Price and PK and the Elephant

[Lafleurs Guy]

Awful, awful, everything's alway awful.

Imagine if we hadn't made it to the CONFERENCE FINAL!

Imagine if we didn't have Carey Price.

Also, pretty funny the way you gloss over where I write that we had a good roster... You've chosen the strawman route though. Nice work.

Are you capable of articulating why you think MT did a good job? Can you articulate specifically why Therrien deserves credit for our great season?

 

[Sorinth]

Yes, MT should also catch some flack regarding some players indivisual performances, but the team still won, although everyone would've prefferred more scoring from everyone except Patches. Let's say he didn't really tried to spark Eller / Bourque out of their funk by letting them rot together and that is something he needed to address, but then, he had DD - Patch - Vanek carrying the team for a while with Price to seal the deal, and PK QBing like a boss.

Let's say he's lucky he had some talented players picking up the slack for most of the season, and within these talented players, note that I included DD because honestly, other than his first abysmal 20 games, he did put up great numbers, no matter how you want to slice it.

The team is good enough to consistently put up 100pt seasons, so does Therrien deserve credit for getting the expected results? Especially considering only 2-3 players were at the top of their game and everyone else had near career worsts. I'm not sure much credit goes to the coach.

Also regarding your 2nd lineup :

Pacioretty - Plekanec - Parenteau
Galchenyuk - Eller - Gallagher
Prust - Bournival - Bourque
Moen - Malhotra - Weise

I'm not so sure Bournival has what it takes to be a regular NHLer at this point, I believe he's giving 100% and is a hard working forechecker, but he clearly lacks hockey IQ and if I critic Eller for taking weak shot attempts, Bournival is the King of weak shots to the goalie's chest, and Bournival can't make plays with talented players (as demonstrated with his short stint as Vanek's linemate, where he had golden oportunities and didn't do squat). If Bourque had the worst season of his career on Eller's wing, I wonder how disasterous it will be on Bournival's. Just food for thought. Also, I believe the first lineup you wrote to be much better than this one just because of the depth scoring Eller + Bourque *could* produce (not that I think there is actual chemistry between the two, but on paper bothe these players should compliment grealtly). Also, Eller and Bourque clicked during the Playoffs.

As 3rd line C I'd expect around 20-25pts from Bournival, he had a pace of 19pts last season so it's not a great leap for him. He made plays with Gionta and Plekanec so I don't think not scoring with Vanek matters that much.

Bourque seems to score irregardless of his linemates, he was useless with everyone at times so I'm not sure he'd score more/less with Eller. He'll score because he'll get hot, and then he'll suck all the other times. Linemates wouldn't change much for him.

Bottom line is last season Eller and Bourque combined for 42 points. It's certainly possible Bournival-Bourque each hit 21pts and match that total.

Like I said we'd lose some depth scoring but we'd also gain scoring in our top-6 which is honestly way more important for our team. We got 95 points from Desharnais/Plekanec last season, I think Plekanec/Eller would come in around 110-115, so it's a net gain even if we lose some depth scoring.

 

[Lafleurs Guy]

The team is good enough to consistently put up 100pt seasons, so does Therrien deserve credit for getting the expected results?

Very good question. Especially when we did not play like a 100 point team. Even with our weaknesses, our roster is good enough to be the best in the East this year. Its a weak conference and its up for grabs. Galchenyuk should be given every opportunity to show what he can do. We're going to need him if we ever want to actually win anything.

 

[Kriss E]

Awful, awful, everything's alway awful.

Imagine if we hadn't made it to the CONFERENCE FINAL!

Yes exactly. If we hadn't made it to CF, some people wouldn't be blind and they'd quickly notice how Therrien was crap last year.

 

[Kriss E]

To be fair with MT, he used PK with Bouillon to not break the balance of his other pairings, and while it exposed PK a little bit, the team still won games, and that's what's important in the whole scheme. That said, time to move on from washed up vets and bring in the young blood, Beaulieu and Tinordi.

Putting your worst Dman with your best one because you don't want to disrupt other pairings is stupid.
PK-Markov should have played the whole year together.

