News Article: Canadiens happy with dynamic blue line

[Grate n Colorful Oz]

He really is not that far from top 20. The problem with our D is the left side of the ice, opposing teams establish their game plans around that side of the ice. If we can have an average left side, we should be fine.

He isn't far from top 20, since he's easily in the 20-40 range. To me, he's ideally a #2D on a good team, and even more ideally, one who can anchor the 2nd pairing.

Kind of the same for Weber, though I prefer Petry to him.

You're both looking way too much at points. Petry CANNOT hold a first pairing on his own. On top of that, there are easily 50-60 dmen i'd pick over him (when not considering hand side). He's far too inconsistent defensively. This is the same kind of overvaluation Chiarot has been getting. Petry is a fine #3, but we won't be anywhere near contention as long as he's our #2.

 

[Favster]

You're both looking way too much at points. Petry CANNOT hold a first pairing on his own. On top of that, there are easily 50-60 dmen i'd pick over him (when not considering hand side). He's far too inconsistent defensively. This is the same kind of overvaluation Chiarot has been getting. Petry is a fine #3, but we won't be anywhere near contention as long as he's our #2.

I'm not only considering points, he is in the 25-35 range of Dmen I would say. We don't have to agree on that. Oh and I think Chiarot is a fine 4-5 btw.

 

[Grate n Colorful Oz]

I'm not only considering points, he is in the 25-35 range of Dmen I would say. We don't have to agree on that. Oh and I think Chiarot is a fine 4-5 btw.

If he was truly a #2, he'd boost our 2nd pairing to a competitive level, like Markov and Subban did, no matter who is on the left side. This never happened, despite the Weber-Mete pairing holding the fort in 18-19 (1.85 GA60, .950 ON ICE%), Petry's pairing sucked.

Aside from his defensive inconsistencies, he isn't an offensive juggernaut either. He's a strong functional/positional offensive player, not a fabricator or enabler on offense, not a bonafide creator of play.

If we make the playoffs, it will be because Romanov (or someone else) will be at least as good a #3 as Petry is, or better, bolstering the top 3. If both Petry and Weber were top 20, we wouldn't need that bolstering to make the playoffs. Adding a #3 at minimum would send that d-corp to contention level, which is not what will happen IMO.

 

[Habs Halifax]

This D group is the Trident but we added Romanov and Edmundson....

4 men and a baby? 4M+B? That's pretty dymanic to me

 

[Favster]

If he was truly a #2, he'd boost our 2nd pairing to a competitive level, like Markov and Subban did, no matter who is on the left side. This never happened, despite the Weber-Mete pairing holding the fort in 18-19 (1.85 GA60, .950 ON ICE%), Petry's pairing sucked.

Aside from his defensive inconsistencies, he isn't an offensive juggernaut either. He's a strong functional/positional offensive player, not a fabricator or enabler on offense, not a bonafide creator of play.

If we make the playoffs, it will be because Romanov (or someone else) will be at least as good a #3 as Petry is, or better, bolstering the top 3. If both Petry and Weber were top 20, we wouldn't need that bolstering to make the playoffs. Adding a #3 at minimum would send that d-corp to contention level, which is not what will happen IMO.

Markov and Subban were both #1 Dmen though... Offensively, Petry is a very good Dman, he's had 3 straight 40 point seasons, I think only 5-6 other dmen have done that the last 3 years and the list is quite impressive. I agree his defensive play can be inconsistent at times but hopefully a steady partner will help him with that.

 

[Grate n Colorful Oz]

Markov and Subban were both #1 Dmen though... Offensively, Petry is a very good Dman, he's had 3 straight 40 point seasons, I think only 5-6 other dmen have done that the last 3 years and the list is quite impressive. I agree his defensive play can be inconsistent at times but hopefully a steady partner will help him with that.

As I said... points points points.

(In no order of importance)
Jones
Makar
Heiskanen
Josi
Carlson
Hedman
McDonaugh
Smidth
Theodore
Klingberg
Provorov
Doughty
Dahlin
OEL
Ristolainen
McAvoy
Brodin
Suter
Rielly
Lindholm
Chabot
Pietrangelo
Giordano
Hamilton
Orlov
Slavin
Ekblad
Ekholm
Hughes
Edler
DeAngelo
Letang
Niskanen
Burns
Karlsson
Dunn
Weber
Pionk

I consider all those players to be better overall than Petry. While some of them produce a bit less, they are far ahead defensively.

And then in the next 30 players, it's arguable who's better than Petry or not, but he doesn't fall squarely in front of all those remaining 30 players. Guys like Sergachev or Toews or Murray, et al, which Petry isn't clearly over or under.

