Confirmed with Link: [MTL/DET] Habs acquire Steve Ott from Detroit for 6th in 2018

[Souffle]

The part of Ott's game that has impressed me so far has been his discipline. Bad Ott is a penalty magnet. Picks the wrong time to create energy with a cheap hit or a failed fight instigation. But he's been careful while still being effective on the 4th line.

I have no doubt that people sat down with him when he was acquired and explained his role, including that it would be a rotation. And I'm very confident that he was warned about taking bad penalties.

Anyway, it should be fun to watch in the playoffs. He can go a bit crazy, assuming the refs relax the standards like they usually do.

 

[frapp10]

I'd take him back as the 13th forward next year

 

[crazyd]

I'd take him back as the 13th forward next year

If he keeps it up, sure, I'd take him back.

 

[le_sean]

Why couldn't he be 5 years younger? He's awesome.

 

[the]

Anybody have the clip where's he's preventing Lundqvist from taking a sip from his water bottle?

This guy is awesome...please sign him!

 

[Habs Halifax]

Why can't this guy win a key faceoff for us? I'm a Ott fan and love his energy but wasn't he brought in to help us win key faceoffs?

 

[Goldenhands]

Why can't this guy win a key faceoff for us? I'm a Ott fan and love his energy but wasn't he brought in to help us win key faceoffs?

Indeed, lost alot of key faceoffs yesterday and was a non factor for the most part, I much prefer Mitchell personally..

 

[Adam Michaels]

Indeed, lost alot of key faceoffs yesterday and was a non factor for the most part, I much prefer Mitchell personally..

He wasn't a non-factor. He was hard on the fore-check. He was finishing his checks. He was agitating the Rangers (even Lundqvist and his bottle). He was good on the PK. He played the Steve Ott game.

 

[FerrisRox]

Indeed, lost alot of key faceoffs yesterday and was a non factor for the most part, I much prefer Mitchell personally..

Ott wears #92.

There's no way you could have watched yesterdays game and arrived at the conclusion that Ott was a non-factor.

 

[Ginu]

I love the signing but I'm surprised at the number of times the 4th line got offensive zone starts last night, especially on icings.

 

[417]

Don't know why he's in the lineup ahead of Mitchell

Ott can't skate and he's not that good of a faceoff guy

A bit perplexing to say the least

 

[417]

He wasn't a non-factor. He was hard on the fore-check. He was finishing his checks. He was agitating the Rangers (even Lundqvist and his bottle). He was good on the PK. He played the Steve Ott game.

He can't skate or handle the puck though

Torrey Mitchell can do all of the above but he can actually play hockey.

 

[Adam Michaels]

He can't skate or handle the puck though

Torrey Mitchell can do all of the above but he can actually play hockey.

Yes. I think if Galchenyuk is to be on the 4th line, he needs someone like Mitchell who is the best possible 4th liner to help #27 offensively.

I wouldldn't mind keeping Ott in though. I'd do Galchenyuk-Ott-Mitchell.

If it were to be Galchenyuk-Mitchell-Flynn, it would make for a good 4th line in terms of speed and will be better offensively. And with Mitchell and Flynn out there, Galchenyuk has more freedom because the defensive aspect will be covered by Mitchell and Flynn. And both of those guys are good in the face-off circle. So I'm good with a 27-17-32 fourth line.

However, I really enjoyed Ott last night and have been a fan of his since he was acquired. He could get under the Rangers' skins and add a little edge.

The good news is that neither Mitchell or Flynn stayed on the ice for some extra time after practice tomorrow. The guys who stay after practice are usually the extras. So chances are we might see either or both get in the line-up in Game 2. Remember how those two started the playoffs two years ago against Ottawa.

 

[Deebs]

Yes. I think if Galchenyuk is to be on the 4th line, he needs someone like Mitchell who is the best possible 4th liner to help #27 offensively.

I wouldldn't mind keeping Ott in though. I'd do Galchenyuk-Ott-Mitchell.

If it were to be Galchenyuk-Mitchell-Flynn, it would make for a good 4th line in terms of speed and will be better offensively. And with Mitchell and Flynn out there, Galchenyuk has more freedom because the defensive aspect will be covered by Mitchell and Flynn. And both of those guys are good in the face-off circle. So I'm good with a 27-17-32 fourth line.

However, I really enjoyed Ott last night and have been a fan of his since he was acquired. He could get under the Rangers' skins and add a little edge.

The good news is that neither Mitchell or Flynn stayed on the ice for some extra time after practice tomorrow. The guys who stay after practice are usually the extras. So chances are we might see either or both get in the line-up in Game 2. Remember how those two started the playoffs two years ago against Ottawa.

Mitchell is fine, but I'd pass on Flynn

 

[Adam Michaels]

Mitchell is fine, but I'd pass on Flynn

I'm cool with that as well.

 

[Garry Valk]

Don't know why he's in the lineup ahead of Mitchell

Ott can't skate and he's not that good of a faceoff guy

A bit perplexing to say the least

He is, literally, above average in face offs. So I don't know where you're getting that from. I thought Ott was great.

 

[FerrisRox]

He can't skate or handle the puck though

Torrey Mitchell can do all of the above but he can actually play hockey.

Mitchell cannot play close to the forechecking or physical game that Ott does. To say that he can do all the things Ott can do simply isn't true.

