Do you feel that our roster is top 5 in the NHL this year?
No. Do you?
If I can answer for him.
top-5 goalie with serviceable backup;
top-5 dman and a top-30 dman as no. 2;
A pair of 35 goal scorers on the first line;
Gallagher and Plekanec on the 2nd line;
Eller, Bourque, Gionta on the 3rd line;
Moen, Prust, Weise, Bournival, Briere populating the 4th line;
I think we're doing ok, we're top-5. With the additions of Vanek, Weaver, and Weise, this is the best team we've had in a long time. We would be top-5 in the standings if Vanek had started the season in Montreal.
We're getting closer. We have a lot of pieces and Vanek is a huge one.
We need Galchenyuk to realize his potential.
Really? You would play a raw d-man who is still in the A and another who hasn't cracked the lineup because he needs more careful nurturing.
Over Bouillion? Of course I would! Who the hell wouldn't?
Beaulieu is NHL ready man. He should've been with the team all year long. The only reason he hasn't "cracked" the lineup is because our coach is an idiot.
Yet you're probably one of those fans who complains we don't have management like the Red Wings. And when we do get one that utilizes the Red Wings strategy you complain that he keeps prospects down.
Shut up with the strawman crap.
Challenge me on what I've actually written, not on some fictional crap that you want to make up because you can't come up with a decent argument.
If we brought up Beaulieu & Tinordi this year two brutal things would have happened.
1) We would not have made the playoffs.
2) We would have placed them in over their heads and probably screwed with their development. They weren't ready to take on NHL responsibilities. But again you'll probably argue you know more than MB, Lapointe, Brisebois, Mellanby and Dudley.
1) Dead wrong. We would've been a better team.
2) Beaulieu has proven that he's NHL ready. Without a doubt. He's light years ahead of either Cube or Murray. Tinordi is more raw but he should've been given the whole year to develop.
Regardless... neither Murray nor Bouillion belong in the NHL. And btw, when we signed Murray I was cautiously optimistic that he'd be a decent stop-gap. His not being signed by anyone but us until the 11th hour was a red flag but I was hoping he'd be good. He wasn't. He's absolutely brutal.
the fact that MB kept Chucky & Gally last year tells me he'll keep a player here if he believes he can do the job. Tinordi & Beaulieu he obviously felt were not ready.
I believe this was a coaching decision, not MB's. 'Cause there's no way in the world MB would ask MT to play Cube on the PP for example.
This year MT felt that we should play Bouillion on the PP, play Murray more than Subban on occassion, pair PK with both these clowns and watch his play absolutely plummet.
Sorry but you are making my point for me.
And yet we managed to weasel our way to 4th in the conference. You know there's an expression: the proof is in the pudding. Even though you and Lafleurs Guy are incapable of seeing the value of MB's moves, maybe just maybe the fact that we were 4th in the conference this year and 3rd last year should be two big hints that his moves aren't as brutal as you guys claim.
If the team was floundering, I could understand you guys coming here and criticizing MB. But the team has been good to very good since he took over.
Murray had negative value to us. So did Parros. Briere wasn't as bad but he was basically a non-factor all year long and in his case its no so much that he's a bad player as it has to do with opportunity cost. We could've spent that money a whole lot better somewhere else - ie. Jaromir Jagr.
And you're talking like I've done nothing but trash MB, that's not the case. Some good and some bad. But you're focusing only on my criticisms and pretending that's all I've given towards him.
I think that's a tough argument to make. SJ, BOS, STL, CHI, LA are all a level ahead. Anaheim too, though I have them a notch below those 5. I think Montreal looks particularly good right now: the non-performers (Briere, Eller, Bourque) are looking good at the moment; Desharnais is looking strong; Plekanec is excelling against fundamentally poor (so far) opposition. These guys up against the Getzlafs, Toews, et al would be looking different.
Montreal's more in NY's category, which isn't bad. NYR's got great goaltending, similar (if not better) D, some interesting forwards, but not really at that top tier level.
I agree. Tier two right now.
If Galchenyuk develops some more (would've been nice to see him get more opportunity this year) then that will be another huge piece. I really feel that we've got a better roster than we've shown and that some of our younger players should be getting more opportunities than they are.
