MT doesn´t like Lars Eller and it´s hurting the team in the process

[Et le But]

It's not that they want to keep DD this bad, it's that he may not have a good value outside of this team and there's nobody that can take his place.

On even strength? Maybe, like him or not, Desharnais is still a producer on a team that's not stacked with them. It's ridiculous people want to trade him for scraps.

On the power play, Desharnais has been the first wave's weak link outside of faceoffs.

 

[ECWHSWI]

Facts:
- David Desharnais is a better offensive scorer than Lars Eller.
- Lars Eller is a better defensive player than David Desharnais.
- David Desharnais has made the most of his PP opportunities. -> PP going downhill since DD is on the first wave
- Lars Eller has not made the most out of his PP opportunities. -> Despite Eller not being a PP producer, PP was among the best when he was getting PP time
- Montreal scoring across the board has dropped this season compared to last season. -> Habs were better offensively when DD was relegated to a secondary role
- David Desharnais is having a great 2014 offensively. -> if DD was to keep a PPG pace till the end of the season, it would NOT be enough for a 60 points season, so your opinion of him being great has to be taken very lightly.
- Lars Eller is not having even an average 2014 offensively.
- David Desharnais is constantly accused of needing skilled wingers to score.
- Lars Eller is constantly excused for poor offence because he doesn't have skilled wingers with him.
- David Desharnais has been benched this season for poor performances.
- Lars Eller has not been benched this season for poor performances.
- When David Desharnais was not scoring, people wanted him off the team.
- When Lars Eller is not scoring, people are ready to defend him.
- Lars Eller has had very good games with Galchenyuk and Gallagher, but he also had poor performances with them.
- Lars Eller was unable to produce with Tomas Plekanec and Brian Gionta.
- Since 2014 began, Lars Eller has had weaker offensive production than Ryan White, Brandon Prust and Rene Bourque.
- The last three games Eller received powerplay time (Pittsburgh 1:57, Boston 2:04, Carolina 0:54) he squandered it.

Do you dispute any of this?

The problem with Eller supporters is they continue to compare him to David Desharnais. He shouldn't be comparing himself to DD. He should be comparing himself to Tomas Plekanec. That's the spot he's going to want to take since DD's only a benchwarmer for when Alex Galchenyuk is ready to become a center. Right now all Eller has proven is he can be carried by better wingers and play admirable defence. He has failed miserably proving he can make offence happen himself and when given PP time in 2014, there were no results.

It's the Montreal Canadiens. Lack of results should lead to benchings. You do not deserve a place over another player just because you have a higher ceiling. You only deserve it when you produce. Eller hasn't produced. He hasn't been benched. If he wants to be a top six center for this team, and if you want him to be a top six center for the team, stop looking at Therrien. Start asking why Lars Eller has less points in 2014 than Ryan White.

DD beg to differ.

 

[Winter Eclipse]

Yes.

Yes.

Yes.

Ok, so do you think that Galchenyuk is a better replacement for DD, Eller, or Plekanec in the Center spot?

You're arguing semantics. Do you realize how useless that is? A franchise center for most people means a center who will be your #1 go to guy for a couple of years. You can't be a franchise center for 1 year. That's the general consensus on the meaning of the words franchise center.

I know. There's a difference between being "...your #1 go to guy for a couple of seasons..." and:

There have been a maximum of ten NHL franchise centers over the past 20 years....and Desharnais and co. are not among them that's for sure.

I'm not arguing semantics, I was actually using the baseline definition, not the "Hall of Fame" definition

As for this baseline definition, it's been established that many posters have argued that DD has been our most productive Center this season, and now we have this:

Desharnais was the team's most productive center the season before (which was 82 games) ..why not bring that up as well?

So we now have an argument that DD has been our best Center for 2 straight full seasons, sounds like he's on the path to franchise center, no? And if that's not good enough:

Since starting the season with 1pt in 19 games. David Desharnais is up to .85 pts/game which puts him on par with Pavel Dastyuk #TSN690

 

[Goldthorpe]

Galchenyuk can.. they are just too "omg rookie" to give it a chance.

Who play LW then? Desharnais? It wouldn't work.

 

[Goldthorpe]

So we now have an argument that DD has been our best Center for 2 straight full seasons, sounds like he's on the path to franchise center, no? And if that's not good enough:

Not really, no. Franchise center refers to franchise player. Desharnais obviously isn't a franchise player. The fact that he is the most productive one doesn't change a thing. There's more to be an exceptional hockey player than simply scoring points.

 

[LyricalLyricist]

Who play LW then? Desharnais? It wouldn't work.

Galchenyuk plays wing because he can. Eller doesn't look good on wing and I'd bet DD looks the same.

Essentially, Galchenyuk is on the wing not because they don't see him as a center but because our wingers suck and no center swap-winger would be as good as the current situation.

The habs really need to address our winger issue IMO.

 

[Hoople]

Honest question........

Is it against the rules to post the link to the latest DD bashing thread here?

