HF Habs: The Martin St Louis Thread

[Habs]

Out of curiosity, who do you think Montreal's 2nd line is?

Because the bigger issue is that Montreal doesn't really have one ATM.

It's a mix of whoever on the first line isn't hurt., and this is going to be the Dach problem. He will do well on a first line, he may need a lot more hockey to lead a second line after a year off. We are in an odd time because what Dach are we going to get in the end?

 

[Captain Mountain]

It's a mix of whoever on the first line isn't hurt., and this is going to be the Dach problem. He will do well on a first line, he may need a lot more hockey to lead a second line after a year off. We are in an odd time because what Dach are we going to get in the end?

The plan going into the season with everyone healthy was to have a top-6 all under the age of 27 and a D-core with only two guys over the age of 23.

Its not just Dach. Montreal's in transition and they're trying to make room for young guys. Guys who have missed time due to injury and lack experience. That was always going to put a relatively low ceiling on the team even if everyone is healthy.

With injuries, Montreal's actual 2nd line this season has been Gallagher-Evans-Anderson. And (unfortunately) that's by merit, not favouritism. But it doesn't mean that line wouldn't work in the bottom 6, its that it shouldn't be the 2nd line.

 

[pepperMonkey]

Then it isn't parity when your San Jose's and Anaheim's are AHL level.

Parity doesn't mean 'ACTUAL' parity...if that is the case no team would be ahead of the other and no team would win because everyone is equal (other than by luck and randomness). Parity just means that all things being equal, generally speaking, most teams should have a fair chance of being, well, fairly competitive. Not that they 'will' be on par with each other. Our D squad as a whole is closer to being an AHL-level D than the top team's D squad.

 

[Lafleurs Guy]

So you agree they are hot garbage? That's all I'm saying , our bottom lines are dysfunctional and an unacceptable collection of pleebs that need to GTFO so we can improve.

Uh, no.

Im saying they’re like most other club’s bottom six. I’m not sure why you think they suck… Now overpaid? That’s another story.

And yes, we’re going to improve our botttom six in the coming years. Beck, Roy, Hage Dmeidovv, Laine…. we’re going to have to make room for those guys and I think we’re on our way to having a great top nine. But it’ll take some time.

We are handcuffed with them in place, and won't make the next step until we can ice a different, more aggressive look after lines 1&2

Bottom six is the least of our worries man.

I don't mind Evans at all, and if we aren't complaining bout money then Anderson will fill some bottom minutes this year. But seriously this blueline is really bad, and without Guhle atrocious. MM has a role if he's insulated, Hutson obviously and Arbs looks like he needs a session with Dr Phil for his PTSD. The rest are bottom dwelling blueliners that need to disappear and are all replaceable shortly. Struble is 'meh' as a 5-6 , nothing special at all.

The blueline is inexperienced. It’s a transition year. You’re right, it’s going to be bad this year. But who cares? We’re not winning anything now anyway.

 

[Lafleurs Guy]

Out of curiosity, who do you think Montreal's 2nd line is?

Because the bigger issue is that Montreal doesn't really have one ATM.

With Slaf out, we really don’t. And we don’t have Roy so that doesn’t help and us putting Armia there is brutal.

I think by the end of the year that’ll be solved though. Laine and Dach will be there and Roy will be depth.

 

[Sorinth]

Our system right now is pretty much man-to-man, with a mix of zone defense, and we're running the 1-2-2 that most teams similarly do, sprinkled-in with some amount of neutral zone pressure and whatnot. It's not rocket science.

But the way we set defensive attributions, and the lack of clarity when it comes to it all since what St. Louis advocates for (or at least did before this year) is basically a type of "position-less" hockey most prevalent in the NCAA, with some limitations suited to the NHL games (a focus on center responsibility).

All of which means that players need to make reads on the fly a lot of the times instead of having more specific roles to play on the ice.

All teams play positionless hockey to varying degrees, yes some teams will try to switch back to the natural positions as early as they feel they can safely do it while others including us are less strict about when to make the switch.

Like you say it's not rocket science and while different systems might ask players to make more/better reads and therefore be impacted more by hockey iq or lack thereof, I feel like the whole thing is getting overstated. If you lack hockey iq you are going to struggle no matter the system in place.

The trade-off here is that if everybody is up to speed, then we have more flexibility both offensively and defensively since our F1s, F2s, and F3s can change on the fly and our D can permutate as well. This frees-up a lot of ice to produce offense and many variations that lead to increasing scoring.

