Rumor: NOT AGAIN Carbo met with Habs Management?

[Runner77]

No rookie coaches. Next year has to be our year to go for a cup. We can't waste it training somebody on the job.

I wasn't suggesting he was an option for the Habs now. I merely mentioned that he sounded like a reasonable guy who feels like he's ready to take the jump.

 

[Lafleurs Guy]

Bold? Fleury gave stellar netminding? Eh. Generally speaking, you need a starter to play like one. People give Boucher and other hopefuls all the credit in the world because he didn't get good goaltending and should be given benefit of the doubt. Same with a lot of guys really.

MT got average to above average goaltending while he was there.

I did mess up though, there is another season where they make his club makes the playoffs with average goaltending. In '07 Pittsburgh gets a shade above the league average in save percentage. Crosby gets 120 points that year and they make the playoffs

In '08 Fleury's incredible and they make the playoffs and go all the way to the finals.

In '09 they get average goaltending and fall out of a playoff spot.

Each year they are outshot. 2009 is particularly terrible. Bylsma takes over and that team immediately goes top ten in both shots for and against for the next few seasons. They also go on to win the cup.

They don't win that cup if they don't fire him and there's a good chance that Therrien cost them a cup in 2008.

Hitch is a well respected coach and he absolutely would be an improvement but he's still not a great coach IMO. He's a tier above MT and as is a guy like Martin. Nothing wrong with him though. Just not my style.

A while back I was really high on this guy but now I'm not so sure. You could do a lot worse for a cup run though and I'd say he's a lot better than Martin was.

I wouldn't oppose Boucher either. My only issue is the notion that he's a savior or any coach is. A lot of people want MT gone and say we'd do better but few are willing to straight up say that with a healthy price said coach can make us win a cup or bring us to the finals. If a new coach brings us to 2nd or 3rd round like MT or god forbid less then what makes him better? Because he plays X player people like more or less?

What makes him better? How about the fact that most coaches:

- Are better at player development
- Are better at special teams
- Are infinitely better at roster mgmt
- Are infinitely better systems wise
- Can adjust on the fly (ie will double shift, shorten the bench etc...)
- Gets the most out of their team and gives the team a better chance to win.

That's the difference.

I already know when Eller is still a 3rd liner with a new coach we'll hear how "It's too late, MT ruined him" or if Galchenyuk isn't a superstar...same story. Man...he's mismanaged some players but the excuses will be golden.

You are missing the point. The point is that he's mismanaged these players. He's never gotten the most out of them and he's limited their potential.

I will not sit here and say that Eller could've been a legit second liner. I suspect he could've been though. I think he could've been a Thomas Plekanec type guy. Instead MT put him in a box and we'll never know.

As for Galchenyuk, again we're needlessly stunting his growth. Everyone from Mackenzie to Ferraro, to Marinaro to everyone here knows it. It's the worst kept secret in the NHL. So again... could this guy have been a legit number one for us the past two seasons? I guess we'll never know....

As for Eller, it IS too late. He's 26 years old and he's a career 3rd liner now. That's it for him.

If you inherit MT as a player and you're 22 or 23... good luck. He's going to kill your career. If you're 18 and the coach has a shelf life of four years, you can recover from it. I suspect Galchenyuk will be given a real opportunity when MT leaves. If he isn't, then I'll rip the next coach we hire. Simple as that.

This is what I said about MT in 2013:

I thought he had a little more time in him(I was wrong) but unless they make an epic comeback and make playoffs he's finished IMO.

We never, ever should've hired him.

 

[deandebean]

Heard an interview with Pascal Vincent this week. He's been assistant coach with the Jets since 2011. Sounds like a smart, level-headed guy. Apparently well appreciated by the players. Of course, when you're assistant coach, you're more of a confidant for players, you don't have decision-making ability about critical player issues, like playing time. Vincent, now 44, mentioned that he feels he is ready for a coaching position, whether with the Jets or elsewhere.