In then end, I think MT deserves more credit than he's getting as earning 100 points with the lineup he had, with key players going through lenghty slumps and or just underperforming (Eller, Bourque, DD, Gionta and let's not forget Bournival also, that had a pretty underwhelming second half of season, and Prust who didn't contribute much, Moen being a no show, etc). MT's system made up for all these players having a hard time.

Don't you think there's something very off about your reasoning here??
You just said multiple key players went through slumps or under performed (which is an under statement, most of the guys either regressed - stalled - under performed.), not only that but a lot of team stats also show a struggling team which falls in line with our players under performing, and you are crediting the coach for earning us 100pts??
Don't you think it's more logical that our team was carried by a couple of players, not the coach? We were carried by Max, Markov and PK, and most importantly Price. Those guys earned us the 100pts, not Therrien.

 

[Mario le Magnifique]

Putting your worst Dman with your best one because you don't want to disrupt other pairings is stupid.
PK-Markov should have played the whole year together.



Don't you think there's something very off about your reasoning here??
You just said multiple key players went through slumps or under performed (which is an under statement, most of the guys either regressed - stalled - under performed.), not only that but a lot of team stats also show a struggling team which falls in line with our players under performing, and you are crediting the coach for earning us 100pts??
Don't you think it's more logical that our team was carried by a couple of players, not the coach? We were carried by Max, Markov and PK, and most importantly Price. Those guys earned us the 100pts, not Therrien.

That pretty much sums it up and I said it warrant a knock on Therrien, that said I also praised his system that relies on defensive responsibility more than putting pressure to score goals, wich in the end, hinders individual stats for the team profit.

Therrien should've acted to spark Eller / Bourque out of their funk, but IMO putting Markov with Emelin and Subban with Bouillon (when Gorges got hurt) was the right thing to do to maintain balanced and defensively capable pairings on the ice for 80-90% of the time, although we all know that Subban was carrying Bouillon, and that reflects in Bouillon avg ice-time.

I think MT has flaws but his system did work, despite players underperforming. Like you said though, his system is mostly sucessful due to our key players dominating in a big way. And in the end it's always like that, coaches are always dependant on how their key players perform for them. What I like about Therrien is that he is a barking son of a *****, he makes the players work harder and is not complacent. And that's the way a good hockey coach should be, makes players accountable and more responsible. See, coaches like Dan Bylsma are IMO never a good thing, they become their player's best buddies and it creates a comfortable atmosphere, and you kind of always want your players to compete internally, drive them to get better. BTW I loved his approach with Subban, tough love, and Subban might dislike it but in the end that'll make him a better player (always IMO anyways). Take it for what it is, I experienced both types of coaching during my brief career and the hardest ones, the ones you'd hate in your dreams (got me riled up pretty good occasionnaly in practices) were the ones garnering more satisfying end results (winning tournies, championships).

 

[Not The One]

Imagine if we didn't have Carey Price.

Also, pretty funny the way you gloss over where I write that we had a good roster... You've chosen the strawman route though. Nice work.

Are you capable of articulating why you think MT did a good job? Can you articulate specifically why Therrien deserves credit for our great season?

Imagine if NY didn't have Lundqvist, if LA didn't have Quick, if Chicago didn't have Toews, bla bla bla.... talk about strawmen.

He did a good job because his team performed above and beyond all reasonable expectations. What more can you ask?

Yes exactly. If we hadn't made it to CF, some people wouldn't be blind and they'd quickly notice how Therrien was crap last year.

See above. If Therrien was crap then we would without a doubt have won the cup with a better coach, right?

Oh wait, he didn't didn't give enough minutes to some people's mancrushes and gave too much to some others and he disrespected Subban and probably eats kittens in his spare time so he's crap crap crap.

I miss the times I was allowed to feel good about the Habs, and this place wasn't filled with wannabe comic-book guys.

Worst coach/player/GM/team evarrr!

