HF Habs: The official 2023-2024 tank thread

[Miller Time]

Maybe Slaf but no forward on the team is capable of consistently putting up PPG+ imo. They're good players but not gamebreakers.

That kind of certainty and clairvoyance is better suited for the casino, lotto tickets & sportsbooks.

 

[montreal]

I suspect they will beat the Sens who I thought were going to be decent this year but it appears they suck worse then us. A win tonight could move us up to 9th OA but the problem is how much space it will be between 4th/5th OA who I still hold out some hope that we can catch them.

 

[Gravity]

That kind of certainty and clairvoyance is better suited for the casino, lotto tickets & sportsbooks.

Hence the imo....... I watch hockey and I evaluate players just like every other fan. I do not believe we have a perpetual elite PPG forward in-house. You think we may. What is there to debate? Let the cards fall where they may but IMO we need someone elite up front.

 

[SwiftyHab]

Tank is no longer operable. Close this thread down

 

[Miller Time]

Hence the imo....... I watch hockey and I evaluate players just like every other fan. I do not believe we have a perpetual elite PPG forward in-house. You think we may. What is there to debate? Let the cards fall where they may but IMO we need someone elite up front.

I guess I missed the imo... Nope, wasn't there

You don't believe any of our forwards will reach their full potential, I think it remains to be seen.

Not much to debate, indeed.

 

[WeThreeKings]

Hence the imo....... I watch hockey and I evaluate players just like every other fan. I do not believe we have a perpetual elite PPG forward in-house. You think we may. What is there to debate? Let the cards fall where they may but IMO we need someone elite up front.

We may or we may not.

The goal of the organization is to either find a way to acquire one and if they can't, how do they build a contender with what we do have.

So I'll ask you this question - you watched the Colorado Avalanche lose to the Montreal Canadiens the other night. They do provide the talent you mention, in 3 players - Rantanen, MacKinnon and Makar. Now this core did win a cup, but they were a much deeper team than they are today.

When that line wasn't on the ice, which was more than half the game.. that is where they lost the game.

So do you think in lieu of that player you are coveting, if the Habs build a deep enough team, do you think that could create a cup contender by simply having more players on the ice that are capable of generating above average offense than their opponent?

Or do you think that without that player there is no viable path to contention?

 

[habsfan891]

View attachment 805682

This is Cole Eiserman.. for those wondering why he's falling.

I mean his defense at 1 seems low even though he's terrible at it but his offensive metrics should be higher than that imo if he falls to us outside the top 10 I'd laugh myself sick on the way to the podium

 

[Gravity]

I guess I missed the imo... Nope, wasn't there

You don't believe any of our forwards will reach their full potential, I think it remains to be seen.

Not much to debate, indeed.

Maybe Slaf but no forward on the team is capable of consistently putting up PPG+ imo. They're good players but not gamebreakers.

 

[Miller Time]

Maybe Slaf but no forward on the team is capable of consistently putting up PPG+ imo. They're good players but not gamebreakers.

That's a bad take with little grounds to justify it.

 

[WeThreeKings]

I mean his defense at 1 seems low even though he's terrible at it but his offensive metrics should be higher than that imo if he falls to us outside the top 10 I'd laugh myself sick on the way to the podium

Oh yeah I think the risk/reward becomes perfect at a certain point.. but that's a guy who will fall without a big improvement. So that's good for us because we'd be in position to assume that risk even if we don't tank as low as some people are hoping.

 

[Gravity]

We may or we may not.

The goal of the organization is to either find a way to acquire one and if they can't, how do they build a contender with what we do have.

So I'll ask you this question - you watched the Colorado Avalanche lose to the Montreal Canadiens the other night. They do provide the talent you mention, in 3 players - Rantanen, MacKinnon and Makar. Now this core did win a cup, but they were a much deeper team than they are today.

When that line wasn't on the ice, which was more than half the game.. that is where they lost the game.

So do you think in lieu of that player you are coveting, if the Habs build a deep enough team, do you think that could create a cup contender by simply having more players on the ice that are capable of generating above average offense than their opponent?

Or do you think that without that player there is no viable path to contention?

I do think that without a doubt there is value to having a deep roster where all lines can contribute. I think ideally, recent cup winners have had both: a real gamebreaker and quality depth. I am not concerned about quality depth but I believe that to truly move towards sustainable contention, we that piece up front.

 

[WeThreeKings]

I do think that without a doubt there is value to having a deep roster where all lines can contribute. I think ideally, recent cup winners have had both: a real gamebreaker and quality depth. I am not concerned about quality depth but I believe that to truly move towards sustainable contention, we that piece up front.

That's completely fair and reasonable.

