing. He’s an integral part of a Stanley Cup repeat champion, and contender again this year. The refrain is that punishing Keith would be punishing all his other teammates, and the Chicago fans. So we should go lightly.
And to me, that’s the whole point. There should be consequences to his actions. If he lets his teammates down and a whole city full of fans down, and feels this small, that’s kind of the point. He never learns. Maybe he should this time.
And maybe teams would think twice when signing these guys to these contracts, there should be a significant risk to hiring dirty players who are a menace to everyone else. The penalty shouldn’t be borne only by the player through suspension, the team that enables him, fails to discipline him, they should bear some of the blame, get splattered too.
The narrative is building towards ‘an excellent player who’s had a couple lapses of judgment, and now this one’. Which is false. He’s had more than that.
I remember watching live when he took a gigantic, completely gratuitous slash at Daniel Sedin’s back, while Daniel was strides ahead of him and about to score on a breakaway. There was no strategic reason for it, no upside, it wasn’t that kind of harrying little slashes on the player to try to put him off his game, but also while not drawing a ref’s whistle. It instead was a completely cynical hack, at the player he’d assaulted before, and probably felt misplaced resentment for, for having caused him to get suspended.
Watching Duncan Keith play, at the 2010 and 2014 Olympics, for example, is to see a player fully displaying his skill and intelligence, he makes you marvel at how smart and aware and in charge he is. He’s a true quarterback, a general with the puck.
He’s also a miserable son of a betch, an unprincipled basturd who loses his head. He has impulse control issues, anger management issues. He’s just a big jerk, and that’s an understatement.
When a female reporter asked him a direct question about that hack at Daniel Sedin, he demeaned her as a person and a reporter, ridiculed her knowledge of the game. Instead of answering her question, he lost his cool, got all mean and snarky. And refused to admit it or apologize afterwards.
So seeing talking heads trying to tease apart dirty plays and dirty players, it’s just more colincampbelling to me, the constant minimizing and deflecting of the issues.
Duncan Keith is a dirty player who does this kind of stuff all the time, rarely gets called for it, and the book should be thrown at him. I cringe at the whole “Well, maybe five games, and another one or two games, they’re playoff games, after all, …” This was a clear, voluntary strike in the face of the opponent, with a stick, with intent, with motive. The discussion should start at a minimum twenty or thirty games, that should be the floor to start any discussions. Duncan Keith is no better than Matt Cooke or Raffi Torres, other serial offenders and threats to health and safety.
Except that Duncan Keith is better at that whole hockey thing. He’s an integral part of a Stanley Cup repeat champion, and contender again this year. The refrain is that punishing Keith would be punishing all his other teammates, and the Chicago fans. So we should go lightly.
And to me, that’s the whole point. There should be consequences to his actions. If he lets his teammates down and a whole city full of fans down, and feels this small, that’s kind of the point. He never learns. Maybe he should this time.
And maybe teams would think twice when signing these guys to these contracts, there should be a significant risk to hiring dirty players who are a menace to everyone else. The penalty shouldn’t be borne only by the player through suspension, the team that enables him, fails to discipline him, they should bear some of the blame, get splattered too.
Thursday, 24 March 2016
Should the Canadiens re-sign Tom Gilbert on a short-term contract, to retain an asset?
"Okay, hear me out. Don't be so quick to dismiss."
[Crowd mutters, pre-emptively angry]
"We sign Tom Gilbert..." [ducks a rotten tomato]
[Crowd leaves its seats and gestures at the stage, at each other]
"No listen!... Gimme a chance here. We sign Tom Gilbert..." [flinches at nothing at all]
"...and we play him a dozen games next season..."
[Mutters and murmurs have grown to a roar as some audience members clamber onto the stage]
"...but just to showcase him..." [is swarmed by a mob who knock the microphone stand down and headlock/drag/carry the speaker stage left]
"...(muffled) trade... mpfffasset..." [dull thud of fist making explosive contact with ribs]
[As William Wallace addressing his army of Scotsmen]
"...For the Draft! For the Draft!..."
[Voice dies away]
[Crowd mutters, pre-emptively angry]
"We sign Tom Gilbert..." [ducks a rotten tomato]
[Crowd leaves its seats and gestures at the stage, at each other]
"No listen!... Gimme a chance here. We sign Tom Gilbert..." [flinches at nothing at all]
"...and we play him a dozen games next season..."
[Mutters and murmurs have grown to a roar as some audience members clamber onto the stage]
"...but just to showcase him..." [is swarmed by a mob who knock the microphone stand down and headlock/drag/carry the speaker stage left]
"...(muffled) trade... mpfffasset..." [dull thud of fist making explosive contact with ribs]
[As William Wallace addressing his army of Scotsmen]
"...For the Draft! For the Draft!..."
[Voice dies away]
Eugene Melnyk is a terrible NHL owner.
From the Ottawa Citizen:
Man, I’m so glad we have an owner like Geoff Molson instead of windbag Eugene Melnyk. To start off, our owner is an honest purveyor of a staple to the masses, a scion of an honourable Montréal family, not a shady pharmaceutical shell-gamer. I still can’t quite shake the opinion that his public appeal for an organ donor was unseemly, an example of the plutocrats line-jumping the system.
When it comes to his team, despite his denials, it’s a fact that he doesn’t ‘spare no expense’ to build a winner, it’s widely known that the Sens work to an internal budget, like the Jets do, and unlike teams that will spend to the cap ceiling.
Generally, I want a pro sports team owner, if we must have such a thing, if we’re not quite at the stage where every team is a publicly-owned community organization, like the Roughriders or the Green Bay Packers, to be a benevolent trustee for the fans. Not a self-important demagogue like the Yankees’ George Steinbrenner or the Cowboys’ Jerry Jones, not an arriviste like the Raiders’ Mark Davis or the Bengals’ Mike Brown or the Bruins’ Charlie Jacobs or the Colts’ Jim Irsay, who like the saying goes, were born on third-base and act like they hit a triple. Not a windsock like the Browns’ Jimmy Haslam or an underhanded schemer like the Oilers’ Darryl Katz, he of the fact-finding mission to Seattle.
And certainly not a cash-strapped Napoleon-complexed parasite who comes up short in stick-measuring contests with other, wealthier owners, who leeches profits off a team for his personal enrichment, like the Nordiques’ Marcel Aubut or the Chargers’ Spanos family. Or the Sens’ Eugene Melnyk, who wants to hang with all the bigwigs in the VIP, but looks the other way or goes to the bathroom when it’s time to buy another round of Crystal.
Occasions like this, when his GM is keeping it together in more ways than one, are a great time to keep his damn mouth shut and let the pros do the talking. Or better yet, have a Daniel Alfredsson in place as the knowledgeable President in charge of these types of decisions, and let him talk to the press, with credibility, instead of shooting his mouth off to a legion of fans who see right through him.
Melnyk hasn’t liked what’s happened with the Senators since Day 1. He was mystified by Cameron’s decision to sit starter Craig Anderson in the club’s home opener in October and give O’Connor, a raw rookie, the start in a 3-1 loss to the Montreal Canadiens.He was asked why it went so badly?“No idea. Bryan and I sit there and we just nod our head. We can’t get it. We get it now. I remember back in December some of those games, three in a row that we lost by a goal we were leading. It was inconsistency and some stupidity,” said Melnyk, who then pointed at Cameron’s decision in Game 3 of the season.“I go back to the very first game. You put in the second goalie. What was that about? On opening night and the guy gets clobbered. It’s not fair to him, not fair to the fans. Just a lot of little tiny mistakes that all of a sudden escalate and get serious and get in people’s heads.”