 

[Bourne Endeavor]

Therrien should've acted to spark Eller / Bourque out of their funk, but IMO putting Markov with Emelin and Subban with Bouillon (when Gorges got hurt) was the right thing to do to maintain balanced and defensively capable pairings on the ice for 80-90% of the time, although we all know that Subban was carrying Bouillon, and that reflects in Bouillon avg ice-time.

How is anchoring one of the best players in the league with one of the worst the right thing to do? We essentially neutered our all-star defenseman for a perceived balance that frankly did not exist. Subban struggled more often than not because he was constantly having to correct Bouillon's mistakes. And while Gorges was better, he too hindered Subban due to not being capable enough to pull his weight against top pairing defensemen. Is it at all a coincidence Subban's best stretch of the season was being paired with Markov, a guy he doesn't have to carry?

The very fact Therrien deployed his lines like this is why he warrants criticism.

 

[Lafleurs Guy]

Imagine if NY didn't have Lundqvist, if LA didn't have Quick, if Chicago didn't have Toews, bla bla bla.... talk about strawmen.

You clearly don't know what a strawman is. You should refrain from using the term until you understand its meaning.

They were all good teams with good numbers. We were a good team (not as good as Chicago or LA) with bad numbers. Unlike those teams, our numbers were horrible and we had to rely on goaltending to a ridiculous extent.

So again... how does this mean that MT did a good job?

He did a good job because his team performed above and beyond all reasonable expectations. What more can you ask?

Except we didn't. Our goalie did. Our team played BELOW expectations. Try looking beyond the standings. We were below average across the board except in goaltending. Even our once lethal PP was below average last year.

Again what specifically did MT do to make you think that he was responsible for our success?

See above. If Therrien was crap then we would without a doubt have won the cup with a better coach, right?

Oh wait, he didn't didn't give enough minutes to some people's mancrushes and gave too much to some others and he disrespected Subban and probably eats kittens in his spare time so he's crap crap crap.

I miss the times I was allowed to feel good about the Habs, and this place wasn't filled with wannabe comic-book guys.

Worst coach/player/GM/team evarrr!

Right... 100 points and Eastern Conf final.... that's the extent of your analysis. Thanks for proving my point.

 

[Kriss E]

See above. If Therrien was crap then we would without a doubt have won the cup with a better coach, right?

Oh wait, he didn't didn't give enough minutes to some people's mancrushes and gave too much to some others and he disrespected Subban and probably eats kittens in his spare time so he's crap crap crap.

I miss the times I was allowed to feel good about the Habs, and this place wasn't filled with wannabe comic-book guys.

Worst coach/player/GM/team evarrr!

Ya sure, that's what people are saying. That Therrien is eating kittens. It has nothing to do with being the second worst team in the NHL at ES scoring, seeing our PP struggle, seeing our defense corps be completely disorganized in their zone, having our guys cycle the puck behind our net to the point where they out do it and can't even keep up with themselves turning the puck over, with us having 0 transition game, with turning us into a 1 line offensive team.

None of those things are what was questioned. No. People are saying Therrien was crap because they have a personal vendetta against how he used their favorite playing in NHL2014 on PS or Xbox.

You miss the times you were allowed to feel good about the habs, I miss the time when people that discussed things here actually understood the game.

 

[Mario le Magnifique]

How is anchoring one of the best players in the league with one of the worst the right thing to do? We essentially neutered our all-star defenseman for a perceived balance that frankly did not exist. Subban struggled more often than not because he was constantly having to correct Bouillon's mistakes. And while Gorges was better, he too hindered Subban due to not being capable enough to pull his weight against top pairing defensemen. Is it at all a coincidence Subban's best stretch of the season was being paired with Markov, a guy he doesn't have to carry?

The very fact Therrien deployed his lines like this is why he warrants criticism.

I got your point but take a look at this hypothetic (and pathetic) second pairing : Gorges - Emelin, or Bouillon - Emelin. Neither of those pairings would've been able to handle 20mins a night, but you mix those with guys like Subban and Markov and suddenly they can eat up minutes and be relatively stable defensively, and let their better partner carry the play.