Now, being between 20 and 40 positions removed from the top 20 doesn't make him close to the top 20. Each cut of 20-25 players is 10% of all dmen, so being 20-30-40 away is not what I would consider "close" to the top 20.

 

[Favster]

As I said... points points points.

(In no order of importance)
Jones
Makar
Heiskanen
Josi
Carlson
Hedman
McDonaugh
Smidth
Theodore
Klingberg
Provorov
Doughty
Dahlin
OEL
Ristolainen
McAvoy
Brodin
Suter
Rielly
Lindholm
Chabot
Pietrangelo
Giordano
Hamilton
Orlov
Slavin
Ekblad
Ekholm
Hughes
Edler
DeAngelo
Letang
Niskanen
Burns
Karlsson
Dunn
Weber
Pionk

I consider all those players to be better overall than Petry. While some of them produce a bit less, they are far ahead defensively.

And then in the next 30 players, it's arguable who's better than Petry or not, but he doesn't fall squarely in front of all those remaining 30 players. Guys like Sergachev or Toews or Murray, et al, which Petry isn't clearly over or under.

Now, being between 20 and 40 positions removed from the top 20 doesn't make him close to the top 20. Each cut of 20-25 players is 10% of all dmen, so being 20-30-40 away is not what I would consider "close" to the top 20.

A lot of the guys in that list are debatable. It comes down to personal preference I guess

 

[Treb]

If you thought Richardson was exciting (and dynamic), wait til you hear what's in store for tomorrow's zoom call!!!



Question they'll never ask:

"Francis, can you tell us how you became Development Coach for the Habs straight after you retired, without at the time, doing your classes in the minors or learning about the leading coaching techniques from around the world?"

Oh, you're good friends with Bergy. And Geoff liked you? I see.

What a "dynamic" transition.

Many development coaches around the league had very little to no previous experience in coaching.

Beauchemin, Kelly, Barch, Komisarek, Gleason, Perreault, Samuelsson, Campbell, Schultz...

The only time they somewhat do actual on-ice coaching (with the help of other coaches) is at the development camp. The rest is just talking to player and telling them what the org think they should work on.

 

[Kairi Zaide]

If he was truly a #2, he'd boost our 2nd pairing to a competitive level, like Markov and Subban did, no matter who is on the left side. This never happened, despite the Weber-Mete pairing holding the fort in 18-19 (1.85 GA60, .950 ON ICE%), Petry's pairing sucked.

Aside from his defensive inconsistencies, he isn't an offensive juggernaut either. He's a strong functional/positional offensive player, not a fabricator or enabler on offense, not a bonafide creator of play.

If we make the playoffs, it will be because Romanov (or someone else) will be at least as good a #3 as Petry is, or better, bolstering the top 3. If both Petry and Weber were top 20, we wouldn't need that bolstering to make the playoffs. Adding a #3 at minimum would send that d-corp to contention level, which is not what will happen IMO.

Kulak-Petry was one of the ~20-30 best performing pairing in the entire league by practically all measures.

 

[Grate n Colorful Oz]

Kulak-Petry was one of the ~20-30 best performing pairing in the entire league by practically all measures.

Really? How would they have done that with a 2.54 GF60 and 2.10 GA60??
Mete and Weber were 2.85/1.85 and was not considered even close to how you described the Kulak-Petry pairing of this year...

And last year (18-19), Kulak-Petry were 3.01/3.01.

 

[Runner77]

Many development coaches around the league had very little to no previous experience in coaching.

Beauchemin, Kelly, Barch, Komisarek, Gleason, Perreault, Samuelsson, Campbell, Schultz...

The only time they somewhat do actual on-ice coaching (with the help of other coaches) is at the development camp. The rest is just talking to player and telling them what the org think they should work on.

There are also many who began in lower leagues, like Nolan Pratt who is now assistant coach with the Avs. He started as a development coach in the AHL: Nolan Pratt Brings Defensive Development Background

I didn’t conduct an audit but I am sure there are many development coaches who began in lower leagues. I would much rather see a coach do that rather than just be handed a development job shortly after having retired as an NHLer. The latter situation is usually a function of who you know.

Starting at a lower level and doing your classes, attending seminars, learning advanced methods, etc. more likely makes you a candidate for an NHL job because of what you know.

 

[FormerLurker]

As I said... points points points.

(In no order of importance)
Jones
Makar
Heiskanen
Josi
Carlson
Hedman
McDonaugh
Smidth
Theodore
Klingberg
Provorov
Doughty
Dahlin
OEL
Ristolainen
McAvoy
Brodin
Suter
Rielly
Lindholm
Chabot
Pietrangelo
Giordano
Hamilton
Orlov
Slavin
Ekblad
Ekholm
Hughes
Edler
DeAngelo
Letang
Niskanen
Burns
Karlsson
Dunn
Weber
Pionk

I consider all those players to be better overall than Petry. While some of them produce a bit less, they are far ahead defensively.

