RDS: Bouillon coming back ?

[GREMLIN]

What's wrong with people on RDS.ca? The top comments beneath the article are all in favor of a Bouillon comeback.

You have to understand a lot of quebecers learned everything they know about hockey listening to Gaston Therrien, Alain Chantelois, Michel Bergeron etc.

Not exactly geniuses

 

[optimus2861]

I'm with you. Having 3 inexperienced players on the roster is not alarming in itself, if the they compete for 1 or 2 roster spots (depending on whether Weaver plays that night). I only see 3 of them competing on a regular basis: Beaulieu, Tinordi, Nygren, with Pateryn and one of the last two switching from NHL and AHL periodically, so that there are never more then 3 travelling with the big club. Beaulieu was one of the better players on the blueline in the last playoffs; experience is not a substitute for his talent.

I forget who originally pointed this out, but our 1993 defence corps was remarkably young by NHL standards. On opening night in 92/93, we had these guys:

Desjardins 23 YO 4 full seasons played (was a team regular at 20!)
Schneider 23 YO 2.5 full seasons played
Brisebois 21 YO first full season
Haller 21 YO 1 full season played
Daigneault 26 YO had been in the league since 19
Odelein 24 YO 2 full seasons played

Rob Ramage didn't even enter the picture until March, so until very late in the season there wasn't a single D-man on that team over the age of 26! Therrien would've probably had a stroke trying to coach that team.

Anyway, we don't need no 38-YO washed-up coach's pet on this roster.

 

[pepperMonkey]

There seems to be a disconnect between RDS fans and every other fan. They're like the Habs version of Leafs fans who believe everything Don Cherry says to be true.

Hmm...all the leafs fans (which is pretty much everyone I know as I am in Leafs land) that I know don't actually believe anything that comes from Don Cherry's mouth...they just find him (as do I) entertaining. Then again, I could just be in the wrong social group as there are certainly many dumb fans out there, but I think that's normal when you have large fan bases.

 

[pepperMonkey]

I forget who originally pointed this out, but our 1993 defence corps was remarkably young by NHL standards. On opening night in 92/93, we had these guys:

Desjardins 23 YO 4 full seasons played (was a team regular at 20!)
Schneider 23 YO 2.5 full seasons played
Brisebois 21 YO first full season
Haller 21 YO 1 full season played
Daigneault 26 YO had been in the league since 19
Odelein 24 YO 2 full seasons played

Rob Ramage didn't even enter the picture until March, so until very late in the season there wasn't a single D-man on that team over the age of 26! Therrien would've probably had a stroke trying to coach that team.

Anyway, we don't need no 38-YO washed-up coach's pet on this roster.

Umm...I think we saw the inexperience during the playoffs as we were massively been outshot during the playoffs. Talent is one thing but there is a lot to be said for experience.

 

[JLP]

I forget who originally pointed this out, but our 1993 defence corps was remarkably young by NHL standards. On opening night in 92/93, we had these guys:

Desjardins 23 YO 4 full seasons played (was a team regular at 20!)
Schneider 23 YO 2.5 full seasons played
Brisebois 21 YO first full season
Haller 21 YO 1 full season played
Daigneault 26 YO had been in the league since 19
Odelein 24 YO 2 full seasons played

Rob Ramage didn't even enter the picture until March, so until very late in the season there wasn't a single D-man on that team over the age of 26! Therrien would've probably had a stroke trying to coach that team.

Wow did not realize how young they were.

Anyway, we don't need no 38-YO washed-up coach's pet on this roster.

Agree. But if Therrien has the option don't be surprised if we get two old midgets in a Bouillon - Weaver pairing.

 

[Haaabs]

I think a lot of coaches have players that they are enamoured with because they do what they're told and they've known for a long time. Remember how much Jacques Martin used Darche?

If we didn't have Tinordi and Beaulieu fighting for the Last LD spot, and Pateryn being next in line at RD... Re-signing him would be ok. However, MT would end up benching Beaulieu and Tinordi and using Bouillon even though the two young guys bring more to the table and will only be getting better. Bouillon on the other hand is regressing.

 

[Wats]

Bouillon has nothing to do with the forwards. I would be surprised if Moen wasn't moved before October 1st.

I like the idea of having a veteran in the mix for #6-7-8 and would rather have Bouillon playing 40 games a year and sitting than either Tinordi or Beaulieu in the press box.

#6 D should be a lock for one of Tinordi/Beaulieu (I think Beaulieu wins the spot) since both become waiver eligible next season along with Pateryn. The reason that's relevant is it's unrealistic to expect 3 unproven D to be in lineup same time in 2015/2016. The one that loses spot likely a lock to be 1st call-up and fine tune their skills in their last AHL season as leader (I think Tinordi will be the one here). Neither will have to be a regular in a press-box yet because there's no Boullion in the lineup taking their LD spot for 40 games.