The NHL is all about line matchups and pairing matchups, and a strong first pairing can eat up a good 50% of the ice-time on any given night, but if your second pairing is THAT abysmal, other teams will take advantage of it. Subban was able to hold itand frankly, Bouillon was at least better than Murray in replacement of Gorges, but I would've preferred Beaulieu. I'll give you that, putting your allstar defenseman with your worst dressed D isn't obviously what needs to be done but in hindsight it wasn't too bad, although I understand your criticism.

In other words, the Markov - Subban pairing was great, but as soon as they stepped of the ice the Habs were unable to get out of their own zone, if not by throwing it in the glasses and creating icings / turnovers. With Tinordi / Beaulieu / Gilbert, the Habs defensive corp at least will be able to move the puck when Subban / Markov aren't on the ice.

 

[Kriss E]

That pretty much sums it up and I said it warrant a knock on Therrien, that said I also praised his system that relies on defensive responsibility more than putting pressure to score goals, wich in the end, hinders individual stats for the team profit.

Therrien had no system. We looked terrible in our zone. Just horrible. We were constantly chasing the puck in our own zone, cycling it until we lost it, our transitioning game was very slow and that's only for the rare times we didn't actually dump it out. It was just terrible. I don't think you remember just how bad we looked this year.

Therrien should've acted to spark Eller / Bourque out of their funk, but IMO putting Markov with Emelin and Subban with Bouillon (when Gorges got hurt) was the right thing to do to maintain balanced and defensively capable pairings on the ice for 80-90% of the time, although we all know that Subban was carrying Bouillon, and that reflects in Bouillon avg ice-time.

Therrien should have done a lot of things, most of his players regressed, stalled and under performed. But changing lines wouldn't have necessarily done much, he would have had to actually adjust our game.

I think MT has flaws but his system did work, despite players underperforming. Like you said though, his system is mostly sucessful due to our key players dominating in a big way. And in the end it's always like that, coaches are always dependant on how their key players perform for them. What I like about Therrien is that he is a barking son of a *****, he makes the players work harder and is not complacent. And that's the way a good hockey coach should be, makes players accountable and more responsible. See, coaches like Dan Bylsma are IMO never a good thing, they become their player's best buddies and it creates a comfortable atmosphere, and you kind of always want your players to compete internally, drive them to get better. BTW I loved his approach with Subban, tough love, and Subban might dislike it but in the end that'll make him a better player (always IMO anyways). Take it for what it is, I experienced both types of coaching during my brief career and the hardest ones, the ones you'd hate in your dreams (got me riled up pretty good occasionnaly in practices) were the ones garnering more satisfying end results (winning tournies, championships).

Therrien had no system. We were dumping the puck out left and right, only to chase it down again and again. We played some of the worst hockey in our zone during the season. It was really ridiculous how bad we were at moving the puck and positioning in our zone.
He didn't have a system that relied on his stars, guys like Max-Markov-PK and even Plekanec, didn't have particularly amazing seasons. But they are so good that there's a limit as to how mediocre they can play. They saved Therrien, it's not the other way around. It's not Therrien that constructed a shrewd system for these guys to excel in. There was no system.
As for PK, I disagree. PK started the season looking even better than the previous year. Then Therrien started the public bash fest, PK started struggling. The season ends, PO starts, Therrien can't stop throwing flowers at PK. First time since he's been here that he compliments PK so openly and directly. PK becomes his old self again.
So no I don't think his ''hard ass'' approach worked. I expect he will be singing a completely different tune next year.

Therrien didn't do good. He had a few guys really save his ass and mask the obvious.

 

[Bourne Endeavor]

I got your point but take a look at this hypothetic (and pathetic) second pairing : Gorges - Emelin, or Bouillon - Emelin. Neither of those pairings would've been able to handle 20mins a night, but you mix those with guys like Subban and Markov and suddenly they can eat up minutes and be relatively stable defensively, and let their better partner carry the play.