Man, I’m so glad we have an owner like Geoff Molson instead of windbag Eugene Melnyk. To start off, our owner is an honest purveyor of a staple to the masses, a scion of an honourable Montréal family, not a shady pharmaceutical shell-gamer. I still can’t quite shake the opinion that his public appeal for an organ donor was unseemly, an example of the plutocrats line-jumping the system.
When it comes to his team, despite his denials, it’s a fact that he doesn’t ‘spare no expense’ to build a winner, it’s widely known that the Sens work to an internal budget, like the Jets do, and unlike teams that will spend to the cap ceiling.
Generally, I want a pro sports team owner, if we must have such a thing, if we’re not quite at the stage where every team is a publicly-owned community organization, like the Roughriders or the Green Bay Packers, to be a benevolent trustee for the fans. Not a self-important demagogue like the Yankees’ George Steinbrenner or the Cowboys’ Jerry Jones, not an arriviste like the Raiders’ Mark Davis or the Bengals’ Mike Brown or the Bruins’ Charlie Jacobs or the Colts’ Jim Irsay, who like the saying goes, were born on third-base and act like they hit a triple. Not a windsock like the Browns’ Jimmy Haslam or an underhanded schemer like the Oilers’ Darryl Katz, he of the fact-finding mission to Seattle.
And certainly not a cash-strapped Napoleon-complexed parasite who comes up short in stick-measuring contests with other, wealthier owners, who leeches profits off a team for his personal enrichment, like the Nordiques’ Marcel Aubut or the Chargers’ Spanos family. Or the Sens’ Eugene Melnyk, who wants to hang with all the bigwigs in the VIP, but looks the other way or goes to the bathroom when it’s time to buy another round of Crystal.
Occasions like this, when his GM is keeping it together in more ways than one, are a great time to keep his damn mouth shut and let the pros do the talking. Or better yet, have a Daniel Alfredsson in place as the knowledgeable President in charge of these types of decisions, and let him talk to the press, with credibility, instead of shooting his mouth off to a legion of fans who see right through him.
P.K. Subban reported to be the source of locker room friction.
Lots of rumours, Twitter reports lately about how P.K. Subban is a source of friction and discord in the Canadiens' dressing room.
I don’t understand why this is controversial, why we need to disbelieve. P.K. has a huge personality, is a character, a chatterbox, he’s loud and he’s proud, he attracts attention to himself, doesn’t mind being the butt of jokes or pranks as long as he’s in the middle of things.
This act is a lot easier to swallow when the team is winning and P.K. is slaying the Bruins all by himself, you give him a lot of slack, accept the little foibles and the loudness, my lord the loudness. But when you’re having a horrible season, and everyone is on edge and under pressure, and P.K. bobbles the puck and allows the opposition’s winning goal on a brain cramp, then the antics they wear on you.
Next season when we’re in the midst of a run for the Cup, and P.K. is blasting 25 goals in on the powerplay, he can be the fashion model and the dressing room clown and the rapper-in-training all he wants, and the other 22 guys will fight to the death for him.
I’ve thought of an analogy between P.K. and former Expos great Gary Carter, but I’ve never posted on it, P.K. being a bit of a third rail on social media.
Gary Carter was definitely a good comparable. Supremely talented, a fan favourite, but a target of discontent and jealousy in the clubhouse. There was the story of the other players busting his chops once at the airport, when he got off a bus and made a beeline for the gaggle of reporters, instead of waiting for them to come to him. I can’t remember the exact quote, but they were catcalling him, saying “Jeez Gary, can you let them take out their notebooks first, …” He was the first guy I ever heard the quote “He’s never met a microphone he didn’t love” being used on.
In 1983, when hardline manager Bill Virdon took over, there was a much ballyhooed incident at spring training, when Gary Carter was yelling for an infield popup. Bill Virdon came out of the dugout with both guns blazing, chewing out Gary. Apparently, infield flies are handled in a certain way, someone ‘calls’ it and everybody listens, but on the Expos Gary always called them for himself, which was unusual but the rest of the infield kind of let it happen that way.
It was easy to see what was going on, the reporters all explained that Bill Virdon probably came in with some background knowledge about some of the quirks of the team, maybe some of the resentment towards Gary, justified or not, and the manager put his imprint on the team, seized the reins. Probably a few Expos kind of muttered “Right on” under their breath.
Some of the resentment also apparently fell along racial lines, that Gary was the squeaky-clean media darling who got all the press and endorsements, while André Dawson and Tim Raines and Warren Cromartie got the crumbs.
As I wrote earlier about P.K. though, when the Expos were winning, when it was September, you saw the Expos celebrate as a whole team, nobody shunned Gary when he threw out a would-be base stealer or got another timely double.
I don’t understand why this is controversial, why we need to disbelieve. P.K. has a huge personality, is a character, a chatterbox, he’s loud and he’s proud, he attracts attention to himself, doesn’t mind being the butt of jokes or pranks as long as he’s in the middle of things.
This act is a lot easier to swallow when the team is winning and P.K. is slaying the Bruins all by himself, you give him a lot of slack, accept the little foibles and the loudness, my lord the loudness. But when you’re having a horrible season, and everyone is on edge and under pressure, and P.K. bobbles the puck and allows the opposition’s winning goal on a brain cramp, then the antics they wear on you.
Next season when we’re in the midst of a run for the Cup, and P.K. is blasting 25 goals in on the powerplay, he can be the fashion model and the dressing room clown and the rapper-in-training all he wants, and the other 22 guys will fight to the death for him.
I’ve thought of an analogy between P.K. and former Expos great Gary Carter, but I’ve never posted on it, P.K. being a bit of a third rail on social media.
Gary Carter was definitely a good comparable. Supremely talented, a fan favourite, but a target of discontent and jealousy in the clubhouse. There was the story of the other players busting his chops once at the airport, when he got off a bus and made a beeline for the gaggle of reporters, instead of waiting for them to come to him. I can’t remember the exact quote, but they were catcalling him, saying “Jeez Gary, can you let them take out their notebooks first, …” He was the first guy I ever heard the quote “He’s never met a microphone he didn’t love” being used on.
In 1983, when hardline manager Bill Virdon took over, there was a much ballyhooed incident at spring training, when Gary Carter was yelling for an infield popup. Bill Virdon came out of the dugout with both guns blazing, chewing out Gary. Apparently, infield flies are handled in a certain way, someone ‘calls’ it and everybody listens, but on the Expos Gary always called them for himself, which was unusual but the rest of the infield kind of let it happen that way.
It was easy to see what was going on, the reporters all explained that Bill Virdon probably came in with some background knowledge about some of the quirks of the team, maybe some of the resentment towards Gary, justified or not, and the manager put his imprint on the team, seized the reins. Probably a few Expos kind of muttered “Right on” under their breath.
Some of the resentment also apparently fell along racial lines, that Gary was the squeaky-clean media darling who got all the press and endorsements, while André Dawson and Tim Raines and Warren Cromartie got the crumbs.
As I wrote earlier about P.K. though, when the Expos were winning, when it was September, you saw the Expos celebrate as a whole team, nobody shunned Gary when he threw out a would-be base stealer or got another timely double.
Devante Smith Pelly, Part 3
I've contributed long posts on Devante Smith-Pelly since he was traded to the Devils, how I don't get why he didn't 'go to the net and cause havoc', as he describes what he now tries to do with great success for the Devils.
I asked what prevented him from doing so as a Canadien, since Michel Therrien constantly pleads with his charges to go to the net, that's where goals are scored. I gave specific examples of the head coach doing precisely, specifically that, enjoining his players to go to the net, instead of trying fancy passing plays.
