Proposal: Trade Thread #60

[Scriptor]

Danault can do this with defensive wingers, and Suzuki can do this with better wingers.

This "new" way of setting up a depth chart really isnt new though, its the same. You still have a first, second, third and fourth line. You still have a line that you want to use in all situations over the others, let that be our best line since Tanguay-Koivu-Kovalev, enough with the spreading the offense bullshit, it has never worked and never will.

The difference is in the application of the line match-ups. You see it as best offensive line VS best offensive line and so on.

I don't.

The reality is Montreal doesn't have the league's best offensive line. However, unless you stubbornly play Montreal's best offensive line against the opponent's best offensive line, it doesn't have to mean Montreal can't be competitive against teams with a better #1 offensive line, provided Montreal has the type of shutdown line you get with Tatar - Danault - Gallagher.

Could Tatar - Suzuki - Gallagher play a similar shutdown role? Probably, although, initially, it would be a little less productive defensively (the veteran Danault has more experience with adversity) and, perhaps -- though unproven -- a little better offensively, overall.

Why, this early on in Suzuki's career, force him to play the difficult match-ups and carry the offensive production on his shoulders at the same time? Why, when you have someone in Danault that will gladly play the difficult match-ups while, with the help of his current wingers, help provide a positive goal differential against the opponents' best offensive players?

Why not let Suzuki get better match-ups where he can build his two-way confidence and produce better offensive numbers along the way?

Your argument (in how to deploy your lines) only makes sense after you've lucked into a couple of generational players. Montreal hasn't -- not yet -- and actually coaching, meaning using your strengths to their fullest, will not currently espouse your philosophy.

Montreal has proven it can beat softer yet more talented offensive lineups like Pittsburgh's lineup, all of this before adding the size, physicality and a little more scoring that might, in the end, also allow it to beat more physical and deeper teams like Philadelphia.

You can keep harping on the same points and refuse to see any other way of examining the current situation. That's entirely your prerogative but, it certainly doesn't demonstrate a ripe analytical capacity.

You only argue that so and so sucks and then use that false theorem to justify everything else afterwards.

It pretty much limits any discussion...

 

[Mrb1p]

The difference is in the application of the line match-ups. You see it as best offensive line VS best offensive line and so on.

I don't.

The reality is Montreal doesn't have the league's best offensive line. However, unless you stubbornly play Montreal's best offensive line against the opponent's best offensive line, it doesn't have to mean Montreal can't be competitive against teams with a better #1 offensive line, provided Montreal has the type of shutdown line you get with Tatar - Danault - Gallagher.

Could Tatar - Suzuki - Gallagher play a similar shutdown role? Probably, although, initially, it would be a little less productive defensively (the veteran Danault has more experience with adversity) and, perhaps -- though unproven -- a little better offensively, overall.

Why, this early on in Suzuki's career, force him to play the difficult match-ups and carry the offensive production on his shoulders at the same time? Why, when you have someone in Danault that will gladly play the difficult match-ups while, with the help of his current wingers, help provide a positive goal differential against the opponents' best offensive players?

Why not let Suzuki get better match-ups where he can build his two-way confidence and produce better offensive numbers along the way?

Your argument (in how to deploy your lines) only makes sense after you've lucked into a couple of generational players. Montreal hasn't -- not yet -- and actually coaching, meaning using your strengths to their fullest, will not currently espouse your philosophy.

Montreal has proven it can beat softer yet more talented offensive lineups like Pittsburgh's lineup, all of this before adding the size, physicality and a little more scoring that might, in the end, also allow it to beat more physical and deeper teams like Philadelphia.

You can keep harping on the same points and refuse to see any other way of examining the current situation. That's entirely your prerogative but, it certainly doesn't demonstrate a ripe analytical capacity.

You only argue that so and so sucks and then use that false theorem to justify everything else afterwards.

It pretty much limits any discussion...

Suzuki is a high draft pick, one of the best rookie weve ever had
Suzuki showed he could handle tough matchups
Gallagher is actual the best two way player on this team and Danault benefits a lot more from him than the other way around


Even ignoring that, why was Danault given Radulov and Pacioretty in 2016? Was he a better player than suzuki is at this point?