The NHL is all about line matchups and pairing matchups, and a strong first pairing can eat up a good 50% of the ice-time on any given night, but if your second pairing is THAT abysmal, other teams will take advantage of it. Subban was able to hold itand frankly, Bouillon was at least better than Murray in replacement of Gorges, but I would've preferred Beaulieu. I'll give you that, putting your allstar defenseman with your worst dressed D isn't obviously what needs to be done but in hindsight it wasn't too bad, although I understand your criticism.

In other words, the Markov - Subban pairing was great, but as soon as they stepped of the ice the Habs were unable to get out of their own zone, if not by throwing it in the glasses and creating icings / turnovers. With Tinordi / Beaulieu / Gilbert, the Habs defensive corp at least will be able to move the puck when Subban / Markov aren't on the ice.

While I will concede our second, and especially the third, pairings left more than a little to be desired. This is where playing rookies becomes advantageous. Instead of anchoring Subban with Bouillon, why not pair him with Beaulieu? Sure, Beaulieu would make mistakes, however his confidence would be through the roof. He's playing with one of the best defensemen in the league. Not to mention, Subban was in his exact same position four years ago and would be arguably the most ideal mentor. That would serve to ground Subban, which this organization seems intent on doing, and develop a fledgling defenseman.

Beaulieu - Subban
Markov - Emelin
Gorges - Weaver/Diaz

It's better simply because Bouillon isn't on the team.

This hearkens back to arguably the biggest criticism people have of Therrien. He doesn't not play rookies/youth in positions to succeed, or at the expense of veteran talent. While I could see the merit in Tinordi going back to the AHL last season, Beaulieu was more than ready to step into the NHL, especially given how we deploy our lines. Even the third pairing gets ample minutes. Other teams have done so to great effect. We, on the other hand, bury our youth on depth lines (Galchenyuk, Eller) or in the minors (Beaulieu).

I will say, if there is one thing I will commend Bergevin on going into this season, it is the apparent intent to do away with that paradigm. So I hope to hell we do not sign Bouillon.

 

[Bourne Endeavor]

Also, to provide some context to just how decisively average we actually were last season.

Goals Per Game: 2.55 (21st)
Goals Against Per Game: 2.45 (5th)
5 on 5 Goals For/Against Ratio: 0.99 (16th)
5 on 5: 136 (21st)
5 on 4: 42 (15th)
Powerplay: 17.2 (19th)
Penalty Kill: 85.1 (4th)
Shots Per Game: 28.4 (24th)
Shots Against Per Game: 31.0 (22nd)
Faceoffs: 49.6 (17th)
Blocked Shots: 1491 (1st)
Missed Shots: 942 (17th)
Giveaways: 646 (13th)

Excluding defensive statistics, we were the epitome of average. Now compare that to the season prior.

Goals Per Game: 3.04 (4th)
Goals Against Per Game: 2.58 (14th)
5 on 5 Goals For/Against Ratio: 0.99 (5th)
5 on 5: 99 (5th)
5 on 4: 35 (4th)
Powerplay: 20.7 (5th)
Penalty Kill: 79.8 (23rd)
Shots Per Game: 30.6 (9th)
Shots Against Per Game: 26.9 (5th)
Faceoffs: 49.7 (17th)
Blocked Shots: 702 (14th)
Missed Shots: 580 (9th)
Giveaways: 394 (12th)

The most shocking thing about this is how radically different we were from one season to the next, yet the only really hindrance in 2013 was our woeful penalty kill. We were above average for the most part defensively but scored at a pace that only Pittsburgh had us thoroughly beat at. I also feel this flies in the face of those claiming Therrien did not alter his system. You do not get the degree of change we witnessed without overhauling what you've done previously.

Now before anyone says Eastern Conference finals. I'll point to the fact Price and Subban played substantially better, the former holding us in games, in particular against Boston in the early going. We also had contributions from Bourque that no one could accord for. None of that could be said in our series against Ottawa.

What I will say about Therrien, is he does have a unique opportunity to prove himself as a worthwhile coach by blending both systems into a slightly altered variation. If he can manage to replicate our offense from 2013 without hurting our defense too much and not making us so wholly reliant on Price. I will openly commend him. That, to me anyway, is his challenge because as it stands, this team can score and play offensive hockey. We chose not to last year.