#7/8 D already has 3 older young players already under contract that can challenge: Greg Pateryn (24) / Magnus Nygren (24) / Davis Drewiske (29). You want someone that can sit on a bench:
- Drewiske demonstrated that by being a #7 D on a cup winning roster and has the experience practicing with championship environment. He can play both LD and RD, supposedly has a lot of character based on Bergevin, and has no issues sitting.
- Nygren has a ton of international pro experience and is RD with a powerplay specialization role. Doesn't want to play AHL and already a top pairing D in SHL. He's a realistic option to have on roster and use in case of injuries on RD/play low minutes like Streit in his rookie year if he shows he's NHL ready in preseason/camp.
- Pateryn has paid his dues in AHL and had a breakout year offensively. Being in the pressbox and playing 40 games will be next step for his development if he beats out Nygren and Drewiske. He will also be waiver eligible soon and needs games to prove whether he's ready to take next step full time. Better break him in now than when there's no more chance to send him down without waivers.

Habs already have two 35+ year olds, two ~30 year olds, and one elite 25 year old D taking the rest of the roster spots. Not uncommon at all for good teams to have the lower D spots filled by up youth. Then there's the whole 3 key D prospects becoming waiver eligible next season that don't need a Boullion using up NHL games they could be using to prove their longterm worth to the organization/gaining experience to become full time D. Throwing the young D in the playoffs in desperation due to Boullion/Murray/etc being horrible isn't the greatest path to gaining the experience needed to become a full time D.

 

[Halifaxhab*]

#6 D should be a lock for one of Tinordi/Beaulieu (I think Beaulieu wins the spot) since both become waiver eligible next season along with Pateryn. The reason that's relevant is it's unrealistic to expect 3 unproven D to be in lineup same time in 2015/2016. The one that loses spot likely a lock to be 1st call-up and fine tune their skills in their last AHL season as leader (I think Tinordi will be the one here). Neither will have to be a regular in a press-box yet because there's no Boullion in the lineup taking their LD spot for 40 games.

#7/8 D already has 3 older young players already under contract that can challenge: Greg Pateryn (24) / Magnus Nygren (24) / Davis Drewiske (29). You want someone that can sit on a bench:
- Drewiske demonstrated that by being a #7 D on a cup winning roster and has the experience practicing with championship environment. He can play both LD and RD, supposedly has a lot of character based on Bergevin, and has no issues sitting.
- Nygren has a ton of international pro experience and is RD with a powerplay specialization role. Doesn't want to play AHL and already a top pairing D in SHL. He's a realistic option to have on roster and use in case of injuries on RD/play low minutes like Streit in his rookie year if he shows he's NHL ready in preseason/camp.
- Pateryn has paid his dues in AHL and had a breakout year offensively. Being in the pressbox and playing 40 games will be next step for his development if he beats out Nygren and Drewiske. He will also be waiver eligible soon and needs games to prove whether he's ready to take next step full time. Better break him in now than when there's no more chance to send him down without waivers.

Habs already have two 35+ year olds, two ~30 year olds, and one elite 25 year old D taking the rest of the roster spots. Not uncommon at all for good teams to have the lower D spots filled by up youth. Then there's the whole 3 key D prospects becoming waiver eligible next season that don't need a Boullion using up NHL games they could be using to prove their longterm worth to the organization/gaining experience to become full time D. Throwing the young D in the playoffs in desperation due to Boullion/Murray/etc being horrible isn't the greatest path to gaining the experience needed to become a full time D.

All of this, and call up anyone from the AHL BEFORE signing Bouillion as anything other than a scout or coach.....PLEASE!

 

[onebighockeyfan]

The problem is that you're not properly evaluating our talent. The habs roster has not been 'average' at all. People are still falling for the 'but we finished 3rd last that one year'. Seems most habs fans find it hard to believe we're actually good again, as that 3rd last finish was the fluke, not the other way around. It's as if people only remember the cunneyworth year and have forgotten the fact that we were really good the year before.

So your position is that the exact same roster over the last two years would have gotten more points under another coach? You think our team was capable of more than 163 points in 130 games? As a reference, Chicago got 184 points the last two years. I think we are a genuine #1C and 1 shutdown D
to be in that space. The coach would not change much.

 

[WhiskeySeven*]

So your position is that the exact same roster over the last two years would have gotten more points under another coach? You think our team was capable of more than 163 points in 130 games? As a reference, Chicago got 184 points the last two years. I think we are a genuine #1C and 1 shutdown D
to be in that space. The coach would not change much.

We have a really, really good team - especially for the eastern conference. Every team is missing a #1 this and a #1 that.

Therrien shouldn't get too much credit for performing to expectations and neither should Bergevin for steadying a ship with all it's previous talent. Neither of them have added onto what we already had.

 

[Bourne Endeavor]

MT is a terrible coach? 100 points last year with an average roster. 63 points in 48 games the previous year, again with an average roster..