Inversely, since adapting requires reading the play at all times, it also adds a time variable to the processing of the game for our players. Meaning that if they aren't able to react very quickly (aforementioned high requirement on hockey sense) then they actually lose tempo vs. a simpler, slightly more rigid and less flexible gameplan.

So yeah, St. Louis' system actually definitely requires more out of our players when it comes to hockey sense vs. what is most common in the NHL right now.

That system works in the NCAA, and might eventually make it to the NHL as more than the "side concept" that it is now, but that time hasn't come yet given how structured of a game eventual Stanley-Cup winners have been playing basically since the end of the 1980s.

Sure but like I said the requirements are getting overstated, if you can't process the game and make reads you're going to struggle, no system will change that.

Then comes the second part of your post.

And frankly I kind of agree in a sense. Since we're shooting for an effective gameplan once our personnel turnover is done there's no need to "cater" to our existing players per se and we should instead try to institute the gameplan that will be most conducive to wins when our roster is eventually deep and strong enough to actually contend.

But then again, the mark of a good coach is to be able to win no matter the circumstances and get the best out of his team. You don't need to adapt the system that much to the roster if you can just do some small tweaks and be "good to go".

That very inflexibility (or unwillingness to change) in strategy is one of the factors that actually characterize bad coaches from good ones.

And also, ask the Oilers, the Sabres, and other such teams' fans how much losing their focus on winning has cost them in the long term, and how much longer their rebuilds have had to be because of it.

At the end of the day you need to eventually right the ship and start going, or you get stuck in the mud, lose traction, and have to do it all over again. And that requires winning some hockey games, which requires both better personnel, but also at least competent coaching.

The mark of a good coach isn't to win no matter the circumstances because sometimes like the past few years the goal/direction of management wasn't to get the most wins but to teach and develop the players for long term success. And in such situations sacrificing long term development for a few extra points is the sign of a bad coach.

Now it's true that most of the time coaches are hired to be fired so they focus on short term goals like winning the most games possible because they are expecting in a few years to be let go no matter what and will be more likely to be hired if they can point to those extra wins they squeezed out. But that doesn't seem to be the relationship Hughes has with MSL which is a good thing.

Now at some point yes we will want/expect the coach to focus more on the short term where wins matter more and it's certainly a question mark whether or not MSL will be able to make that adjustment, but until the mandate from management changes to be win no matter what we can't say one way or another. I would point out that this year there has been some change in terms of team expectations (In the mix), and we have seen MSL make adjustments so it's not like we can say that MSL is inflexible, but the jury will be out for what is likely to be quite some time.

 

[Gaud]

If your system needs creative players with high hockey IQ to be anywhere near via ble then your system is pretty trash.

A coaching scheme/system is supposed to be there to make the most of your players' strengths and try to win more games.

If you can't adapt to the roster at hand and need only a certain kind of players then you shouldn't be anywhere near an NHL coaching gig. Or you should, as a tank commander.

Not disputing that - though i tend to abstain from extremes (lol maybe the system is only half trash since only half hte people dont fit in it, and its not totally exclusive).

Just observing that the broad concepts seem to be about players going "beyond" their traditional roles and that 1 on 1 D requires IQ, play reading and good communications. I like the ideas he puts forward, but i anticipate that we will see MSL adapt his strategy to be more inclusive to players that are inflexible in that regard (I think of Anderson who seems to need X and Os on a board to be effective)

 

[Just this once]

People should take into account that the loss of Monahan was pretty big and it's not clear Dach can replace him. Centers are often stabilizing factors so that they would disorganized is a bit normal. I still think MSL's system is not great, but it's not the reason for the current chaos. Also Mailloux is learning and need adjustments.

 

[The Real Timo]

People should take into account that the loss of Monahan was pretty big and it's not clear Dach can replace him. Centers are often stabilizing factors so that they would disorganized is a bit normal. I still think MSL's system is not great, but it's not the reason for the current chaos. Also Mailloux is learning and need adjustments.

Moneyhands scored 2 last night... jus' sayin'.

 

[HabsAddict]

Come here little Marty...

Do you see how a professional coach prepares his team to play at full speed? Why? Because he's a PROFESSIONAL coach and you're learning on the job that was given to you...and you never earned.

Maybe one day we get a REAL coach too

 

[RealityBytes]

One right in their own backyard - Vincent.

Carbo, Groulx, Ian Lapierre, Julien,

... and why would you think they would be better? They would have to show they are better and want to do it. They all could end up being worse.

 

[Naslund]

This thread...

 

[Vachon23]

So if MSL is to go, who do you replace him with?

Who is better, available, and willing to come here, as well as being someone who speaks French and satisfies the French media??? List a few.