HockeyInsideOut member 'Phil C' wrote a long, cogent analysis and dissection of our system compared to the Devils. With his (tacit) approval, I've linked his entire post, but list here the main points he brought up and supported with video clips:
1. Carrying the puck across the blueline vs carrying it in.
2. Poor net drive/Perimeter play.
3. (Poor) Cycling the Puck.
He and I agree that his current explosion is a blip in performance that is unsustainable, is too small a sample size (7 goals and 3 assists in nine games) to draw definite conclusions from. I'm persuaded by his post that there are system and roster differences in both teams that partially explain his greater success on the scoresheet so far.
But it nags at me that the quote that kind of twigged me, that kind of stuck in my craw a little, where he says he parks himself in front of the net and that's where he's going to be successful, it's kind of baffling, since that's what I'd yell at him to do through my magic Panaphonics screen, to go to the front of the net, to battle with opposition d-men and keep them busy, create space, and he did so very rarely.
So I've been digesting this, and eventually circled back to an article from earlier this season, where he confessed that the Canadiens' system was a little alien to him, where he was asked to not necessarily finish his checks but rather chase the puck:
I've mentioned this often in posts, how that philosophy largely explains why we get outhit in the stat sheet regularly, although sometimes it's galling when a bigger player like Jacob de la Rose flies by a player who himself has been pretty generous with the hits and crosschecks and elbows, who should be made to pay back a little bit.
But another quote caught my eye:
At the start of the season, we saw a slimmer Devo being more limber and more noticeable on the ice. But as the season progressed, he kind of blended in, to the point where at the end of some nights you wondered if he played, if he was in the lineup. He was actually healthy-scratched a couple of times.
Some have brought up that he was injured partway through the season; Michel Therrien did so when he was asked about Devo's explosion in New Jersey, that his injury set him back and he struggled to get back on track after. He missed games starting in late November with a 'lower-body injury'. So I'll attribute some of his ineffectiveness to that.
But mainly, I notice how he said the same thing then that he's saying now in NJ, about crashing the net and using his size to screen goalies.
And it sticks in my craw. When he was acquired last season, it caused a hue and cry among Montréal fans who were sore about losing Jiri Sekac in the deal, but I pleaded for patience, I stuck up for him. It hurt to lose Jiri, but I always had my eye on Devo, was jealous that the Ducks at nabbed him in the second round and he played in the NHL at 19, he was a find, I thought.
I explained often that he was a right-shot right-winger, which we needed, a young player with potential, and that we needed his skillset more than Jiri, all things considered. We needed his thumping amongst our forwards, his ability to push back against other big opponents, with our relatively light complement of forwards.
And he never quite delivered. He seemed uninvolved. Not personally, since he mostly said all the right things, seemed to mesh well within the team. Not as uninvolved as Michael Ryder in his second stint here, not as uninvolved as Thomas Vanek hiding in the stick rack against the Bruins in the playoffs, but playing desultorily. Invisibly. When Marc Méthot was facewashing one of ours, the best we could expect was that Devo might grab a Senator and hang on, which left me wanting a little more snarl, more of a message sent.
And about saying all the right things, he actually uttered a headscratcher when he claimed to the reporters that he didn't know why he was being left out of the lineup, during his healthy scratches. Michel Therrien, when asked the same question, tersely replied that Devo needed to be responsible defensively, and more involved physically. It oughtn't have been that much of a puzzler for Devo.
So I'm going to let this go, but I'm going to be a little frustrated with Devo, that he didn't do here what he's embracing in New Jersey, that he didn't keep his word about being the bigger guy who'd be found in front of the net on his line. I'll give him partial dispensation that he didn't quite fit the system here, that NJ may be better for him, but going back to that October quote, seeing that, it's going to make me a little bitter.
After Smith-Pelly’s three-point performance Thursday night, he told nhl.com: “So far, I think I fit like a glove (with the Devils). I’m just getting in on the forecheck and creating havoc, going in front of the net and parking myself right there, at the edge of the crease. That’s something I knew I definitely had to do.
I asked what prevented him from doing so as a Canadien, since Michel Therrien constantly pleads with his charges to go to the net, that's where goals are scored. I gave specific examples of the head coach doing precisely, specifically that, enjoining his players to go to the net, instead of trying fancy passing plays.
My question for the learned folks here is, did anything in the Canadiens' vaunted/cursed system prevent Devo from doing this while he was here? I'm not being glib or trolling anyone, I'm asking an honest question, looking for some analysis.
HockeyInsideOut member 'Phil C' wrote a long, cogent analysis and dissection of our system compared to the Devils. With his (tacit) approval, I've linked his entire post, but list here the main points he brought up and supported with video clips:
1. Carrying the puck across the blueline vs carrying it in.
2. Poor net drive/Perimeter play.
3. (Poor) Cycling the Puck.
He and I agree that his current explosion is a blip in performance that is unsustainable, is too small a sample size (7 goals and 3 assists in nine games) to draw definite conclusions from. I'm persuaded by his post that there are system and roster differences in both teams that partially explain his greater success on the scoresheet so far.
But it nags at me that the quote that kind of twigged me, that kind of stuck in my craw a little, where he says he parks himself in front of the net and that's where he's going to be successful, it's kind of baffling, since that's what I'd yell at him to do through my magic Panaphonics screen, to go to the front of the net, to battle with opposition d-men and keep them busy, create space, and he did so very rarely.
So I've been digesting this, and eventually circled back to an article from earlier this season, where he confessed that the Canadiens' system was a little alien to him, where he was asked to not necessarily finish his checks but rather chase the puck:
“I’m just getting on the puck and not necessarily going for the big hit all the time. I’m trying to get my stick in there and create turnovers. That’s something that, before I came here, I wasn’t told to do,” offered Smith-Pelly, who joined the Canadiens last February in a trade with the Anaheim Ducks. “I was always told to run guys right through the boards. I was never told to do anything else.”
I've mentioned this often in posts, how that philosophy largely explains why we get outhit in the stat sheet regularly, although sometimes it's galling when a bigger player like Jacob de la Rose flies by a player who himself has been pretty generous with the hits and crosschecks and elbows, who should be made to pay back a little bit.
But another quote caught my eye:
“Our speed is a big part of our success. We’re doing everything we can to make it hard for other teams to break out clean and create offensive chances. That’s how we’re being asked to play, and I think we’ve been doing a really good job. Those two other guys [Mitchell and Flynn] are really fast. If you dump it in, they’re going to get in there and make it hard for defensemen to make a clean pass,” explained Smith-Pelly, who has one assist so far this season. “We’re all a little different, but at the same time, it matches perfectly. I’m just going to go to the front of the net. If they’re looking for me, that will be the first place they’ll look. Those are two speedy guys. We’re just reading each other perfectly. We matched well together right away.”
At the start of the season, we saw a slimmer Devo being more limber and more noticeable on the ice. But as the season progressed, he kind of blended in, to the point where at the end of some nights you wondered if he played, if he was in the lineup. He was actually healthy-scratched a couple of times.
Some have brought up that he was injured partway through the season; Michel Therrien did so when he was asked about Devo's explosion in New Jersey, that his injury set him back and he struggled to get back on track after. He missed games starting in late November with a 'lower-body injury'. So I'll attribute some of his ineffectiveness to that.
But mainly, I notice how he said the same thing then that he's saying now in NJ, about crashing the net and using his size to screen goalies.
And it sticks in my craw. When he was acquired last season, it caused a hue and cry among Montréal fans who were sore about losing Jiri Sekac in the deal, but I pleaded for patience, I stuck up for him. It hurt to lose Jiri, but I always had my eye on Devo, was jealous that the Ducks at nabbed him in the second round and he played in the NHL at 19, he was a find, I thought.