 

[TRG]

Honestly, the only thing that scares me is if Therrien reaches his usual shelf life. It could put us in a bad spot to make the playoffs.

 

[Bourne Endeavor]

Honestly, the only thing that scares me is if Therrien reaches his usual shelf life. It could put us in a bad spot to make the playoffs.

Hopefully we handle that the same way Pittsburgh did: find a replacement quickly. Although, I'm not certain who at this point. I suppose Muller or Boucher are an option.

 

[Talks to Goalposts]

The really weird part is that it wasn't exactly cut between 2013 and 2014.

First 20 games or so of the 2014, Montreal plays much like 2013, and they got back towards that at the end of the season such that they pretty much played at the same level through the playoffs up to the New York series.

Its that valley of suck they went through in the middle of 2014. They were so bad they were able to make Subban a normal rather than a superlative player, that's how awful the systems and team play was.

This is also the period where Emelin got moved up for Diaz as the 2nd RD (this was an unmitigated disaster for a long period of time, Emelin isn't that great to start and he clearly wasn't playing at full capacity coming back from injury), the stubborn insistance on carrying the Murray-Boullion pairing despite that they were AHL quality at best and the transition to back to the bad old days of being a one line hockey team.

 

[Ineverplayedthegame]

Not that I think DD is a first line C (he's not) or that Therrien using him as one is wise in terms of roster optimization (it's really not but there are lots of other things he does that aren't) but I don't think trading him, an NHL level top nine player, for the sake of trading him is a good idea for a team that could see one of Prust or Weise ending up in it's fully heathy top 9. Well if one of the grinders end up there it should really be Bournival but like I said Therrien isn't really good at roster optimization.

Seriously, Habs fans everywhere (not just here) have spent the entire summer (and more) arguing about who sucks more between Eller and DD(both NHL level middle 6 player), who's more overpaid, who should be in the top 6, who should be on the powerplay, who should be traded to make room for Galchenyuk, who should play wing, who makes the meanest chili or whatever while I've barely seen anyone critic Prust who was paid 2.5M and was barely NHL caliber last season.

I mean DD getting penciled/not penciled on the first line on fake lineups is enough to start a 2000 threads debate but nobody bats an eye on Weise or Prust in the top 9?

He's bad on the powerplay tho, I'll give that to the critics. But, like I said, Therrien sucks at player usage.

 

[Lafleurs Guy]

The really weird part is that it wasn't exactly cut between 2013 and 2014.

First 20 games or so of the 2014, Montreal plays much like 2013, and they got back towards that at the end of the season such that they pretty much played at the same level through the playoffs up to the New York series.

Its that valley of suck they went through in the middle of 2014. They were so bad they were able to make Subban a normal rather than a superlative player, that's how awful the systems and team play was.

This is also the period where Emelin got moved up for Diaz as the 2nd RD (this was an unmitigated disaster for a long period of time, Emelin isn't that great to start and he clearly wasn't playing at full capacity coming back from injury), the stubborn insistance on carrying the Murray-Boullion pairing despite that they were AHL quality at best and the transition to back to the bad old days of being a one line hockey team.

For the 1st 20 or so games Subban was absolutely incredible. Eller was given more opportunities, scoring was more balanced... Then MT got into the act.

"We're a grinding team."

 

[Lafleurs Guy]

Also, to provide some context to just how decisively average we actually were last season.

Goals Per Game: 2.55 (21st)
Goals Against Per Game: 2.45 (5th)
5 on 5 Goals For/Against Ratio: 0.99 (16th)
5 on 5: 136 (21st)
5 on 4: 42 (15th)
Powerplay: 17.2 (19th)
Penalty Kill: 85.1 (4th)
Shots Per Game: 28.4 (24th)
Shots Against Per Game: 31.0 (22nd)
Faceoffs: 49.6 (17th)
Blocked Shots: 1491 (1st)
Missed Shots: 942 (17th)
Giveaways: 646 (13th)

Shocking that our PP was so bad at the end considering how good the PP was to start the year and the previous season it was good as well.

