Zilo44
Registered User
- Jul 4, 2012
- 1,472
- 2,055
This. Awesome outcomeIf Hutson scored, we did not have Damidov, don't we ?
This. Awesome outcomeIf Hutson scored, we did not have Damidov, don't we ?
This. Awesome outcome
Well I liked Poehling because of his NCAA career and WJC tournament. The NHL game meant nothing to me. He did pretty well in the NCAA rarely playing with good linemates. In his last season i believe he mostly was on a line with his brothers who were not that good.Hutson played two dominant games against a full Detroit squad fighting for their playoff lives.
Poehling had a couple lucky goals against a AHL version of a Toronto roster who had nothing to play for.
People were hoping for something from Poehling based on a couple games in a WJC. Hutson has been the best defenseman in college hockey two years in a row.
They aren't the same type of prospect at all and trying to reduce what Hutson did because Poehling had one exciting game is classic Habs fans not believing we can have anything good.
Well I liked Poehling because of his NCAA career and WJC tournament. The NHL game meant nothing to me. He did pretty well in the NCAA rarely playing with good linemates. In his last season i believe he mostly was on a line with his brothers who were not that good.
Maybe some fans got over the top hype from that game, but I think plenty of more rational fans saw it for what it was even at that very moment: an awesome game and a great moment for the kid.He showed pretty clearly that at best he was going to be a 3C and he ended up being a rotational 4th liner. Pretty median outcome for a guy like that. The one game gave people hope there was top 6 offense in there but there never really was, none of his offensive tools were all that good.
I think there was potential to be a low end 2nd liner but by the end of his 1st season it was looking more and more unlikely.He showed pretty clearly that at best he was going to be a 3C and he ended up being a rotational 4th liner. Pretty median outcome for a guy like that. The one game gave people hope there was top 6 offense in there but there never really was, none of his offensive tools were all that good.
Maybe some fans got over the top hype from that game, but I think plenty of more rational fans saw it for what it was even at that very moment: an awesome game and a great moment for the kid.
What he could become, I hoped he would become a regular sooner and with us. It is a little bit disappointing to see what Norris has become while he looked worse than Poehling at various points in time while Poehling couldn't achieve anywhere close to that level of success.
Aside from over the top fans, which we will always have in healthy numbers, I don't think everyone was going insane with Poehling.
I think there was potential to be a low end 2nd liner but by the end of his 1st season it was looking more and more unlikely.
Suzuki was not expected to be all that good at that time either. Probably should have been ahead of Poehling but not significantly.Well, he got voted over Suzuki in our prospect pool polls, so there was some insane hype on him for a time.
We all know how I felt about Poehling at the draft - I know some people felt that way. I wish MB would have moved him in that ROR proposal in hindsight.
Suzuki was not expected to be all that good at that time either. Probably should have been ahead of Poehling but not significantly.
Subban had the size and physicality that Hutson will never possess. At the start of his NHL career, Subban was a physical, intimidating force who could control opponents along the boards or box them out in front of the net. He rarely lost puck battles and could deliver devastating open ice hits. Who could forget Subban nearly separating Marchand from his soul:Considering Subban was never good defensively I still think Hutson will have a better career.
Subban had the size and physicality that Hudson will never possess. At the start of his NHL career, Subban was a physical, intimidating force who could control opponents along the boards or box them out in front of the net. He rarely lost puck battles and could deliver devastating open ice hits. Who could forget Subban nearly separating Marchand from his soul:
Regrettably Subban made the decision to bulk up his body which robbed him of his quickness, end to end speed and offensive effectiveness. His legacy would have been much more impactful but for that decision. Probably would still be playing today.
It's a problem when any defenseman gets caught OUT OF POSITION.That's an awful take.
Hutson made the right decisions in that overtime play. First of all, Hutson almost scored the game-winner. Secondly, the shot created a rebound, which got to player #41 from Detroit. Hutson had the choice between poke-checking #41, or turning back toward the dzone. He decided to go for the poke-check, which was the smarter decision considering he was already near the puck, and #41 wasn't even looking at him. Player #41 fell and lost possession of the puck by himself, and Raymond retrieved the loose puck. That was just an unlucky sequence for Hutson. If player #41 had possession of the puck properly, Hutson likely does a successful poke-check, and the habs regain possession of the puck. Thirdly, Raymond passes the puck and races to create a 2 on 1, and despite Raymond being one of the best skaters in the NHL, Hutson almost catches up to him.
Subban had the size and physicality that Hudson will never possess. At the start of his NHL career, Subban was a physical, intimidating force who could control opponents along the boards or box them out in front of the net. He rarely lost puck battles and could deliver devastating open ice hits. Who could forget Subban nearly separating Marchand from his soul:
Regrettably, Subban made the decision to bulk up his body which robbed him of his quickness, end to end speed and offensive effectiveness. His legacy would have been much more impactful but for that decision. Probably would still be playing today.
The real deal? You're asking the million dollar question.One of the best hardest hits ever.
And made even better since the guy getting hit thought he was untouchable.
As for Hutson, Chester do you think he is the real deal, or is the hype a little too much?? Could the kid become our Quinn Hughes?
No, Hutson will never become our Hughes. He will become our Hutson. Which should be more than good enough.
I suspect in 4 to 5 years fans of other teams will be asking and hoping that their undersized defensive prospect may become their team's Hutson.Hutson will become Hutson, but I believe that he can produce like Hughes for Habs.
He have the talent to put really high production. 50-60a, even more is a realistic projection. Hutson can score a lot of goals aswell.
It's a problem when any defenseman gets caught OUT OF POSITION.
He made a bad decision after making a good play initially.
I take Matheson to task when he does the same thing.
You sure have found a handful of good excuses for him though.
Hutson's shit will stink on occasion get used to it.
You're being just as silly as that article with the baseless accusation and histrionics about "belief". It's not faith-based, you know.Hutson played two dominant games against a full Detroit squad fighting for their playoff lives.
Poehling had a couple lucky goals against a AHL version of a Toronto roster who had nothing to play for.
People were hoping for something from Poehling based on a couple games in a WJC. Hutson has been the best defenseman in college hockey two years in a row.
They aren't the same type of prospect at all and trying to reduce what Hutson did because Poehling had one exciting game is classic Habs fans not believing we can have anything good.
Subban had the size and physicality that Hudson will never possess. At the start of his NHL career, Subban was a physical, intimidating force who could control opponents along the boards or box them out in front of the net. He rarely lost puck battles and could deliver devastating open ice hits. Who could forget Subban nearly separating Marchand from his soul:
Regrettably, Subban made the decision to bulk up his body which robbed him of his quickness, end to end speed and offensive effectiveness. His legacy would have been much more impactful but for that decision. Probably would still be playing today.
You're being just as silly as that article with the baseless accusation and histrionics about "belief". It's not faith-based, you know.
No one is trying to "reduce what Hutson did" by simply pointing out that it's premature to read too much into a microscopic NHL sample. It would be just as premature to go into an in-depth analysis of his performance if he had struggled.
It would be a waste Hutson’s skill to pair him with Savard. Savard was a good soldier, he’s no longer needed.It would be a waste of Savard's remaining time here not to pair him with Hutson.
Okay then.You should prepare yourself for disappointment if you expect offensive dmen to not take risks, especially at 3 on 3.
It would be a waste Hutson’s skill to pair him with Savard. Savard was a good soldier, he’s no longer needed.