I explained often that he was a right-shot right-winger, which we needed, a young player with potential, and that we needed his skillset more than Jiri, all things considered. We needed his thumping amongst our forwards, his ability to push back against other big opponents, with our relatively light complement of forwards.
And he never quite delivered. He seemed uninvolved. Not personally, since he mostly said all the right things, seemed to mesh well within the team. Not as uninvolved as Michael Ryder in his second stint here, not as uninvolved as Thomas Vanek hiding in the stick rack against the Bruins in the playoffs, but playing desultorily. Invisibly. When Marc Méthot was facewashing one of ours, the best we could expect was that Devo might grab a Senator and hang on, which left me wanting a little more snarl, more of a message sent.
And about saying all the right things, he actually uttered a headscratcher when he claimed to the reporters that he didn't know why he was being left out of the lineup, during his healthy scratches. Michel Therrien, when asked the same question, tersely replied that Devo needed to be responsible defensively, and more involved physically. It oughtn't have been that much of a puzzler for Devo.
So I'm going to let this go, but I'm going to be a little frustrated with Devo, that he didn't do here what he's embracing in New Jersey, that he didn't keep his word about being the bigger guy who'd be found in front of the net on his line. I'll give him partial dispensation that he didn't quite fit the system here, that NJ may be better for him, but going back to that October quote, seeing that, it's going to make me a little bitter.
Tuesday, 22 March 2016
Game 74: Canadiens 4, Ducks 3
Condensed "Canadiens Express" thoughts, thanks to Gary "Our Game" Bettman, on the 4-3 win against the Ducks.
--This is the first game I've ever noticed Cam Fowler. We always talk about him as this mythically great defenceman we wish we had, but he never caught my eye, and I'm not saying this to demean him, it's more of a knock on me as a fan, who watches players for the Canadiens but only notices opponents when they foil us or goon us.
Tonight, I realized that he's much taller/bigger than the picture I had of him in my mind, more robinsonny than cheliosy. Moves well, has a nice stride. Good play by him on the Perry goal, nice shot on net that created a rebound.
--We found one thing Stefan Matteau can do: he can come out of the cycle with the puck down low, curl out towards the corner and bank pass the puck back to his defenceman.
Take that all those of you who say he's a worthless player incapable of anything.
--I cringe whenever I see Mike McCarron fight. Call it the Komisarek effect. I've grown accustomed to having our big physical players get cut down to size, usually by Milan Lucic. I'm afraid someone's going to pop our balloon.
And now it crystallizes for me that having big Mike on the team won't work next year, unless we have two other guys at least who can throw their weight around and drop the gloves, or else he'll be a constant target and have to fight fourty times.
I guess Connor Crisp and Brett Lernout make the team by default next season, straight out of camp.
Unless we sign Milan Lucic as a UFA. And David Backes.
--I'm very happy that Jacob de la Rose is not subject to waivers next season, because he needs at least another season in the AHL, that poor kid just isn't a player of any impact in the NHL.
--I like the Nathan Beaulieu and Greg Pateryn pairing, in theory at least. Two youngsters who can skate, play physical and follow the classic model: the puck mover attacking guy, and the bigger more defensive tougher guy who can support the attack by having a decent shot. Lefty-righty.
Let's keep those guys playing together, build on their history together in the AHL.
--That Paul Byron to Max Pacioretty to Greg Pateryn back to Max to Alex Galchenyuk et le buuuuuuut! goal was a beauty. As it developed, I kept seeing how the attack would abort, the defenceman would check Max, or the puck would skip over a stick, in my mind, four or five times before the puck found mesh. Great stuff.
I was just formulating the thought that Max really won't get to thirty goals this year as the play developed.
--"On n'a pas nécéssairement mentioné le nom de (Mike) Brown souvent ce soir, il a quand même trois mises en échec dans ce match, et il vient d'en rajouter une quatrième, et une cinquième, ben là pas vraiment..., ha ha ha, Simon Després ha ha ha l'attendait..., ha ha ha, et le buuuuut, ha ha ha, c'est 3-2!"
Okay, I'll say this about Jacob de la Rose, he and Lucas Lessio forechecked hard in the Ducks' zone, and he covered up on two occasions for Darren Dietz and Joel Hanley when they pinched in along the boards to keep up the pressure. Maybe developing a hate-on for him will allow me to notice when he does something good.
And nice goal for Mike Brown, good story for him. Sure, he lucked into a puck in the slot, but he deserved that, his forechecking and the threat of a crunching hit from him created that loose puck eventually.
--On that Jacob Silfverberg goal, Max didn't make a strong play with the puck, a defensively responsible play. Some argue that we should leave our zone as a five-player unit, with possession of the puck, but here, on this play, the defensively-safe strong play of getting the puck out of our zone by clearing it off the boards would have made Michel Therrien happy, and not led directly to a goal against.
--Seeing Ryan Kesler and Kevin Bieksa on the Ducks, it brings a bit of clarity to the convulsions the Canucks are going through the last couple of seasons. Two great leaders those two, big tough talented guys who play hard every night, have a nasty side, who compete and will play mean, keep the other team honest. Disregarding their contracts, I'd take those two guys on my team any day.
--Forechecking works. Lucas Lessio and Mike Brown have some speed, maybe not as much as Michaël Bournival and Brian Flynn, but bring the added component of size and strength, which festers in the back of the mind of a harried opposition defenceman. Nice goal for Lucas Lessio, and Mike Brown adds an assist and an argument for obtaining a contract next season.
And a goal which came on a cursed dump-in, to boot. With Jacob de la Rose standing in front of the net. And which endangers our draft status. Cognitive dissonance aplenty.
--Darren Dietz and Joel Hanley having a nice game, supporting the attack by pinching in, after a difficult couple of games.
--Stupid mean Michel Therrien would never give Lars Eller two good wingers like Mike Brown and Lucas Lessio, along with more ozone. David Desharnais gets all the O3...
--Maybe the boys heard Daniel Sedin's sortie about giving 100% effort every game, every shift, that you demand the puck every time, while they were looking in the mirror, and it had an unintended effect.
--This is the first game I've ever noticed Cam Fowler. We always talk about him as this mythically great defenceman we wish we had, but he never caught my eye, and I'm not saying this to demean him, it's more of a knock on me as a fan, who watches players for the Canadiens but only notices opponents when they foil us or goon us.
Tonight, I realized that he's much taller/bigger than the picture I had of him in my mind, more robinsonny than cheliosy. Moves well, has a nice stride. Good play by him on the Perry goal, nice shot on net that created a rebound.
--We found one thing Stefan Matteau can do: he can come out of the cycle with the puck down low, curl out towards the corner and bank pass the puck back to his defenceman.
Take that all those of you who say he's a worthless player incapable of anything.
--I cringe whenever I see Mike McCarron fight. Call it the Komisarek effect. I've grown accustomed to having our big physical players get cut down to size, usually by Milan Lucic. I'm afraid someone's going to pop our balloon.
And now it crystallizes for me that having big Mike on the team won't work next year, unless we have two other guys at least who can throw their weight around and drop the gloves, or else he'll be a constant target and have to fight fourty times.
I guess Connor Crisp and Brett Lernout make the team by default next season, straight out of camp.
Unless we sign Milan Lucic as a UFA. And David Backes.
--I'm very happy that Jacob de la Rose is not subject to waivers next season, because he needs at least another season in the AHL, that poor kid just isn't a player of any impact in the NHL.
--I like the Nathan Beaulieu and Greg Pateryn pairing, in theory at least. Two youngsters who can skate, play physical and follow the classic model: the puck mover attacking guy, and the bigger more defensive tougher guy who can support the attack by having a decent shot. Lefty-righty.
Let's keep those guys playing together, build on their history together in the AHL.