I think some people see it as an all or nothing venture and I felt that way before, but when I see so many teams with more than one game breaker struggle to get out of the first round, or make the play-offs.. that building a complete team is a better barometer of success than just having that talented game breaker.

I hope we don't have to choose between both but I think we are at least on a better track than we've ever been because we are looking to have more than enough depth as opposed to a team that was shallow, lacked that high end talent up front, and was buoyed specifically by one of the best goalies to ever do it.

 

[Gravity]

That's a bad take with little grounds to justify it.

I'm just quoting my original post and highlighting the imo. We're talking about players primes here, as entropic of an variable as can be, so there's little to justify an argument either side of the debate other than comparables. Hischier, Debrincat and Johansen have been my comparables for Suzuki, CC, and Dach respectively.

That's completely fair and reasonable.

I think some people see it as an all or nothing venture and I felt that way before, but when I see so many teams with more than one game breaker struggle to get out of the first round, or make the play-offs.. that building a complete team is a better barometer of success than just having that talented game breaker.

I hope we don't have to choose between both but I think we are at least on a better track than we've ever been because we are looking to have more than enough depth as opposed to a team that was shallow, lacked that high end talent up front, and was buoyed specifically by one of the best goalies to ever do it.

That's my concern precisely, having to choose one or the other (depth or gamebreakers) and being content solely with depth.

 

[WeThreeKings]

I'm just quoting my original post and highlighting the imo. We're talking about players primes here, as entropic of an variable as can be, so there's little to justify an argument either side of the debate other than comparables. Hischier, Debrincat and Johansen have been my comparables for Suzuki, CC, and Dach respectively.


That's my concern precisely, having to choose one or the other (depth or gamebreakers) and being content with depth.

Here's one thing I will say.. we may not really know how good a lot of these guys can be offensively until we see the finished product. I do think Hutson may be that guy who turns 60 pt players into 80 pt players, for example. Its possible our superstar is on defense.

 

[habsfan891]

Here's one thing I will say.. we may not really know how good a lot of these guys can be offensively until we see the finished product. I do think Hutson may be that guy who turns 60 pt players into 80 pt players, for example. Its possible our superstar is on defense.

I really hope we get to see a taste of him at the end of the season he's probably the prospect I've been most pumped for since I was a kid

 

[Miller Time]

I'm just quoting my original post and highlighting the imo. We're talking about players primes here, as entropic of an variable as can be, so there's little to justify an argument either side of the debate other than comparables. Hischier, Debrincat and Johansen have been my comparables for Suzuki, CC, and Dach respectively.

I see. I didn't read every post of yours in the thread, simply was responding to the one I quoted.

I don't think there is any justified take that proclaims certainty that none of the current fwds in the org. are capable of being ppg players in the NHL.

Not likely? Sure. Debatable but ultimately purely a matter of opinion.

Not capable? Nonsense unless you add every prospect/young player yet to do so, Bedard included, into that kind of silly conjecture. That's where "opinion" runs smack into the wall of reality.

No debate to be had there indeed.

 

[Gravity]

Here's one thing I will say.. we may not really know how good a lot of these guys can be offensively until we see the finished product. I do think Hutson may be that guy who turns 60 pt players into 80 pt players, for example. Its possible our superstar is on defense.

I certainly wouldn't be against that. If Mailloux or Hutson blossoms to become a stud top10 D in the league, I wouldn't be complaining.

 

[Skip Bayless]

Can someone explain to me “game breaking”? Is that McDavid? PPG?

The ability to take over a game shift after shift and tilt the ice/scorebox. Think of Malkin when he gets angry, or McDavid/ prime Ovechkin.

 

[Heffyhoof]

Maybe Slaf but no forward on the team is capable of consistently putting up PPG+ imo. They're good players but not gamebreakers.

Sorry, Suzuki will shortly when the team catches up to him. PPG is still a good benchmark, but not what it was even 5-6 seasons ago so it's not as crazy to claim.

 

[Sorinth]

winning is hard so I guess I just place more importance on it, over the full season it should sort of even out since you have a team that can't score when it's not 2 players (as I got to believe Monahan is traded), their goaltending seems to be playing over their heads at least imo, they score a lot less then they give up which says a lot as well which is why I feel goal DIF usually tells the tale outside of a team here or there that bucks the trend and say makes the playoffs despite a not so good goal DIF.

We'll see what happens but whenever I do get around to watching them I think we are in for a lot of trouble until the youth gets a lot better.

I would understand if we were in the playoff hunt and people were saying all we have to do is make the playoffs and anything can happen. Then yeah it makes sense to look at RW, but when differentiating between bad and terrible L are probably more indicative since getting to OT is still an accomplishment that the terrible teams will struggle to do.