Not a fan of Vincent. Sweet talker, to me, that's about it.

Ben Groulx SHOULD be with the organisation. His son will be in major junior (high pick) next season, won't need his daddy (divorced) anymore. Ben will be free to go.

 

[Bourne Endeavor]

Didnt he have Vinny, st louis and Stamkos ?? He would really have to trap with the habs lineup.

He did, with Stamkos having the best season of his career under Boucher. Unfortunately, Tampa's defense at the time was laughably bad, which is why he employed the 1-3-1 system that has basically blacklisted him ever since.

 

[Souffle]

Horrible with young players

I don't know if that's true. At least, my recollection is different. He got value out of some players who never really went on to match it elsewhere. Which is unusual for Montreal.

Higgins was his best under Carbonneau. A legitimate 1st line LW. Plekanec had his best offensive season under Carbonneau. AKostitsyn actually looked like the player he was supposed to become from the 2003 draft. SKostitsyn also was developed into something here, even though he was young for Montreal's standards and a late round pick. Latendresse and Lapierre gave good minutes. Komisarek emerged as a force when he was here.

I guess Perezhogin is the example of how bad he was at developing young players. We could debate that, though. But who else? I haven't gone back to check rosters and all that, so I must be forgetting other examples. Maybe I've even mis-remembered the positive ones I gave above.

 

[mitchmagic]

Higgins was his best under Carbonneau. A legitimate 1st line LW.

Whoa whoa whoa. Higgins has never been a legitimate 1st liner anywhere.

 

[WeThreeKings]

Whoa whoa whoa. Higgins has never been a legitimate 1st liner anywhere.

He was great for his first 3 years here.. always good for 20-25 goals.

 

[mitchmagic]

He was great for his first 3 years here.. always good for 20-25 goals.

Highest point total was 52. 7th in points on the team. Was also playing on the 2nd line that year.

 

[LyricalLyricist]

He did, with Stamkos having the best season of his career under Boucher. Unfortunately, Tampa's defense at the time was laughably bad, which is why he employed the 1-3-1 system that has basically blacklisted him ever since.

No it wasn't. It's a lie people keep spewing over and over.

How is Hedman, Kubina, Ohlund, Brewer as a top 4 laughably bad?

Ohlund was considered a top pairing guy...that's why TBL gave him a 7 year contract.
Brewer was a deadline acquisition and a top 4 at the time.
Hedman was 20 years old and probably better than Beaulieu is to us now.
Kubina was easily a top 4 at the time too.

The rest were rounded out by veteran D like Clark and journeymen like Lundin, MAB.

Guess what, we have Pateryn and Barberio playing for us.

The D was fine. Their goalie wasn't spectacular but they had Mike Smith and said he wasn't good enough for them and went with Roloson instead. Mike Smith's stats went a lot higher as soon as he left Tampa.

So yah, let's not exaggerate. Tampa just had a bad season and Yzerman didn't like the style they were playing so he fired Boucher.

 

[Souffle]

Whoa whoa whoa. Higgins has never been a legitimate 1st liner anywhere.

Well, depends on what we mean by that. In 2007-08 he finished 23rd in scoring among LWers. His 27 goals put him at 13th league-wide. Top 10 in shots and PPG.

To me, that's a 1st line LW calibre season. But I'm fine with saying that it was just a good season for a top 6 forward. It doesn't really make a difference to the argument.

Under Carbonneau, he was becoming a good scoring winger -- developing nicely as a 14th overall pick. He has never duplicated that season or arguably even the one previous, where he missed 20 games.

The real point, using Higgins as one example, is that I'm not convinced that Carbonneau was "horrible with young players".

 

[SirClintonPortis]

Playing with Koivu sure padded his stats.

 

[capebretoncanadien]

Do you remember watching Higgins though?

Absolute hands of stone.

Like Almost Bourque and Ryder near the end of his first stint with the Habs.