And then in the next 30 players, it's arguable who's better than Petry or not, but he doesn't fall squarely in front of all those remaining 30 players. Guys like Sergachev or Toews or Murray, et al, which Petry isn't clearly over or under.

Now, being between 20 and 40 positions removed from the top 20 doesn't make him close to the top 20. Each cut of 20-25 players is 10% of all dmen, so being 20-30-40 away is not what I would consider "close" to the top 20.

The number of names on this list is inflated by including guys that once we're better than Petry is now, guys that may in the future be better than Petry is now, and guys that had an outlier career year better than Petry. Also some guys that put up good numbers but suck defensively, which seems to be your argument against Petry.

 

[Treb]

There are also many who began in lower leagues, like Nolan Pratt who is now assistant coach with the Avs. He started as a development coach in the AHL: Nolan Pratt Brings Defensive Development Background

I didn’t conduct an audit but I am sure there are many development coaches who began in lower leagues. I would much rather see a coach do that rather than just be handed a development job shortly after having retired as an NHLer. The latter situation is usually a function of who you know.

Starting at a lower level and doing your classes, attending seminars, learning advanced methods, etc. more likely makes you a candidate for an NHL job because of what you know.

Nolan Pratt is assistant coach for the Avs, not development coach. He was also assistant coach in the AHL. You seem to be mixing those up. Our equivalent to Pratt would be Richardson, not Bouillon.

The avs development coaches are:
Brett Clark who was "Development Consultant" for the Avs for 5 years before being named development coach. No other experience but played a bunch for the Avs.
Jean-Ian Filiatrault who is the goalie development coach. He has a bunch of previous experience, but that's what I have seen from other goalie dev coach, like our own Vincent Riendeau.
Steven Reinprecht who had 1 year as NCAA and WC (Germany) assistant coach. Played 3 years for Colorado.
Brian Willsie who was "Development Consultant" for the Avs for 4 years before being named development coach. Played some games for the Avs and was Captain of thei AHL team for 2 years.

It's pretty much the same all around the league. I looked at like 10 teams and the best I have seen is 2 years of coaching prior to being development coach (except goalies). Most of them had 0.

 

[Kriss E]

If he was truly a #2, he'd boost our 2nd pairing to a competitive level, like Markov and Subban did, no matter who is on the left side. This never happened, despite the Weber-Mete pairing holding the fort in 18-19 (1.85 GA60, .950 ON ICE%), Petry's pairing sucked.

Aside from his defensive inconsistencies, he isn't an offensive juggernaut either. He's a strong functional/positional offensive player, not a fabricator or enabler on offense, not a bonafide creator of play.

If we make the playoffs, it will be because Romanov (or someone else) will be at least as good a #3 as Petry is, or better, bolstering the top 3. If both Petry and Weber were top 20, we wouldn't need that bolstering to make the playoffs. Adding a #3 at minimum would send that d-corp to contention level, which is not what will happen IMO.

I'd say us making the POs will depend mostly on the forwards, not so much the defense. We could have a third line of Toffoli-Danault-Armia, or Armia-KK-Anderson, that's some pretty good depth up front and definitely enough to drive this team forward into the POs.
The defense just needs not to be putrid.

 

[McGuires Corndog]

Dynamic blue line, I didn’t realize we had a bunch of comedians running the show.

 

[Deebs]

Much like the team as a whole, our defense corps will be more effective in the playoffs than the regular season. Not that it will be poor but better built and equipped for that style of hockey.

 

[Habs Halifax]

Really? How would they have done that with a 2.54 GF60 and 2.10 GA60??
Mete and Weber were 2.85/1.85 and was not considered even close to how you described the Kulak-Petry pairing of this year...

And last year (18-19), Kulak-Petry were 3.01/3.01.

I'd like to see the numbers with Kulak/Petry in two approaches...

Down the stretch for the 18/19 season and 2020 playoffs
vs
19-20 regular season

 

[Habs Halifax]

I'd say us making the POs will depend mostly on the forwards, not so much the defense. We could have a third line of Toffoli-Danault-Armia, or Armia-KK-Anderson, that's some pretty good depth up front and definitely enough to drive this team forward into the POs.
The defense just needs not to be putrid.

Two glaring differences with me from regular season to playoffs.... Results were night and day difference to me.

Regular season where forwards turning the puck over before our blue line and puck stays in adding pressure on our D over and over again
vs
Playoffs where the Trident stepped up (well rested at that point) and our coaches addressed the issue of turning the puck over before the blue line with the forwards.

