What world is any line Plekanec on considered a "2nd line on any given night"? Plekanec is a black hole of offense and will somehow drag Galchenyuk down with him. The guy is an overpaid bottom-six center that's a defensive specialist.
If you actually look at the lineup you posted with Hudon on the top line, Hemsky in the top-six, Galchenyuk and Gallagher on the 3rd line playing with freakin' Plekanec and your ???? = Streit, Davidson, Jerabek, Morrow as our options and think that's better than what we went into last season with than I don't know what to say.
At least last season we had the optimism at the time of Beaulieu getting a legitimate shot and still having a formidable top-4 consisting of Markov, Weber, Beaulieu and Petry and the prospect of a full 82-game season of Pacioretty-Galchenyuk together, along with Radulov, Gallagher, Lehkonen joining the club, Plekanec (before he lost any offensive skill he ever possessed in a single summer), etc.
it still wasn't good and Price went on two separate superman runs, but it's still better than what we have now...
I don't know if the team is any better, but I wouldn't claim it is automatically
much worse as some are doing.
I'm curious to see how the D will share up with so many changes and additions.
I expect to have a better defensive D than last season with the departure of both Emelin and Beaulieu.
I don't expect to have a better D at skating the puck up the ice as we have had in the past, even once Subban had been traded. Beaulieu was perhaps the best skating D on the team, with all the brain farts on and off the ice that came with the man. Subtract those and he is still here, no doubt.
I'm less concerned with the skating up the ice part because most -- if not all -- our Ds are tagged as possessing a good first pass and being mobile along the blue line. Also, with Price's puck-handling skills, our Ds always look at least slightly better than they would on another team without a G that can kill opponents' offensive forays before they become established in the zone.
I'm really hoping that Bergevin can add a top-6 C without poaching Drouin (22), Galchenyuk (23), Pacioretty (28), Lehkonen (21) or Danault (24) from his lineup in the process.
I'm also hopeful that the incoming C will be 27 yrs-old or less to get enough prime years playing with our younger forward core. A younger C than that with strong indications of success at the NHL level would also warrant trading away 1st rounders and such futures, as it did for Drouin, IMHO. You lose out on potential prospects and prospect depth in the short run, but you gain an established youngster in the process that will play long enough to replenish the prospect pool and won't go through the hit or miss development process.
A veteran C can more easily be had for a playoff push at the trade deadline at an affordable price in terms of assets without touching the core players in your NHL lineup.
I expect Montreal to have added a key piece to their lineup (ideally up front) by the All-Star Game and for the trade deadline to be an interesting period of the year as we gear up for the playoffs.
I wouldn't be surprised to see Gallagher traded as part of a package for that addition to our lineup by the All-Star Game and even less surprised to have an onslaught of Bergevin-bashing as a result on these boards. I'm also plenty reassured that there will have been plenty of bashing before an eventual trade bolsters the lineup.
Impatience from the fan base present on these boards is somewhat unsettling and unrealistic. One minuscule move is generally portrayed as the end-all move for the GM and insistence on living in the moment precludes anything else from possibly happening. It just becomes ironic how the GM is called out as being short-sighted while the reactions on the boards to individual moves are exactly that -- Short-sighted!
Is the team currently definitely better? IMO, no. Does that mean it is condemned to remain that way throughout the season. Only to support posters' arguments if their end game is to be stoically negative to their dying breaths.
You can remain optimistic while being realistic that miracles won't necessarily happen. However, building a winning team takes timing and opportunity. That's where patience kicks in as those two tenets for success usually don't materialize -- for every missing piece on a team -- in the same three-day window.
Too much melodrama and sarcasm on these boards that make leaps in logic to justify end-of-days scenarios; Hemsky preferred to Radulov statements and other such nonsense. It's obvious that, from a hockey standpoint, Bergevin would have preferred Radulov in the lineup, but we are made to waste time on such asinine statements time and time again.
When one points out absurdities like these, they are painted into a corner as pro Bergevin disciples and there inevitably isn't any discussion developing afterwards.
It's somewhat annoying to see.