--That Paul Byron to Max Pacioretty to Greg Pateryn back to Max to Alex Galchenyuk et le buuuuuuut! goal was a beauty. As it developed, I kept seeing how the attack would abort, the defenceman would check Max, or the puck would skip over a stick, in my mind, four or five times before the puck found mesh. Great stuff.
I was just formulating the thought that Max really won't get to thirty goals this year as the play developed.
--"On n'a pas nécéssairement mentioné le nom de (Mike) Brown souvent ce soir, il a quand même trois mises en échec dans ce match, et il vient d'en rajouter une quatrième, et une cinquième, ben là pas vraiment..., ha ha ha, Simon Després ha ha ha l'attendait..., ha ha ha, et le buuuuut, ha ha ha, c'est 3-2!"
Okay, I'll say this about Jacob de la Rose, he and Lucas Lessio forechecked hard in the Ducks' zone, and he covered up on two occasions for Darren Dietz and Joel Hanley when they pinched in along the boards to keep up the pressure. Maybe developing a hate-on for him will allow me to notice when he does something good.
And nice goal for Mike Brown, good story for him. Sure, he lucked into a puck in the slot, but he deserved that, his forechecking and the threat of a crunching hit from him created that loose puck eventually.
--On that Jacob Silfverberg goal, Max didn't make a strong play with the puck, a defensively responsible play. Some argue that we should leave our zone as a five-player unit, with possession of the puck, but here, on this play, the defensively-safe strong play of getting the puck out of our zone by clearing it off the boards would have made Michel Therrien happy, and not led directly to a goal against.
--Seeing Ryan Kesler and Kevin Bieksa on the Ducks, it brings a bit of clarity to the convulsions the Canucks are going through the last couple of seasons. Two great leaders those two, big tough talented guys who play hard every night, have a nasty side, who compete and will play mean, keep the other team honest. Disregarding their contracts, I'd take those two guys on my team any day.
--Forechecking works. Lucas Lessio and Mike Brown have some speed, maybe not as much as Michaël Bournival and Brian Flynn, but bring the added component of size and strength, which festers in the back of the mind of a harried opposition defenceman. Nice goal for Lucas Lessio, and Mike Brown adds an assist and an argument for obtaining a contract next season.
And a goal which came on a cursed dump-in, to boot. With Jacob de la Rose standing in front of the net. And which endangers our draft status. Cognitive dissonance aplenty.
--Darren Dietz and Joel Hanley having a nice game, supporting the attack by pinching in, after a difficult couple of games.
--Stupid mean Michel Therrien would never give Lars Eller two good wingers like Mike Brown and Lucas Lessio, along with more ozone. David Desharnais gets all the O3...
--Maybe the boys heard Daniel Sedin's sortie about giving 100% effort every game, every shift, that you demand the puck every time, while they were looking in the mirror, and it had an unintended effect.
Sunday, 20 March 2016
Game 73: Canadiens 1, Flames 4
Ouf... What a 'game' it was. Mike McCarron scored late to give it the appearance of decency.
At the end in 2012, I don't think we were all quite so blue or homicidal. I don't have a lot of context, that was my first season back watching Canadiens games assiduously, after years of missing out on Andreas Dackel and Radek Bonk.
I think that year we could be more Zen because we knew there was going to be a massive cleanup at the Nouveau Forum, Geoff Molson had been the owner for only a year, and would have spent that time to evaluate the organization top-to-bottom. That, combined with the certainty of a high draft pick, and a great chance at 'un gros joueur de centre' in either Alex Galchenyuk or Mikhail Grigorenko, meant a brighter future to look forward to.
We'd have to outwait the millstone contracts of Scott Gomez and Tomas Kaberle, sure, there's no miracle cure to those, Gary Bettman hates long contracts to veterans and would ensure that we wouldn't slip out of those, that we'd take our medicine, drink our gallon of cod liver oil, like every other team that gives crazy contracts. Fair is fair.
But we were proven right. Geoff Molson purged the hockey operations staff, hired a bright young go-getter with lots of experience from a quality organization as his GM. We ended up with 'only' the third pick, but the stars aligned, the Oilers picked the consensus best player in the draft in Nail Yakupov, the Blue Jackets took a defenceman some compared to Scott Niedermayer in Ryan Murray, and we were left with the player we wanted, uber-talented Alex Galchenyuk, who if he hadn't lost his draft season due to an ACL reconstruction, some pundits claimed, would have been the lock for first overall. And the farm system, long neglected, would start to overflow with the shrewd picks from Trevor Timmins, so we'd be able to deal with the salary cap and make trades from a position of strength, swapping superfluous assets to desperate teams, because we had kids in the minors who couldn't be denied a chance in the NHL any longer.
The table was set for unfettered progress. We weren't enthused with the new head coach, dreaded what may come, but I figured we should give him a chance. I hadn't been happy when we hired Jacques Martin previously. "What, the Ottawa reject-coach who couldn't get it done with a stacked team?", I scoffed, but in time he proved to be a quality NHL coach, inspiring confidence in his charges, winning more than he lost. I thought maybe Michel Therrien will have the same effect, would be preferable to a rookie head coach, a guy from the minors learning the ropes.
This year, I'm not looking ahead at next season with the same optimism. Sure, Carey Price will be back healthy, and so will Max after a full summer of workouts, something he couldn't do last summer with his tibial plateau fracture. So will Brendan Gallagher. If anything, we're lucky these three core members of the team had their injury-marred season concurrently. It will allow us a high draft pick this season, and we can maybe get right back into Cup contention next season.
Looking past the solid pieces of this core though, we get so many more question marks than anything else. We used to jones for the day when we were rid of riffraff like Travis Moen and René Bourque, but in our minds they'd be replaced with newer, shinier, better, cheaper players, it's the Wheel of Life right? It seems to me that next season, we'd be happy to have these players, those pros, on our roster, compared to the callow youths we're seeing in the forward corps lately.
And there probably won't be a cathartic housecleaning at the New Forum. I'm afraid a New School coach like Guy Boucher, freely available now for hire, will be left at the altar, in pursuit of organizational stability, so as to put an end to the endless cycle of coach hirings and firings, to stop the madness.
Which is fine in principle, but ignores the practical reality that the players are speaking loud and clear how they feel about the current régime. They're not playing with any pride, any desperation. They've thrown in the towel.
How awkward will it be if the whole gang is brought back together next September? Are we supposed to cheer them on as if nothing happened? Kind of like the morning after, when your life partner found your texts on your phone, and furniture was wrecked and dishes were smashed and words were said that can't be unsaid?
If we knew there was closure coming this April, we'd deal with this a lot better. Instead, we're forced to protest ever more stridently, like opponents of a Trump presidency being ever more fervent as they are faced with what seems like a fait accompli.
At the end in 2012, I don't think we were all quite so blue or homicidal. I don't have a lot of context, that was my first season back watching Canadiens games assiduously, after years of missing out on Andreas Dackel and Radek Bonk.
I think that year we could be more Zen because we knew there was going to be a massive cleanup at the Nouveau Forum, Geoff Molson had been the owner for only a year, and would have spent that time to evaluate the organization top-to-bottom. That, combined with the certainty of a high draft pick, and a great chance at 'un gros joueur de centre' in either Alex Galchenyuk or Mikhail Grigorenko, meant a brighter future to look forward to.
We'd have to outwait the millstone contracts of Scott Gomez and Tomas Kaberle, sure, there's no miracle cure to those, Gary Bettman hates long contracts to veterans and would ensure that we wouldn't slip out of those, that we'd take our medicine, drink our gallon of cod liver oil, like every other team that gives crazy contracts. Fair is fair.