No finish whatsoever.

 

[macavoy]

Ok, guys, if I give you the choice to complete the season as an interim between Lefebvre and Carbo, who would you take?

Lefebvre so he also gets replaced in St John's and he would better help the tank

 

[Souffle]

Do you remember watching Higgins though?

Absolute hands of stone.

Like Almost Bourque and Ryder near the end of his first stint with the Habs.

No finish whatsoever.

I do remember, and I think you are exaggerating. He had speed. He liked to shoot. And he went to the net. It's true he missed chances -- could've scored a lot more goals than he did. But I'm not sure how much of that we should hold against him in this conversation. He generated shots and chances and scored some goals. To miss a scoring opportunity often means that you had a hand in creating one.

Anyway, I don't want to argue whether he was good, great or whatever. Just observing that he was a young player on the upswing of a promising career but that it never got better for him. And that goes back to the question of whether Carbonneau really was horrible with young players.

 

[JayKing]

Just denied meeting Bergevin privately on l'Antichambre. There was a party for the company FX at the Bell Centre and he was there as well as Bergevin, Therrien and a bunch of other ex players.

 

[Kriss E]

No it wasn't. It's a lie people keep spewing over and over.

How is Hedman, Kubina, Ohlund, Brewer as a top 4 laughably bad?

Ohlund was considered a top pairing guy...that's why TBL gave him a 7 year contract.
Brewer was a deadline acquisition and a top 4 at the time.
Hedman was 20 years old and probably better than Beaulieu is to us now.
Kubina was easily a top 4 at the time too.

The rest were rounded out by veteran D like Clark and journeymen like Lundin, MAB.

Guess what, we have Pateryn and Barberio playing for us.

The D was fine. Their goalie wasn't spectacular but they had Mike Smith and said he wasn't good enough for them and went with Roloson instead. Mike Smith's stats went a lot higher as soon as he left Tampa.

So yah, let's not exaggerate. Tampa just had a bad season and Yzerman didn't like the style they were playing so he fired Boucher.

Ohlund? He only played 2 seasons in TB and his last one was during Boucher's rookie year. He wasn't near to the great Ohlund of the Canucks days though. He scored 0 goal in TB during his 2 seasons.
Kubina was traded to Philly during Boucher's 2nd season. He was on a clear decline and never played in the NHL after that season, like Ohlund btw.
Brewer, also, was on a decline, which is why St-Louis traded, but yea, a top 4.
Hedman, you said it, was 20. He was nowhere as good as he is now. Comparing him to Beaulieu isn't making your case, even if slightly better. He was not a top pairing guy, and yet, they had to use him there.
Boucher had to use freaking MAB as a top 4 D.

So ya, there's no exaggeration, TB had a terrible defensive group.

 

[Grate n Colorful Oz]

Ohlund? He only played 2 seasons in TB and his last one was during Boucher's rookie year. He wasn't near to the great Ohlund of the Canucks days though. He scored 0 goal in TB during his 2 seasons.
Kubina was traded to Philly during Boucher's 2nd season. He was on a clear decline and never played in the NHL after that season, like Ohlund btw.
Brewer, also, was on a decline, which is why St-Louis traded, but yea, a top 4.
Hedman, you said it, was 20. He was nowhere as good as he is now. Comparing him to Beaulieu isn't making your case, even if slightly better. He was not a top pairing guy, and yet, they had to use him there.
Boucher had to use freaking MAB as a top 4 D.

So ya, there's no exaggeration, TB had a terrible defensive group.

Not only that, but their centerline wasn't great defensively either, you need a good centerline to have a good defense.

IMO Boucher would do wonders with the team here. He's not perfect, but he's way more cerebral than Therrien. He's also a good communicator and knows some of the players on the team. If we're picking from the French pool only, Boucher is my pick, by a mile, unless Julien or Vigneault gets the boot by season's end, which I wouldn't bet on.