Excluding defensive statistics, we were the epitome of average. Now compare that to the season prior.

Goals Per Game: 3.04 (4th)
Goals Against Per Game: 2.58 (14th)
5 on 5 Goals For/Against Ratio: 0.99 (5th)
5 on 5: 99 (5th)
5 on 4: 35 (4th)
Powerplay: 20.7 (5th)
Penalty Kill: 79.8 (23rd)
Shots Per Game: 30.6 (9th)
Shots Against Per Game: 26.9 (5th)
Faceoffs: 49.7 (17th)
Blocked Shots: 702 (14th)
Missed Shots: 580 (9th)
Giveaways: 394 (12th)

The most shocking thing about this is how radically different we were from one season to the next, yet the only really hindrance in 2013 was our woeful penalty kill. We were above average for the most part defensively but scored at a pace that only Pittsburgh had us thoroughly beat at. I also feel this flies in the face of those claiming Therrien did not alter his system. You do not get the degree of change we witnessed without overhauling what you've done previously.

He absolutely did alter the system. And he gave DD the lions share of scoring assignments after around game 20 as well. Everyone else dropped off a cliff offensively and it killed our overall game.

Now before anyone says Eastern Conference finals. I'll point to the fact Price and Subban played substantially better, the former holding us in games, in particular against Boston in the early going. We also had contributions from Bourque that no one could accord for. None of that could be said in our series against Ottawa.

What I will say about Therrien, is he does have a unique opportunity to prove himself as a worthwhile coach by blending both systems into a slightly altered variation. If he can manage to replicate our offense from 2013 without hurting our defense too much and not making us so wholly reliant on Price. I will openly commend him. That, to me anyway, is his challenge because as it stands, this team can score and play offensive hockey. We chose not to last year.

Apart from the nonsense of calling out players and some very stupid roster decisions, MT actually did a pretty good overall job in 2013. He's shown that he can at least implement an offensive system when he wants to.

I hope to God he stays away from dump and chase again this year. And if he goes back to it, I hope he's very quickly fired.

 

[Agnostic]

Honestly, the only thing that scares me is if Therrien reaches his usual shelf life. It could put us in a bad spot to make the playoffs.

We saw the power that PK has with the fans and the front office, he's now the team's #1 star and alpha male in the locker room. Therrien would be smart to ensure PK doesn't become the team's coach killer.

 

[Wats]

Habs stats became pretty good after they acquired Vanek.

 

[Not The One]

You clearly don't know what a strawman is. You should refrain from using the term until you understand its meaning.

They were all good teams with good numbers. We were a good team (not as good as Chicago or LA) with bad numbers. Unlike those teams, our numbers were horrible and we had to rely on goaltending to a ridiculous extent.

So again... how does this mean that MT did a good job?

Who care about good numbers? They sure didn't help the Pens, Sharks, Bruins, Avs, Blues, etc. The habs made it because Team play > Stats. No coach is goin to turn borderline AHLers into superstars but the team came through when it counted, and you absolutely can't separate Therrien's coaching from this, ESPECIALLY because the results were better than the numbers let on.

Except we didn't. Our goalie did. Our team played BELOW expectations. Try looking beyond the standings. We were below average across the board except in goaltending. Even our once lethal PP was below average last year.

Plenty of people saw the Habs outside the playoffs last september, including me to be honest. If finishing basically tied fo third in the conference is your idea of playing below expectations, then you are totally delusionnal. You really expected the Habs to finish ahead of the Bruins and Pens?

Not add the Conference final on top of that, beating the Bruins and that's BELOW your lofty expectations? lol

And every top team gets good goaltening. Two of the three teams ahead of us had Vezina nominees playing this year. It certainly does not invalidate MT's coaching.

Again what specifically did MT do to make you think that he was responsible for our success?

Right... 100 points and Eastern Conf final.... that's the extent of your analysis. Thanks for proving my point.

Yep. The best overall Montréal Canadiens season in twenty years, with a roster devoid of stars except for Price and Subban (at times) is good enough for me.