But we were proven right. Geoff Molson purged the hockey operations staff, hired a bright young go-getter with lots of experience from a quality organization as his GM. We ended up with 'only' the third pick, but the stars aligned, the Oilers picked the consensus best player in the draft in Nail Yakupov, the Blue Jackets took a defenceman some compared to Scott Niedermayer in Ryan Murray, and we were left with the player we wanted, uber-talented Alex Galchenyuk, who if he hadn't lost his draft season due to an ACL reconstruction, some pundits claimed, would have been the lock for first overall. And the farm system, long neglected, would start to overflow with the shrewd picks from Trevor Timmins, so we'd be able to deal with the salary cap and make trades from a position of strength, swapping superfluous assets to desperate teams, because we had kids in the minors who couldn't be denied a chance in the NHL any longer.
The table was set for unfettered progress. We weren't enthused with the new head coach, dreaded what may come, but I figured we should give him a chance. I hadn't been happy when we hired Jacques Martin previously. "What, the Ottawa reject-coach who couldn't get it done with a stacked team?", I scoffed, but in time he proved to be a quality NHL coach, inspiring confidence in his charges, winning more than he lost. I thought maybe Michel Therrien will have the same effect, would be preferable to a rookie head coach, a guy from the minors learning the ropes.
This year, I'm not looking ahead at next season with the same optimism. Sure, Carey Price will be back healthy, and so will Max after a full summer of workouts, something he couldn't do last summer with his tibial plateau fracture. So will Brendan Gallagher. If anything, we're lucky these three core members of the team had their injury-marred season concurrently. It will allow us a high draft pick this season, and we can maybe get right back into Cup contention next season.
Looking past the solid pieces of this core though, we get so many more question marks than anything else. We used to jones for the day when we were rid of riffraff like Travis Moen and René Bourque, but in our minds they'd be replaced with newer, shinier, better, cheaper players, it's the Wheel of Life right? It seems to me that next season, we'd be happy to have these players, those pros, on our roster, compared to the callow youths we're seeing in the forward corps lately.
And there probably won't be a cathartic housecleaning at the New Forum. I'm afraid a New School coach like Guy Boucher, freely available now for hire, will be left at the altar, in pursuit of organizational stability, so as to put an end to the endless cycle of coach hirings and firings, to stop the madness.
Which is fine in principle, but ignores the practical reality that the players are speaking loud and clear how they feel about the current régime. They're not playing with any pride, any desperation. They've thrown in the towel.
How awkward will it be if the whole gang is brought back together next September? Are we supposed to cheer them on as if nothing happened? Kind of like the morning after, when your life partner found your texts on your phone, and furniture was wrecked and dishes were smashed and words were said that can't be unsaid?
If we knew there was closure coming this April, we'd deal with this a lot better. Instead, we're forced to protest ever more stridently, like opponents of a Trump presidency being ever more fervent as they are faced with what seems like a fait accompli.
Friday, 18 March 2016
Stefan Matteau and Devante Smith-Pelly, Part Deux.
I wrote a long post on Devante Smith-Pelly recently, it's a subject that might intrigue us over the next few seasons. My take is that he and Stefan Matteau are found money, we got them in exchange for Jiri Sekac, who while flashy and showy is struggling to show he's an NHL'er, to say the least.
Reading a Montréal Gazette article by Stu Cowan, I come across this passage:
My question for the learned folks here is, did anything in the Canadiens' vaunted/cursed system prevent Devo from doing this while he was here? I'm not being glib or trolling anyone, I'm asking an honest question, looking for some analysis.
Now, I know that Devo expressed surprise last season at how we play, that relentlessly pursuing the puck rather than thumping and finishing checks was a different deal than he'd grown accustomed to in Anaheim. I've observed and posted on this, how on 24CH you see the coaches enjoin players to not 'look' for big hits, that these will happen organically, that they should rather focus on the puck. I've posted a couple of times when I'd see an opposition defenceman behind his net flip the puck along hurriedly and then brace for impact, only to see a Torrey Mitchell or Michaël Bournival or Jacob de la Rose speed by and chase off after the puck. You'd see the d-man kind of frozen for a second, shocked they didn't get pounded into the boards.
So maybe that's what Devo means when he says "creating havoc", although I'd argue that when Brandon Prust and Dale Weise were racing around on the forecheck, that created havoc also, but without the Ryan Reaves flying elbows.
But the rest of the quote, I'm scratching my head. "...going in front of the net and parking myself right there, at the edge of the crease."? Michel Therrien does nothing but promote that. I've posted on that as well. The famous "We are a grinding team!" quote that social media latched on to, it's actually part of a longer segment when he torches his guys for not 'driving the net', for hesitating to go to the net, he lampoons them about how they seem as if they're negotiating or debating as to who should go there.
Another example I've caught is a couple seasons back, early in the year when the boys weren't scoring very much. I lauded Michel Therrien for using a different teaching method, whereby instead of telling them (again...) to go to the net, go to the slot, he simply invited every goal scorer thus far that season to come to the front of the dressing room and mark on the whiteboard where he was when he scored. The picture and lesson was clear, and he was hoping it would sink in if he presented it this different way: every 'X' was in and around the crease, none were along the boards or far out at the blue line.
So, I wonder, what prevented Devo in his 80 games or so here from parking himself at the edge of the crease, like Yvon Lambert did, or like rookie Mike McCarron seems to grasp as a raw rookie, right off the bat? If anything, that's what we'd fault Devo for, for playing entire games when he was invisible, when you'd catch a fleeting glimpse of his number 21 and wonder "That's odd, I didn't know Doug Jarvis was playing tonight?..."
I'm genuinely asking this. Is there a difference in the system the Devils use that allows DSP to play a netfront role and have success which wasn't possible given the system predicated in Montréal? Was there a reason why he couldn't forecheck and create havoc in Montréal? Or are we thinking his recent success is a product of puck luck, unsustainably-high shooting percentage, and a change in scenery/kick in the rear?
Reading a Montréal Gazette article by Stu Cowan, I come across this passage:
After Smith-Pelly’s three-point performance Thursday night, he told nhl.com: “So far, I think I fit like a glove (with the Devils). I’m just getting in on the forecheck and creating havoc, going in front of the net and parking myself right there, at the edge of the crease. That’s something I knew I definitely had to do.
My question for the learned folks here is, did anything in the Canadiens' vaunted/cursed system prevent Devo from doing this while he was here? I'm not being glib or trolling anyone, I'm asking an honest question, looking for some analysis.
Now, I know that Devo expressed surprise last season at how we play, that relentlessly pursuing the puck rather than thumping and finishing checks was a different deal than he'd grown accustomed to in Anaheim. I've observed and posted on this, how on 24CH you see the coaches enjoin players to not 'look' for big hits, that these will happen organically, that they should rather focus on the puck. I've posted a couple of times when I'd see an opposition defenceman behind his net flip the puck along hurriedly and then brace for impact, only to see a Torrey Mitchell or Michaël Bournival or Jacob de la Rose speed by and chase off after the puck. You'd see the d-man kind of frozen for a second, shocked they didn't get pounded into the boards.
So maybe that's what Devo means when he says "creating havoc", although I'd argue that when Brandon Prust and Dale Weise were racing around on the forecheck, that created havoc also, but without the Ryan Reaves flying elbows.
But the rest of the quote, I'm scratching my head. "...going in front of the net and parking myself right there, at the edge of the crease."? Michel Therrien does nothing but promote that. I've posted on that as well. The famous "We are a grinding team!" quote that social media latched on to, it's actually part of a longer segment when he torches his guys for not 'driving the net', for hesitating to go to the net, he lampoons them about how they seem as if they're negotiating or debating as to who should go there.