If our goal differential of -27 makes us "truly terrible", then what category is SJ who are at -94.

Tank is no longer operable. Close this thread down

We are still likely getting a top-10 pick, and people often list Rantanen and Kopitar as guys their teams got through tanking.

 

[KevSkillz4]

Suzuki - 13
Caufield - 15
Guhle - 16
Mailloux - 31

Habs can pick a really really good prospect between 12-14.

Keep calm guys!

 

[Trabdy2]

After losing so many players to injury early in the season I was expecting a Top 10 or maybe even Top 5 pick to really bolster the talent in our prospect pool. Right now I'm starting to think we'll be picking in the ~10-15ish range if we keep our recent play up.

If we can somehow get a late 1st rounder for Monahan I'll be less disappointed if we end up finishing in that 10-15 range with our own 1st rounder.

 

[Tuggy]

Even after the wins/loser points, they are still 9th worst in the league.

 

[montreal]

8th OA by win %.

The good news has been Seattle being red hot, the Flames have won 7 of 10, and we saw how hot the Oilers have been. Wings and Flyers heating up.

The bad new the Yotes, Caps, NYI, have been slipping while the bottom 6 of SJ, Hawks, Ducks, Sens, Jackets, Wild have been shit.

 

[montreal]

I would understand if we were in the playoff hunt and people were saying all we have to do is make the playoffs and anything can happen. Then yeah it makes sense to look at RW, but when differentiating between bad and terrible L are probably more indicative since getting to OT is still an accomplishment that the terrible teams will struggle to do.

If our goal differential of -27 makes us "truly terrible", then what category is SJ who are at -94.

SJ is historic as they could be the worst team in NHL history. I wouldn't want to be in their shoes.

It should even out in time so we'll see maybe they are better then I think they are but if so I don't see how since barely anyone can score goals outside of the top line. Still a lot of hockey left so we'll see how it ends up.

Truly terrible, terrible, bad, it will come down to semantics I'm guessing as it's good to see Slaf show a much better season then his very disappointing rookie year, progress is always what you want to see so if he can be a 50 pt player soon then that would speed things up a bit but there's still so many holes on this roster.

Then you have wait and see who out of all these blueliner they have that you hope you can find one big time star out of the group or two really good ones to go with some just being solid or good then they will be in business. But so far it's hard to say if any will be a real star from the back end or even really good. Or they could have several who knows but for now that blueline doesn't look very good to me.

Ghule has been hyped and I'm a fan but I felt they should have given him time in the AHL to work on his offense, perhaps I was wrong there but I was not as impressed last season in the little I saw at least, compared to the high praise he got around here. He is clearly and NHLer, just I always had concerns over the offense but thought he was an easy lock to be a good NHLer at worst. So right there you know you have 1 D you can build around if need be just a question of how good will he be.

Barron I can't say I'm a huge fan of but I felt he should have had more time in the AHL to get him to work on his defensive game but the offensive game is legit so I can see why as he should be able to stick in the NHL long term due to his tools of offense, skating, mobility, solid frame. I don't think he can handle top ice time and really should be more of a bottom pairing D.

Struble I felt like some were getting carried away with him as he is surprising me by how well he's done in the NHL, it could take a while before we really know what we have in him as I never really believed in the offense and still don't so that could force him to be more of a bottom pairing D.

Harris I have always been a big fan because he's so smart and plays with so much poise. I was very disappointed in how he looked any time i've seen him since the preseason but I hear he's had some good games lately. I feel like this could just be a bit of a Sophmore Slump as I thought he was impressive last year despite how undersized he is. But now I wonder how good will he be as the offense so far has not developed as I had hoped at least not yet. His lack of size is going to be a problem but I am interested to see how much can he progress in the next 4 years.

Xhekaj I felt was getting overrated last year as I thought he would be AHL bound to work on his defensive game, mobility. He's been great in Laval much of the time so perhaps I was wrong there and he was NHL ready as clearly he will be back in the NHL in the not too distant future but I struggle to figure out how good he will be as I like him a lot but he's got holes in his defensive game and he's got to be smart with the penalties.

Looking at that group alone it's hard to project them being very good this or next, of course they could always surprise and perhaps they are now and I just haven't really seen it as I don't watch too much but the little I have seen this year I was not impressed with any of the blueliners which is to say a little concerning.

I also never believed in the goaltending, Allen does seem like a solid backup but I just don't get why they didn't just send him to Laval at the start of the season. Guess they have a plan but the 3 goalie one is not one I can say I ever recall so it's bold.

So am I wrong and the goaltending is better or the young blueliners better then expected, is the offense better then it's shown? If so would you say they make the playoffs next season assuming 90% of the roster is the same.