 

[Lafleurs Guy]

Who care about good numbers? They sure didn't help the Pens, Sharks, Bruins, Avs, Blues, etc. The habs made it because Team play > Stats. No coach is goin to turn borderline AHLers into superstars but the team came through when it counted, and you absolutely can't separate Therrien's coaching from this, ESPECIALLY because the results were better than the numbers let on.

The Habs made it because their goalie stood on his head. We couldn't score, we couldn't defend and we were outplayed all year.

So AGAIN, why are you telling us to credit the coach?

Plenty of people saw the Habs outside the playoffs last september, including me to be honest. If finishing basically tied fo third in the conference is your idea of playing below expectations, then you are totally delusionnal. You really expected the Habs to finish ahead of the Bruins and Pens?

I expected the Habs to be a playoff team. Most people here did because we showed that we have the talent to score back in 2013. So I'm not sure what you're talking about here.

Not add the Conference final on top of that, beating the Bruins and that's BELOW your lofty expectations? lol

Do we beat the Bruins without Price standing on his head? No.

In the playoffs I think we actually played pretty well for the most part btw. MT seemed to step away from the ridiculous dump and chase that he had in the regular season. But again, we don't even make it past Boston if Price isn't insanely good in that series, esp early on.

And every top team gets good goaltening. Two of the three teams ahead of us had Vezina nominees playing this year.

Sure. But most don't have to rely on it the way we did. Most top teams can score and defend. That's because they have good rosters and a coach who knows what he's doing. We had a good roster and a coach who was an idiot. That's why we were outshot most of the time.

It certainly does not invalidate MT's coaching.

You still haven't told us what MT has done to warrant credit. You keep pointing at the standings and the conference finish.

Why should we credit MT and not Price? Tell us.

Was it the bottom third in shots that has you excited?
Bottom third in goals?
Bottom third in shots against?
Below average PP from a team that has two of the best QBs in the game?
Was it the regression of play from almost every player on the roster?

Tell us. What the **** did MT do to warrant any kind of credit last season? We gave up tons of scoring opps and didn't have many for ourselves. Our goalie stepped up and saved the day. Hence why our GA was top five in the league.

Yep. The best overall Montréal Canadiens season in twenty years, with a roster devoid of stars except for Price and Subban (at times) is good enough for me.

Yep, looking at the standings is good enough for you. That's why you aren't being taken seriously here. You've done zero to tell us why MT deserves credit for this.

We won despite him, not because of him.

 

[Sorinth]

Who care about good numbers? They sure didn't help the Pens, Sharks, Bruins, Avs, Blues, etc. The habs made it because Team play > Stats. No coach is goin to turn borderline AHLers into superstars but the team came through when it counted, and you absolutely can't separate Therrien's coaching from this, ESPECIALLY because the results were better than the numbers let on.



Plenty of people saw the Habs outside the playoffs last september, including me to be honest. If finishing basically tied fo third in the conference is your idea of playing below expectations, then you are totally delusionnal. You really expected the Habs to finish ahead of the Bruins and Pens?

Not add the Conference final on top of that, beating the Bruins and that's BELOW your lofty expectations? lol

And every top team gets good goaltening. Two of the three teams ahead of us had Vezina nominees playing this year. It certainly does not invalidate MT's coaching.



Yep. The best overall Montréal Canadiens season in twenty years, with a roster devoid of stars except for Price and Subban (at times) is good enough for me.

So I guess when Toronto made the playoffs 2 seasons ago it was also due to great coaching. Funny how they dropped back down to Earth this past season like many predicted based on the underlying stats.

It's actually funny that your argument is that you predicted the Habs not making the playoffs, were completely wrong about that, and somehow use that as proof that Therrien is doing a good job. Whereas people who do look at the underlying stats noticed that even when we finished 3rd last our underlying stats were quite good and so accurately predicted us bouncing back and making the playoffs both 2 years ago and this past year. They even predicted us slowing down a bit last season compared to 2013 after adding guys like Parros, Murray, Briere because they knew it would hurt our stats.