Another example I've caught is a couple seasons back, early in the year when the boys weren't scoring very much. I lauded Michel Therrien for using a different teaching method, whereby instead of telling them (again...) to go to the net, go to the slot, he simply invited every goal scorer thus far that season to come to the front of the dressing room and mark on the whiteboard where he was when he scored. The picture and lesson was clear, and he was hoping it would sink in if he presented it this different way: every 'X' was in and around the crease, none were along the boards or far out at the blue line.
So, I wonder, what prevented Devo in his 80 games or so here from parking himself at the edge of the crease, like Yvon Lambert did, or like rookie Mike McCarron seems to grasp as a raw rookie, right off the bat? If anything, that's what we'd fault Devo for, for playing entire games when he was invisible, when you'd catch a fleeting glimpse of his number 21 and wonder "That's odd, I didn't know Doug Jarvis was playing tonight?..."
I'm genuinely asking this. Is there a difference in the system the Devils use that allows DSP to play a netfront role and have success which wasn't possible given the system predicated in Montréal? Was there a reason why he couldn't forecheck and create havoc in Montréal? Or are we thinking his recent success is a product of puck luck, unsustainably-high shooting percentage, and a change in scenery/kick in the rear?
Thursday, 17 March 2016
Stefan Matteau and Devante Smith-Pelly.
When we acquired Devante Smith-Pelly, it stung for this Canadiens fan, since I liked Jiri Sekac, I had bought in, I liked his backstory, I liked his size and speed, it showed even on my TV screen. I had confidently predicted great things.
I understood the reasoning for the trade. Anaheim needed a left-shot forward, a left winger, and had too many righties in their forwards. They wanted someone who could potentially complement Ryan Getzlaf and Corey Perry on their top line, someone better than Patrick Maroon, and also a little boost of speed, since many of their forwards were lumberers, built to battle heavy teams like the Kings and Sharks and Blues.
Meanwhile, Marc Bergevin needed to unclog the left side and beef up the right side of his forward corps. And speaking of beef, he needed some added heft, someone to play a little more physically, and to add a little snarl, a little pushback. So Devo was what the doctor ordered for our team too. Good trade, like in "Dances with Wolves", both parties getting something they wanted by giving up something they didn't need as much.
Devo wasn't a throwaway in my eyes, a useless plug, a fourth-liner, a grinder as he was castigated on HIO, he was also a good prospect. In my all-too-frequent perusals of past years drafts on HockeyDB, he stood out to me as the guy who played NHL games one year after being drafted, the only second-rounder to do so, ahead of most first-rounders outside of Taylor-Tyler. At the time, I thought the Ducks had unearthed a steal, kind of like the Avalanche with Ryan O'Reilly or the Blackhawks with Brandon Saad, the high-second-round pick who plays in the NHL early in his career, who's effective, the diamond in the rough.
He didn't take to our team and system like a Duck to water though. He struggled, was sat out a few games, and the coach explained he needed to work on his endurance. Devo admitted as much, said that in Anaheim they wanted him to play heavy so he could battle along the boards. He said that our system, which is predicated on puck pursuit rather than finishing your checks, was something he had to adjust to.
The latter half of his season was inauspicious: 3 points in 20 games, and another 3 points in 12 playoff games. He did dish out a few hits, but wasn't the force in the corners and in front of the net that we would have liked. We discovered he wasn't a guy who had a temper and would right our wrongs with his knuckles.
Over the summer, we expected him to trim down, be in a better condition to skate all night, be in better shape overall, and come back and prove what he was made of. He accomplished that to some degree, he looked less jowly in camp, if not carved out of rock like modern NHL'ers. He seemed to have extra spring in his stride. Maybe it was hopeful confirmation bias, but he seemed faster on the ice, better able to keep up with the play.
Except that he still seemed inconsistent, at least, on some nights relatively invisible, still a step behind, and those nights became more and more frequent as the season wore on. I asked, with concern, whether I was the only one noticing him slowing down rather than getting better and better as the season progressed.
Plus, with our relatively lightweight roster, de-Prustified and de-Kassianized, it didn't help that Devo wasn't the most aggressive of players:
On a roster like we had in 2014, with Travis Moen, Brandon Prust, George Parros, Douglas Murray and Francis Bouillon, we could have carried a Devante Smith-Pelly, a guy who'll get involved in scrums after the whistle, grab a guy and hold on, but not do much more than that. Heck, on that type of roster, he might have felt his oats a little more, benefited from the facilitated aggression, been a little more adventurous once in a while, with the ample backup behind him.
But not on our current roster. Devo is not quite the player we thought he was, the big bruiser with hands that can surprise you, who can develop into something, and who'll fit right into our team. It's not quite that seamless a fit.
And I can't help but wonder about Devo's maturity level, whether he really understands how tenuous a hockey career is. When he was a healthy scratch earlier this season, he expressed confusion about why he wasn't playing. Meanwhile, the head coach, asked about this by reporters, tersely replied in ten seconds what we all knew, what Devo should have known, that he needed to play hard, be consistent, involve himself physically, be responsible defensively. That Devo said he was confused about this showed disingenuousness, at the very least.
So before the trade deadline, with a dearth of assets to ship out in return for oodles of scrumptious draft picks, I threw Devo in the lot. I had seen enough, I declared. As much as I wanted him to flower, to explode, to become a bruising Top 6 winger, I cut bait. How long had I waited for Benoit Pouliot, for René Bourque, for Lucien DeBlois, for Perry Turnbull? I wasn't going to be fooled no longer nohow.
Again, I'd seen enough. And I wanted to stock up on draft picks. I thought Devo and a fourth might get us a second.
Instead, we got what I thought was even better, Stefan Matteau, a promising but erratic former first-rounder who would add the toughness and snarl that Devo never did:
In checking his points totals on HockeyDB, I kind of ratcheted down my expectations, despite the first-rounder status. I figured if he provided some speed and energy and popped in 12-15 goals on the Bottom 6, that would be a good trade, in that Devo more often than not merely occupied a lineup spot but didn't make the most of it, was relatively invisible, contrary to guys like Paul Byron or Torrey Mitchell who overachieved, who often flashed and won games outright.
That was my take on the trade, and I was comfortable in my assessment.
That was before, however, Devo's current scoring outburst with the Devils, who now has six goals and three assists in seven games. And before Monsieur Matteau was healthy-scratched a couple of times by a coach juggling spare parts, trying to squeeze rookies in his roster for experimental purposes.
I'm allaying my fears by reckoning that we know what Stefan Matteau will bring, he's secure as a roster member for next season. He'd have to go through waivers, so that won't be an option, sending him to St. John's. He'll be part of the team out of training camp next fall unless a trade or something unforeseen occurs. We saw what happened this season with no Brandon Prust/Zack Kassian on the roster, and Greg Pateryn and Jarred Tinordi in the pressbox where they couldn't be of help. Stefan will have a big role to play, in concert with others. We will have pushback.
And Devo, well, good on him for his current success, maybe the change of scenery was the second swift kick in the rear he got, but the one that took. Maybe he's more suited to the system they play in New Jersey. Maybe he was never meant to be on a fast-break team, or had the stones to be the one heavy on a team.
I don't necessarily want him not to have success, but I'm a little green that it's happening on another team, that he didn't find the touch and expend the effort here, for the team which he cried for upon learning he was no longer a member of. We could have used those goals last season in the playoffs Devo. Or in December and January.
In context though, we're playing with found money. The Jarred Tinordi trade really cut me deep, because we'd invested a first and a second-rounder to draft him, then years in developing him, waiting for him to hatch, all for naught. For What-ley.