If there is no one who satisfies the criteria, then MSL is the best they can get and he stays.

Andre Tourigny or Jim Montgomery are probably gonna be the next Head Coach when they will be available

 

[Paddyjack]

... and why would you think they would be better? They would have to show they are better and want to do it. They all could end up being worse.

I wonder if a coach who has years of experience coaching at every level including the NHL could do better than a coach whose experience was pee-wee....

Seriously guys, I'm not saying to fire MSL, we are not making the POs anyway. But heck, don't tell me you really believe no one could do better.

 

[le_sean]

Another game in the span of less than two weeks where he doesn’t react at all to a team clearly unraveling. He’s in way over his head. This team is lost.

 

[Rapala]

This thread...

30 goals against in the last 5 home games when we have last change.

It isn't normal and it isn't acceptable.

 

[le_sean]

This thread...

Are we not allowed to critique him? I don’t understand. I’ve seen Habs teams whose #1 defenceman was Patrice Brisebois look far better defensively. What we are seeing is not normal.

 

[HabbyGuy]

Are we not allowed to critique him? I don’t understand. I’ve seen Habs teams whose #1 defenceman was Patrice Brisebois look far better defensively. What we are seeing is not normal.

I'd love for you to show us the D corps when Brisebois was our #1 D (who's better than anyone else we have right now) and compare it to the corps we're icing at this moment.

Not normal indeed.

 

[le_sean]

I'd love for you to show us the D corps when Brisebois was our #1 D (who's better than anyone else we have right now) and compare it to the corps we're icing at this moment.

Not normal indeed.

You’re the guy that said the team looked good for one shift at 2-0 so it was smart not to take a timeout.

But sure, I’ll entertain you. In the strike shortened season, the Habs were 17th in goals against, middle of the pack. They had such stalwarts as Brisebois, Odelein, Daigneault, Racine, Schneider and Fogarty on defence. Real elite group.

The 1998-99 Habs. Brisebois, Malakhov, Quintal, Ulnaov, Weinrich, Rivet. 13th in goals against. Another amazing group of HOF talents.

Right now we are 2 goals away from being with the Sharks who are going to be a historically bad team. Lots of improvement since he’s been coach I see.

 

[RealityBytes]

I wonder if a coach who has years of experience coaching at every level including the NHL could do better than a coach whose experience was pee-wee....

Seriously guys, I'm not saying to fire MSL, we are not making the POs anyway. But heck, don't tell me you really believe no one could do better.

Of course someone else could be better but you can't just throw anybody into the position because you think they might be better. It's that we need to find one that looks better by having better results AND is available AND wants to be here AND in Montreal's case, someone who speaks French. It's not an easy find. So many coaches with great expectations have been used through out the years with most ending up as duds. Even if you find one that fits, it still doesn't guarantee results. Look at Mike Babcock with the Leafs for instance, didn't pan out.

Could MSL coach the Florida Panthers to wins?? If so, then it is time to realize it's not just MSL, but also the lack of talent with the players as well.

 

[sampollock]

Too much of a Mr Nice guy
The honeymoon is over it's time to lay the lumber

 

[teamfirst]

''C'tun match dur a evaluer, va falloir que je r'garde la game.......j'te reviens avec ca''

Can't even evaluate a hockey game from behind the bench

 

[HABitual Fan]

I don't expect Marty to be fired, he'll eventually step down or be promoted to some invented job in the organization. I'll just keep my fingers crossed that Boston keeps losing. This will be a repeat of when Julien became available, it being the final nail in the Therrien coffin. If Montgomery is available Hughes pulls the trigger quickly.

 

[HabbyGuy]

You’re the guy that said the team looked good for one shift at 2-0 so it was smart not to take a timeout.

But sure, I’ll entertain you. In the strike shortened season, the Habs were 17th in goals against, middle of the pack. They had such stalwarts as Brisebois, Odelein, Daigneault, Racine, Schneider and Fogarty on defence. Real elite group.

The 1998-99 Habs. Brisebois, Malakhov, Quintal, Ulnaov, Weinrich, Rivet. 13th in goals against. Another amazing group of HOF talents.

Right now we are 2 goals away from being with the Sharks who are going to be a historically bad team. Lots of improvement since he’s been coach I see.

If you can't see that both those corps of D you listed are vastly better than what we iced tonight, then I don't know what to tell you. Despite the fact that they weren't that great to begin with actually shows you just how bad our current iteration is.

Because quite frankly it's not even close.

 

[HabsAddict]

In situations like these the GM will make a dumb move to save a dumb coach.