If it is not, I would like to post it since there is nothing different here on the Eller thread than in the DD bashing thread.

 

[Goldthorpe]

Galchenyuk plays wing because he can. Eller doesn't look good on wing and I'd bet DD looks the same.

Essentially, Galchenyuk is on the wing not because they don't see him as a center but because our wingers suck and no center swap-winger would be as good as the current situation.

The habs really need to address our winger issue IMO.

Agree 1000%. Especially the last part. We have a wingers problem, not a centers one.

 

[Winter Eclipse]

Not really, no. Franchise center refers to franchise player. Desharnais obviously isn't a franchise player. The fact that he is the most productive one doesn't change a thing. There's more to be an exceptional hockey player than simply scoring points.

Like?

 

[pepperMonkey]

Ok, so do you think that Galchenyuk is a better replacement for DD, Eller, or Plekanec in the Center spot?

You don't quit do you?
Yes, Galchy has ALL the tools to be a better replacement than all our C's.
Yes, Galchy has all the potential to be our future franchise player.
But, what you seem to always ignore is that he's still a kid who needs to develop more. He's just not ready to be a #1 C nor is he a franchise C YET.

 

[Goldthorpe]

Like?

Defensive play? Board play? Endurance? Competitiveness? Leadership? Is this a real question?

A franchise player is a player you want to keep forever in your franchise because he's a cornerstone, someone you can't replace easily or at all. Desharnais isn't even the best center in the habs; Plekanec is, and he's not even a franchise player himself.

 

[WeThreeKings]

Galchenyuk plays wing because he can. Eller doesn't look good on wing and I'd bet DD looks the same.

Essentially, Galchenyuk is on the wing not because they don't see him as a center but because our wingers suck and no center swap-winger would be as good as the current situation.

The habs really need to address our winger issue IMO.

DD has done it in in the past and he looked just the same as he does at the center position.

 

[pepperMonkey]

So we now have an argument that DD has been our best Center for 2 straight full seasons, sounds like he's on the path to franchise center, no? And if that's not good enough:

DD has been the top offensive C by default. Not because he has all the virtues of being a great C (or even a good C), let alone being a franchise C. DD is a placeholder till Galchy is ready to become #1 C. Doesn't matter how many years DD holds the position. If he holds it for the next 10 years it just means that Galchy for whatever reason, never lived up to expectation and the management couldn't find a solution for the C position. A franchise player is someone who you build a team around because that player is good enough to spearhead the team. We aren't building around DD. We have a hole in the #1C and DD just happens to be the least bad choice. And please, don't argue that we are building around DD because we aren't. We haven't been trading to find 1st line wingers to play with DD. We haven't been drafting players specifically to play with DD. All we have been doing to moving players we already have to maximize Patches potential.
Frankly, on this team we only have one legit current franchise player in Price, followed closely by a possible near future franchise D in Subban (can be debated that he already is one) and a possible future franchise C in Galch.
DD is NOT a franchise player nor will he EVER be. Period. End of discussion.

 

[pepperMonkey]

Is this a real question?

I'm starting to think he's just trolling us for some unknown reason...it's getting rather ridiculous.

 

[Goldthorpe]

DD has been the top offensive C by default. Not because he has all the virtues of being a great C (or even a good C), let alone being a franchise C. DD is a placeholder till Galchy is ready to become #1 C. Doesn't matter how many years DD holds the position. If he holds it for the next 10 years it just means that Galchy for whatever reason, never lived up to expectation and the management couldn't find a solution for the C position.

There's also the possibility that Galchy develop nicely, we trade someone else (say Eller) and acquire a genuine top-6 winger instead.

If Galchy ends up the first line two-way center we envision, then it push the other centers down. Plekanec is fine playing the though minutes for us right now, but he would be even better facing second and third liners behind a better offensive center than him. Desharnais would then end up playing against the scrap, which is precisely his specialty. He could remain an offensive specialist with us for years to come.

 

[LyricalLyricist]

DD has done it in in the past and he looked just the same as he does at the center position.

How many games has he done it for? And no, he did not look the same. I get your joke but it shows your bias.

 

[Lafleurs Guy]

On even strength? Maybe, like him or not, Desharnais is still a producer on a team that's not stacked with them. It's ridiculous people want to trade him for scraps.

On the power play, Desharnais has been the first wave's weak link outside of faceoffs.

You wouldn't get anything but scraps for him.

 

[Winter Eclipse]

Would you consider Galchenyuk to have a better combination of the attributes you listed?

Yes.

You don't quit do you?
Yes, Galchy has ALL the tools to be a better replacement than all our C's.
Yes, Galchy has all the potential to be our future franchise player.
But, what you seem to always ignore is that he's still a kid who needs to develop more. He's just not ready to be a #1 C nor is he a franchise C YET.

DD has been the top offensive C by default. Not because he has all the virtues of being a great C (or even a good C), let alone being a franchise C. DD is a placeholder till Galchy is ready to become #1 C.