Devo came to us for Jiri Sekac, a player we signed as an undrafted free agent. So we're flipping this found asset for Stefan, and he has some time to develop into a commodity. No skin off our nose.
I understood the reasoning for the trade. Anaheim needed a left-shot forward, a left winger, and had too many righties in their forwards. They wanted someone who could potentially complement Ryan Getzlaf and Corey Perry on their top line, someone better than Patrick Maroon, and also a little boost of speed, since many of their forwards were lumberers, built to battle heavy teams like the Kings and Sharks and Blues.
Meanwhile, Marc Bergevin needed to unclog the left side and beef up the right side of his forward corps. And speaking of beef, he needed some added heft, someone to play a little more physically, and to add a little snarl, a little pushback. So Devo was what the doctor ordered for our team too. Good trade, like in "Dances with Wolves", both parties getting something they wanted by giving up something they didn't need as much.
Devo wasn't a throwaway in my eyes, a useless plug, a fourth-liner, a grinder as he was castigated on HIO, he was also a good prospect. In my all-too-frequent perusals of past years drafts on HockeyDB, he stood out to me as the guy who played NHL games one year after being drafted, the only second-rounder to do so, ahead of most first-rounders outside of Taylor-Tyler. At the time, I thought the Ducks had unearthed a steal, kind of like the Avalanche with Ryan O'Reilly or the Blackhawks with Brandon Saad, the high-second-round pick who plays in the NHL early in his career, who's effective, the diamond in the rough.
He didn't take to our team and system like a Duck to water though. He struggled, was sat out a few games, and the coach explained he needed to work on his endurance. Devo admitted as much, said that in Anaheim they wanted him to play heavy so he could battle along the boards. He said that our system, which is predicated on puck pursuit rather than finishing your checks, was something he had to adjust to.
The latter half of his season was inauspicious: 3 points in 20 games, and another 3 points in 12 playoff games. He did dish out a few hits, but wasn't the force in the corners and in front of the net that we would have liked. We discovered he wasn't a guy who had a temper and would right our wrongs with his knuckles.
Over the summer, we expected him to trim down, be in a better condition to skate all night, be in better shape overall, and come back and prove what he was made of. He accomplished that to some degree, he looked less jowly in camp, if not carved out of rock like modern NHL'ers. He seemed to have extra spring in his stride. Maybe it was hopeful confirmation bias, but he seemed faster on the ice, better able to keep up with the play.
Except that he still seemed inconsistent, at least, on some nights relatively invisible, still a step behind, and those nights became more and more frequent as the season wore on. I asked, with concern, whether I was the only one noticing him slowing down rather than getting better and better as the season progressed.
Plus, with our relatively lightweight roster, de-Prustified and de-Kassianized, it didn't help that Devo wasn't the most aggressive of players:
He’s big and has potential, but he’s another ‘pacifist’, a guy who’ll not make eye contact with Mark Stuart when the going gets facewashy in front of the Jets’ net. With Lars Eller in the Winter Classic, and Jacob de la Rose against Tie Domi’s spawn, we have enough big players who won’t push back, who’ll look the other way, literally turn the other cheek. And with P.K. and Alexei Emelin getting under opponents’ skins but not able/willing to drop the gloves, that’s too many guys who won’t face off against a pugnacious opponent to give him the what for.
On a roster like we had in 2014, with Travis Moen, Brandon Prust, George Parros, Douglas Murray and Francis Bouillon, we could have carried a Devante Smith-Pelly, a guy who'll get involved in scrums after the whistle, grab a guy and hold on, but not do much more than that. Heck, on that type of roster, he might have felt his oats a little more, benefited from the facilitated aggression, been a little more adventurous once in a while, with the ample backup behind him.
But not on our current roster. Devo is not quite the player we thought he was, the big bruiser with hands that can surprise you, who can develop into something, and who'll fit right into our team. It's not quite that seamless a fit.
And I can't help but wonder about Devo's maturity level, whether he really understands how tenuous a hockey career is. When he was a healthy scratch earlier this season, he expressed confusion about why he wasn't playing. Meanwhile, the head coach, asked about this by reporters, tersely replied in ten seconds what we all knew, what Devo should have known, that he needed to play hard, be consistent, involve himself physically, be responsible defensively. That Devo said he was confused about this showed disingenuousness, at the very least.
So before the trade deadline, with a dearth of assets to ship out in return for oodles of scrumptious draft picks, I threw Devo in the lot. I had seen enough, I declared. As much as I wanted him to flower, to explode, to become a bruising Top 6 winger, I cut bait. How long had I waited for Benoit Pouliot, for René Bourque, for Lucien DeBlois, for Perry Turnbull? I wasn't going to be fooled no longer nohow.
Again, I'd seen enough. And I wanted to stock up on draft picks. I thought Devo and a fourth might get us a second.
Instead, we got what I thought was even better, Stefan Matteau, a promising but erratic former first-rounder who would add the toughness and snarl that Devo never did:
I floated the comparison yesterday to a Patrice Cormier or Charlie Coyle, a talented player who can put up points, but has size and strength and a screw loose. I’m normally predisposed to dislike these guys, once they start to raffitorres it out there, but generally a big tough mean player, like Sergio Momesso, Mike McPhee, Shayne Corson, they’re always welcome on our team. Because they’re ours, dammit.I don’t know that Stefan can rack up the points like these guys, but if he has a livelier stick than Devo, and is more effective at throwing hits, and isn’t a pacifist, I’ll be very happy.His contribution will be magnified because there are precious few guys on our team who can do what he does, be a menacing presence at forward, and will crosscheck back when Clayton Stoner starts gooning it up in front of the net. There being this bigger vacuum in our lineup for that kind of contribution, he can be that much more valuable.
In checking his points totals on HockeyDB, I kind of ratcheted down my expectations, despite the first-rounder status. I figured if he provided some speed and energy and popped in 12-15 goals on the Bottom 6, that would be a good trade, in that Devo more often than not merely occupied a lineup spot but didn't make the most of it, was relatively invisible, contrary to guys like Paul Byron or Torrey Mitchell who overachieved, who often flashed and won games outright.
That was my take on the trade, and I was comfortable in my assessment.
That was before, however, Devo's current scoring outburst with the Devils, who now has six goals and three assists in seven games. And before Monsieur Matteau was healthy-scratched a couple of times by a coach juggling spare parts, trying to squeeze rookies in his roster for experimental purposes.
I'm allaying my fears by reckoning that we know what Stefan Matteau will bring, he's secure as a roster member for next season. He'd have to go through waivers, so that won't be an option, sending him to St. John's. He'll be part of the team out of training camp next fall unless a trade or something unforeseen occurs. We saw what happened this season with no Brandon Prust/Zack Kassian on the roster, and Greg Pateryn and Jarred Tinordi in the pressbox where they couldn't be of help. Stefan will have a big role to play, in concert with others. We will have pushback.
And Devo, well, good on him for his current success, maybe the change of scenery was the second swift kick in the rear he got, but the one that took. Maybe he's more suited to the system they play in New Jersey. Maybe he was never meant to be on a fast-break team, or had the stones to be the one heavy on a team.
I don't necessarily want him not to have success, but I'm a little green that it's happening on another team, that he didn't find the touch and expend the effort here, for the team which he cried for upon learning he was no longer a member of. We could have used those goals last season in the playoffs Devo. Or in December and January.
In context though, we're playing with found money. The Jarred Tinordi trade really cut me deep, because we'd invested a first and a second-rounder to draft him, then years in developing him, waiting for him to hatch, all for naught. For What-ley.
Devo came to us for Jiri Sekac, a player we signed as an undrafted free agent. So we're flipping this found asset for Stefan, and he has some time to develop into a commodity. No skin off our nose.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)