It's also rather silly to pretend Ott isn't good in the circle. He's a pretty decent face-off guy and better than Mitchell in that regard.

 

[417]

Mitchell cannot play close to the forechecking or physical game that Ott does. To say that he can do all the things Ott can do simply isn't true.

It's also rather silly to pretend Ott isn't good in the circle. He's a pretty decent face-off guy and better than Mitchell in that regard.

I prefer the way Mitchell is physical, maybe he doesn't hit as hard as Ott, but he's at least making contact with the player while he has the puck.

Ott makes alot of noise but that's pretty much it most of the the time

As for playoffs...Not sure what team you've been watching this year, but Torrey Mitchell led the Habs in faceoff percentage this year at 54.5%.

Ott was just over 50%...And that includes his number from the wings

Since joining the Habs Ott is at just over 47% and in that same timeframe, Mitchell is at 60%.

Let's not even get into the discussion of Ott's ability WITH the puck, cause he has none. Torrey Mitchell has almost as many points this year (17) than Ott has the last 3 years combined (20).

So how's that for silly?

 

[417]

He is, literally, above average in face offs. So I don't know where you're getting that from. I thought Ott was great.

He is literally BELOW average since becoming a Hab

45 wins vs 49 losses for 47.9% since joining Habs

I don't know where YOU'RE getting your info from.

Ott is great at disturbing...But I prefer players who can actually impact the game with something tangible

 

[Doc McKenna]

He is, literally, above average in face offs. So I don't know where you're getting that from. I thought Ott was great.

58% before the trade

 

[417]

58% before the trade

But it's gone down by 10% since he joined the Habs.

He hasn't shown to be very reliable as a Hab so far and if he can win faceoffs, I don't see much use for him in the lineup as he simply can't keep up anymore

 

[FerrisRox]

I prefer the way Mitchell is physical, maybe he doesn't hit as hard as Ott, but he's at least making contact with the player while he has the puck.

Ott makes alot of noise but that's pretty much it most of the the time

As for playoffs...Not sure what team you've been watching this year, but Torrey Mitchell led the Habs in faceoff percentage this year at 54.5%.

Ott was just over 50%...And that includes his number from the wings

Since joining the Habs Ott is at just over 47% and in that same timeframe, Mitchell is at 60%.

Let's not even get into the discussion of Ott's ability WITH the puck, cause he has none. Torrey Mitchell has almost as many points this year (17) than Ott has the last 3 years combined (20).

So how's that for silly?

So let's see if I have this right ... You are apparently disputing the claim that Steve Ott is better at face-offs than Mitchell after you said that Ott "wasn't a good face off guy."

You then double down on the claim when I said it was silly by pointing out a very specific, exact number for Mitchell when you say he is 54.5 percent in the dot this year, and you go on to say that Ott was "just over 50%." Strange you didn't use an exact number for him like you did for Mitchell.

Let me fill in the blank for you: Ott was 55 percent this year. The year before that he was 55.7 and the year before that he was 56.3. He's been over 55 percent eight time since the 2007-08 season. Mitchell has never in his career been over 55 percent and in fact has been under fifty percent six times in the same time frame.

Again, this is silly, and why you are doubling down on a dumb comment is beyond me.

 

[417]

So let's see if I have this right ... You are apparently disputing the claim that Steve Ott is better at face-offs than Mitchell after you said that Ott "wasn't a good face off guy."

You then double down on the claim when I said it was silly by pointing out a very specific, exact number for Mitchell when you say he is 54.5 percent in the dot this year, and you go on to say that Ott was "just over 50%." Strange you didn't use an exact number for him like you did for Mitchell.

Let me fill in the blank for you: Ott was 55 percent this year. The year before that he was 55.7 and the year before that he was 56.3. He's been over 55 percent eight time since the 2007-08 season. Mitchell has never in his career been over 55 percent and in fact has been under fifty percent six times in the same time frame.

Again, this is silly, and why you are doubling down on a dumb comment is beyond me.

You know whats silly?

Ignoring the fact that Torrey Mitchell was our best faceoff guy this year and continues to be today.

What's even funnier is you glossing over the fact that since joining the Habs, which to me is really all that matters, Steve Ott is at 47%.

In that same time period, Mitchell is at 60%...You can take that smug attitude elsewhere, I couldn't give 2 f***s about Ott's faceoff % with the Wings the last 2 years, I only care about how he's performed as a Hab

And he, just like your take on this, is below average...

A dumb comment? You must of fell and bumped your damn head

Because clearly, you didn't watch last night's game, Steve Ott who you apparently think is the reincarnation of Patrice Bergeron in the dot, finished 4 for 10 for 40% vs the Rags.

Worst amongst Habs centers...But let's ignore that, and focus on his numbers on the wings.

P.S. - when I wrote that Ott was 'just over 50%' and you took offense to me not being exact like I was Mitchell, you should of glossed over that too, because since joining the Habs Ott is at EXACTLY 50%, he's 51 for 51.

And I'll repeat because again, you seem to gloss over important facts, during that same timeframe, since Ott joined the Habs, Torrey Mitchell is at 60% or 60 wins vs 40 losses.

 

[Moose Head]

Ott makes the opposition nervous more so than Mitchell. That's why he's in the lineup.

 

[Corncob]

Ott makes the opposition nervous more so than Mitchell. That's why he's in the lineup.

But he makes me nervous more so than Mitchell as well...