See, here's the contradiction I'm seeing. On one hand, you've argued that Galchenyuk has a better combination of the offensive qualities you outlined as necessary for being a #1C.

But now, you're saying that Galchenyuk, despite your own evaluation of him as superior in the offensive skill sets desired in a #1C, isn't ready to replace DD. I don't follow the implicit, unstated logic you've used to argue that the less skilled offensive player has defaulted to the #1C position, despite the fact that you yourself have argued that Galchenyuk currently has better offensive attributes than DD.

Simply put, what underlying assumption have you made that results in defaulting to the less skilled player being the optimal default choice?

 

[Goldthorpe]

Simply put, what underlying assumption have you made that results in defaulting to the less skilled player being the optimal default choice?

Because Galchy is an even better winger compared to our wing depth than he is a center compared to our center depth.

 

[Fazkovsky]

While Eller is playing bad, Gallagher is playing well and Galchenyuk might burst soon. Gallagher is playing almost 20 minutes a game and creating offence and being good in front of the net.

a player plays to his full potentiel WHEN HE GETS ICETIME. You develop when you play good minutes PERIOD. Stop shuffling lines and giving less then 15 minutes to young players. Galchenyuk is starting to feel more confortable to shoot and Pleky will set him up soon enough. We seem to find the perfect winger for Plekanec well guess what there is a reason we picked Gally in top 5, let him play with our best center.

 

[Hoople]

See, here's the contradiction I'm seeing. On one hand, you've argued that Galchenyuk has a better combination of the offensive qualities you outlined as necessary for being a #1C.

But now, you're saying that Galchenyuk, despite your own evaluation of him as superior in the offensive skill sets desired in a #1C, isn't ready to replace DD. I don't follow the implicit, unstated logic you've used to argue that the less skilled offensive player has defaulted to the #1C position, despite the fact that you yourself have argued that Galchenyuk currently has better offensive attributes than DD.

Simply put, what underlying assumption have you made that results in defaulting to the less skilled player being the optimal default choice?

Let me spell it out to you in a more plain fashion.

Imagine that you are dating two women. One is your ideal image of what your wife will be like and you can imagine the future with her. However, she is limited with regards to the amount of time she can spend with you right now.

The other is someone that you cannot imagine spending the rest of your life with but she is free to do anything you want whenever you want at any time of the day or night and she's not so bad that you have to hide her from your friends.

One is Galchenyuk. One is DD.

Edit.........Eller is the girl who you call when none of your friends are available to go down to the local pub and grab a beer.

 

[pepperMonkey]

Let me spell it out to you in a more plain fashion.

Imagine that you are dating two women. One is your ideal image of what your wife will be like and you can imagine the future with her. However, she is limited with regards to the amount of time she can spend with you right now.

The other is someone that you cannot imagine spending the rest of your life with but she is free to do anything you want whenever you want at any time of the day or night and she's not so bad that you have to hide her from your friends.

One is Galchenyuk. One is DD.

Edit.........Eller is the girl who you call when none of your friends are available to go down to the local pub and grab a beer.

Although I have already told him a number of times, it seems it hasn't sunk in yet. Your analogy is good but let me modify it to make it more related to what I was trying to explain...
so taking your description, with my edits in bold...

Imagine that you are 23 (or pick any age over 20) and have met two females. One is your ideal image of what your wife will be like and you can imagine the future with her. However, she is just 16 yrs old. Too young, needs some maturing. A few years before you can date her assuming she grows up to fill in to her potential.

The other is someone that you cannot imagine spending the rest of your life with but she is free to do anything you want whenever you want at any time of the day or night and she's not so bad that you have to hide her from your friends.

One is Galchenyuk. One is DD.

Edit.........Eller is the girl who you call when none of your friends are available to go down to the local pub and grab a beer.

That should do it. If that explanation isn't enough...I have no idea what would.

 

[Alexdaman]

DD has been the top offensive C by default. Not because he has all the virtues of being a great C (or even a good C), let alone being a franchise C. DD is a placeholder till Galchy is ready to become #1 C. Doesn't matter how many years DD holds the position. If he holds it for the next 10 years it just means that Galchy for whatever reason, never lived up to expectation and the management couldn't find a solution for the C position. A franchise player is someone who you build a team around because that player is good enough to spearhead the team. We aren't building around DD. We have a hole in the #1C and DD just happens to be the least bad choice. And please, don't argue that we are building around DD because we aren't. We haven't been trading to find 1st line wingers to play with DD. We haven't been drafting players specifically to play with DD. All we have been doing to moving players we already have to maximize Patches potential.
Frankly, on this team we only have one legit current franchise player in Price, followed closely by a possible near future franchise D in Subban (can be debated that he already is one) and a possible future franchise C in Galch.
DD is NOT a franchise player nor will he EVER be. Period. End of discussion.

I guess points don't count when you want to make it in the NHL

 

[SnapVirus]

Dd > Eller

 

[Alexdaman]

Youppi doesn't like Eller and it's hurting Therrien in the process.