I think we will be very solid at 5/5 this year... even more than the last two years. However, it will come down to Suzuki and KK as centers and how we perform on special teams. In tight games, we probably loose if we can't score on the PP and we allow some on the PK.

 

[HankyZetts]

Gonna be a lot of "surprised" fans when they are forced to see how good Romanov is.

The defense is clean, y'all don't know what you're talking about.

 

[Kents polished head]

If you thought Richardson was exciting (and dynamic), wait til you hear what's in store for tomorrow's zoom call!!!



Question they'll never ask:

"Francis, can you tell us how you became Development Coach for the Habs straight after you retired, without at the time, doing your classes in the minors or learning about the leading coaching techniques from around the world?"

Oh, you're good friends with Bergy. And Geoff liked you? I see.

What a "dynamic" transition.

... I think if anyone has a clue about optimizing a player's development, it's Francis Bouillon. The guy had no tool coming into this league and still held his own for more than a decade. Not sure what you're whining about.

 

[Runner77]

Nolan Pratt is assistant coach for the Avs, not development coach. He was also assistant coach in the AHL. You seem to be mixing those up.

I'm well aware, I'm not mixing anything up. I was only using him as an example of starting at a lower station and making your way up.

I don't know of any field where doing your classes, expanding your expertise is a detriment. It is common knowledge that NHL teams tend to hire on the basis of friendships. I'm merely suggesting that Bouillon would have been better served by taking a lower level coaching assignment. Just my opinion, I don't expect you to agree.

 

[Treb]

I'm well aware, I'm not mixing anything up. I was only using him as an example of starting at a lower station and making your way up.

I don't know of any field where doing your classes, expanding your expertise is a detriment. It is common knowledge that NHL teams tend to hire on the basis of friendships. I'm merely suggesting that Bouillon would have been better served by taking a lower level coaching assignment. Just my opinion, I don't expect you to agree.

Two completely different roles with two different standard of experience league wide.

Anyway, agree to disagree.

 

[Kriss E]

Two glaring differences with me from regular season to playoffs.... Results were night and day difference to me.

Regular season where forwards turning the puck over before our blue line and puck stays in adding pressure on our D over and over again
vs
Playoffs where the Trident stepped up (well rested at that point) and our coaches addressed the issue of turning the puck over before the blue line with the forwards.

I think we will be very solid at 5/5 this year... even more than the last two years. However, it will come down to Suzuki and KK as centers and how we perform on special teams. In tight games, we probably loose if we can't score on the PP and we allow some on the PK.

I don't put any weight on the previous ''playoffs''. It was a stretch of 10 games or so, the Pens looked like absolute garbage, everyone came back from months of confinement, no camp, in a bubble where many players didn't even want to be there, etc.
This wasn't your typical PO year.

I look at our regular season, that is more representative of our team than the bizarre PO Covid tournament.

The biggest thumbs up for our defense during the POs was the solid play of Weber/Chiarot. There is no way those two can keep up the same pace they had in the POs where they became very hard to play against. It ain't happening over a longer period of time.
So, I really don't put much on our defense. I think they'll be okay at best, our success will come from the offense and Price.

 

[Habs Halifax]

I don't put any weight on the previous ''playoffs''. It was a stretch of 10 games or so, the Pens looked like absolute garbage, everyone came back from months of confinement, no camp, in a bubble where many players didn't even want to be there, etc.
This wasn't your typical PO year.

I look at our regular season, that is more representative of our team than the bizarre PO Covid tournament.

The biggest thumbs up for our defense during the POs was the solid play of Weber/Chiarot. There is no way those two can keep up the same pace they had in the POs where they became very hard to play against. It ain't happening over a longer period of time.
So, I really don't put much on our defense. I think they'll be okay at best, our success will come from the offense and Price.

I don't agree that there is "no way" the Trident can provide the same impact. Especially when guys like Edmundson and Romanov are inserted in. I think many in our fan base is underrating our team D this coming season.

 

[Grate n Colorful Oz]

The number of names on this list is inflated by including guys that once we're better than Petry is now, guys that may in the future be better than Petry is now, and guys that had an outlier career year better than Petry. Also some guys that put up good numbers but suck defensively, which seems to be your argument against Petry.

I entirely disagree. What the players on the list have in common, except for a few, is they are all better defensively than Petry RIGHT NOW, and the rare ones that don't are more purely skilled offensive players.

At least use examples or else it's just a blanket statement.

And then there are the ones I didn't include in the list but are arguably better or equal to Petry, or very soon to be.

Saying he's close to top 20 is pure homerism.