MB gets nominate two years in a row for GM of the year. HF Board = fire him.

What's up with that?

Pittsburgh has essentially been the beast of the east for years. Byslma is still an average coach. We tend to win in spite of Therrien, not because of him. That isn't to say he doesn't have some good traits, but many find his rigid nature, conservative style and blatant favoritism a detriment.

 

[Lafleurs Guy]

We tend to win in spite of Therrien, not because of him.

Exactly. Outshot, outchanced... bottom third for goals, shots for, shots against. Not really sure what warrants giving Therrien credit for here. We had a great goalie otherwise we wouldn't have made the playoffs.

I think we'd be much better off going forward with a new coach. Of all the things that are wrong with our club, I'd put coaching at or near the top of the pile. I think we've got a good roster going forward. Still need some improvements up front but the back end is going to be a lot better this year. I just have little faith in the coach.

 

[missthenet]

Umm...I think we saw the inexperience during the playoffs as we were massively been outshot during the playoffs. Talent is one thing but there is a lot to be said for experience.

on defence we had Markov, Weaver, Murray in and out, Bouillion in and out and all over 35. Lota of experience there and Bouillion was a giveaway machine.

 

[Power Man]

No... no thank you.

lol even Michel Therien doesnt want him

 

[habitue*]

Bouillon as a #8 d-man playing 20 games and 10 to 12 minutes per game: fine.

Other than that, a big NO.


But Bergevin may still try to get a good top-six winger ( like Evander Kane) and the price to pay could be Beaulieu. + some vets like Bourque and Moen. Bouillon would then become the #7 d-man.

 

[Sterling Archer]

Signing Bou for one more year effectively means we lose Pateryn forever.

Marko PK
Emelin Gilbert
Beau Weaver
Tinner Pateryn/Bou

Keep the cash to stay under the cap and use it for potential waiver pick ups, trade etc. Why waste it on a washed up 38 y.o.?? Even if you NEED to sign a cheap vet for experience yadd yadda yadda, there are much better options than Bou on the market that can be had for league minimum or a try out contract.

Really, REALLY don't see the need for this guy or why his name keeps popping up. Just GO AWAY, FFS!!

 

[FlyingKostitsyn]

I don't get all the negativity here... Bouillon has been an integral part of our defense for years and he obviously has a lot left in the tank yet. Get 'er done Bergy, 2 more years for Bouillon!!!

I'm kidding of course. The guy is finished and should learn when to quit, and that means now. Why is it we're always stuck with these veterans who try to hang on to the league forever? Except Jagr of course, we weren't interested in him

 

[BPD Habs Fan]

Why would Bouillon come in on a teaching role when he was never good to begin with and his hockey IQ and positioning is arguably his worst aspect?

****ing cronyism man.

I'd rather have Komisarek back.

edit: I REMEMBER TEN YEARS AGO WHEN BOUILLON WAS FISHING PUCKS OUT OF THE NET REGULARLY. HE'S AWFUL.

I agree. Maybe MB can sit MT down and explain what a 7th or 8th defenseman is for. I fear that if this is the case than we can count on soup playing more than half the games this season.

I know MB said he was ok with taking a step back but this is ridiculous. The conspiracy theorist in me thinks he is going after McDavid.

@FlyingKostitsyn - you can't be serious. A 2 year contract? That would take him until he is 40 and put a nail in the coffin of one or more younguns. If it was Chris Chelios I might think differently but I'd rather sign Komi for a low amount and see if he can't regain form.

 

[Subban signed e5]

maybe as cheerleader instead of Gorges?

 

[pepperMonkey]

on defence we had Markov, Weaver, Murray in and out, Bouillion in and out and all over 35. Lota of experience there and Bouillion was a giveaway machine.

Err...wrong team. I was responding about the 93 D corps not the current.

 

[Bourne Endeavor]

I don't get all the negativity here... Bouillon has been an integral part of our defense for years and he obviously has a lot left in the tank yet. Get 'er done Bergy, 2 more years for Bouillon!!!

I'm kidding of course. The guy is finished and should learn when to quit, and that means now. Why is it we're always stuck with these veterans who try to hang on to the league forever? Except Jagr of course, we weren't interested in him

You caught me until I quoted. Bravo.

 

[vokiel]

Two-way or the Highway.

 

[Sterling Archer]

Two-way or the Highway.

Highway. Period. Just the highway out of town.

 

[Phil Parent]

Per TVA Sports, Meehan said Bouillon wants back but Bergevin was hesitant to bring him back.

He's trying to use public pressure to get his guy a deal.

 

[Brainiac]

Per TVA Sports, Meehan said Bouillon wants back but Bergevin was hesitant to bring him back.

He's trying to use public pressure to get his guy a deal.

And Therrien is going all "pretty please" with his boss, threatening to throw a tantrum if his toy dman isn't re-signed!