Toggle sidebar

Player Discussion Juraj Slafkovsky discussion

  • Xenforo Cloud has upgraded us to version 2.3.6. Please report any issues you experience.
  • We are currently aware of "log in/security error" issues that are affecting some users. We apologize and ask for your patience as we try to get these issues fixed.
Non Player Canadiens said:
agree, but i don't think he needs to be that super-brainy player to be effective. just forecheck like crazy, park your ass in front of the net on the PP, throw a few goods hits per game, bam.
Click to expand...
He'll become a much better player when he accepts he's not a high skill or cerebral player. He's dominant when he keeps his game simple and uses his monster size to his advantage, like you described. He just needs to accept who he is.
 
  • Like
Reactions: The Great Weal, Grate n Colorful Oz, DAChampion and 2 others
SlafySZN said:
That last sentence is just… not true at all.
Click to expand...

he does do it when he drives the play. I just don't see him opening the ice for players without driving the play and using his body. He should play the game like a power forward and not a play maker. He's at his best when he's physical, drives the net, and wants to bang pucks in. He is a below average 1st line winger when he's playing along the perimeter. I feel like we see two versions of slafovsky and one has elite potential, a game breaker. The other slafovsky is an average winger.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SannywithoutCompy
Tyson said:
Slaf need to be on a line where he drives the play. I swear I would put him with Beck and Heineman and let them play.
Click to expand...
Question then becomes who do you put on top line? Some people keep complaining about Slaf being gifted this spot but it's not like we have a lot of options. Armia and Anderson have not proven anything. Only true candidates are Laine Newhook and Heineman and they all have negatives tied to them (hole at C, liability at ES or still finding rhythm after injury)
 
  • Like
Reactions: Tyson
Nedved said:
I can't handle how he's positioned on the boards when we have puck possession. they need to change this problem. he needs to shift the front of the net and someone slide into his board position. it makes zero sense. he's the worst play maker on his line and needs to cause traffic and be a menace. he did for a couple games and went perimeter mode again for most the night.
Click to expand...
I think his playmaking is actually pretty impressive. But I agree with your overall point. He needs to go to the net. We don’t have enough guys who do that.
 
BargainBinSpecial said:
This contract will break HuGo, I swear. Anyways, a 95.5 mil. caphit makes it manageable, but this player has Alexandre Daigle written all over him. The contract will come with high expectations and the player will be quite the expensive third liner.
Click to expand...
Holy hyperbole. I don’t think another forward selected 1OA has ever been less comparable to Daigle and he’s 4th in points on the team as a 20-year-old sophomore. If you want to call that 3rd line upside I don’t know what to tell you.

The sky is always falling with some of you, it’s f***ing absurd.
 
  • Like
Reactions: habdynasty, SlafySZN, The Gr8 Dane and 1 other person
Victoire HuGo said:
So much wrong with this post, holy.
Click to expand...
We will see. Time will tell. Like I said with the high caphit, contract becomes manageable. Gally and Anderson have 2 yrs left and I expect Price to be traded to a team trying to reach capfloor, Gally goes on LTIR and the Habs will have another bad contract for 8 yrs, mind you not as bad as Anderson's 7 yrs, Price's 8 yrs at 80 mil., Petry's and Gallagher's.
 
  • Like
Reactions: HabsMD97
DAChampion said:
That's almost certainly not true of most star forwards.
Click to expand...

Depends on what one considers "breaking out"... And what constitutes "star player".

Top 20 scoring forwards right now:

MacKinnon (jump @22yr old season)
Drai (from 77/70pts prior to 105 @ 23)
Kuch*
McD
Connor*
Patrnak
Marner
Eichel*
Scheifele*/Rantanen/Keller*
Necas*
Hegel*
Bratt*
Hughes
Crosby
Reinhart*
Panarin*
6 fwds tied at 65pts (Nylander*, Point*, Suzuki*, Stutzle, Robertson, Raymond*)

I'm working from assumption that top 20 in scoring = "star" (very fair to argue it's a smaller, or larger #, and to argue there are "star" forwards that might score a bit less but contribute in other ways.. have to draw a line somewhere & Im sure if one changes the cut-off it will have some impact on the ratio...)

Before looking at #'s, I'll randomly assign "breakout" to mean 70pts+ (or equivalent of .85ppg in 65+ game season). Same applies re. Setting a different cutoff...

* = players whose first 70pt+ season (or .85ppg in 65+ game played season) came at 23 or older

So about 14 of 24 players making up the top 20 forward scoring this year saw their first high scoring season come at or after 23...

** Did this quick and dirty, may have miscounted a year here or there, but frankly if it's 22 vs 23 vs 24 I think the point remains relevant...
 
  • Like
Reactions: Victoire HuGo
PavelBrendl said:
Holy hyperbole. I don’t think another forward selected 1OA has ever been less comparable to Daigle and he’s 4th in points on the team as a 20-year-old sophomore. If you want to call that 3rd line upside I don’t know what to tell you.

The sky is always falling with some of you, it’s f***ing absurd.
Click to expand...
I beg to differ, we talk in 2 yrs.
 
Lots of people get hated on here cause they dont believe in his potential. I’m still a believer but concerns are legit. Next year gonna be super important for him.
 
So in the end....if power forwards break out much later on...what made us so sure that he was the breaking out type of player so that you give him a contract like that? I really thought we were done as an organization about bad contracts....Even if the guy ends up a 50-point player...that contract is bad nonetheless...
 
Whitesnake said:
So in the end....if power forwards break out much later on...what made us so sure that he was the breaking out type of player so that you give him a contract like that? I really thought we were done as an organization about bad contracts....Even if the guy ends up a 50-point player...that contract is bad nonetheless...
Click to expand...
The answer is that Hughes would rather pay a little more up front than a lot more later on. It makes perfect sense to do this.

Now, there’s always the possibility that it blows up in your face but Hughes signed him after he had a great year. Most of the board was happy with it at the time.

I think when all is said and done that deal will be a bargain for us. Cap is going up, much of that contract will include prime years… under eight? Yeah, I’d definitely do that deal today.
 
Lafleurs Guy said:
The answer is that Hughes would rather pay a little more up front than a lot more later on. It makes perfect sense to do this.

Now, there’s always the possibility that it blows up in your face but Hughes signed him after he had a great year. Most of the board was happy with it at the time.

I think when all is said and done that deal will be a bargain for us. Cap is going up, much of that contract will include prime years… under eight? Yeah, I’d definitely do that deal today.
Click to expand...
The question is not about signing a big contract. You could sign a big contract with Hutson today 'cause the kid GOT it and proves it. Juraj was a question mark at first. Hughes said that he was a player not for now, but for the future, so what if you sign him for 2 years at a bridge contract so that he has no other options but to prove he deserves more? clearly the kid needs regular kick in the butt. A big contract from the get go removes that kick in the butt option...
 
Whitesnake said:
So in the end....if power forwards break out much later on...what made us so sure that he was the breaking out type of player so that you give him a contract like that? I really thought we were done as an organization about bad contracts....Even if the guy ends up a 50-point player...that contract is bad nonetheless...
Click to expand...
First off, i think it's very premature to slap a ceiling on him at this point and there is zero doubt that 50 points is his floor. I did a long post a while back but if he's a late 60s ish point producer. This contract will end up being a bit under market value.

Now is there merit to question you asked of why the rush? Certainly. But if alternative you have in mind is a bridge after ELC those rarely end well for the team
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Ad

Ad

Top Bottom