The answer is clearly no, but yet, here we are, five years later Danault has developped immensile without missing a beat but fans still dont understand that "bringing him up slowly" isnt a necessity, especially when youre talking about players that already have two-way acumen like Suzuki and Danault.

Fans who don't want to see Danault off the first line are the same as people who didnt want civil rights movement to move forward, finding comfort in their little cozy shell instead of trying to build something better and actually meaningful.

 

[ZUKI]

Youre right, its not even mediocrity, the Habs don't even reach that level with Dunno centering the best forwards on this team.

Swap Danault and McDavid, what do you think happens to the Habs ?

Swap Danault with the best player of the NHL . What do you think happens ?
You can put the name of all the players of the NHL out of 3-4 instead of Danault and the results will be the same
What happens if you swap Tatar with Ovechkin, or if you swap Armia with Draisaitl ?
laughable

 

[jellybeans]

If the Penguins suck by the deadline this coming year, I wonder if they'd consider moving Geno.

Malkin - Suzuki - Anderson
Drouin - Kotkaniemi - Gallagher

Would love to have Malkin but kiss Suzuki goodbye and add add add that kind of player just would cost too much.

 

[sampollock]

Find a way to sign Hoffman for 1 year

 

[Mrb1p]

Swap Danault with the best player of the NHL . What do you think happens ?
You can put the name of all the players of the NHL out of 3-4 instead of Danault and the results will be the same
What happens if you swap Tatar with Ovechkin, or if you swap Armia with Draisaitl ?
laughable

So why bring that point up then ? Wasnt the point of this to show the value of Danault as a player? People need to stop bringing up clearly superior players to try and make a point, it never works.

 

[The Great Weal]

Suzuki is a high draft pick, one of the best rookie weve ever had
Suzuki showed he could handle tough matchups
Gallagher is actual the best two way player on this team and Danault benefits a lot more from him than the other way around


Even ignoring that, why was Danault given Radulov and Pacioretty in 2016? Was he a better player than suzuki is at this point?

The answer is clearly no, but yet, here we are, five years later Danault has developped immensile without missing a beat but fans still dont understand that "bringing him up slowly" isnt a necessity, especially when youre talking about players that already have two-way acumen like Suzuki and Danault.

Fans who don't want to see Danault off the first line are the same as people who didnt want civil rights movement to move forward, finding comfort in their little cozy shell instead of trying to build something better and actually meaningful.

Habs finally have center depth now which is a big difference, I see Danault getting similar ice time as Suzuki and KK. He'll be used heavily on the PK whereas KK and Suzuki play on the PP.

 

[Scriptor]

Habs finally have center depth now which is a big difference, I see Danault getting similar ice time as Suzuki and KK. He'll be used heavily on the PK whereas KK and Suzuki play on the PP.

Precisely. Mrb1P's fixation on line attribution is a pointless obsession.

Because Danault was rushed into a situation for lack of actual depth on the Habs' team doesn't mean that using Suzuki differently, while exploiting what we do have of Danault today, isn't the way to actually go.

I never said Suzuki couldn't handle tough match-ups. I just don't see the point of swapping him in for Danault right now. I'd rather see him play with a genuine scorer like Toffoli or a power forward that can score off the rush like Anderson and Drouin, for lack of another more physical, yet skilled LW.

Of course, you hate Drouin and claim he's a worthless husk so, that conversation stops right there.

Toffoli - Kotkaniemi - Armia actualyl appears to be a complementary line, with a scorer that jumps on rebounds like an octopus and a puck possession beast in Armia. Also, Toffoli - Kotkaniemi - Anderson seems to have potential.

I'd settle for Drouin - Suzuki - Armia to see if we can capitalize on the start of some chemistry that had formed in the recent playoffs.

Toffoli - Kotkaniemi - Anderson
Tatar - Danault - Gallagher
Drouin - Suzuki - Armia
Lehkonen/Poehling - Evans - Byron/Lehkonen

It's about getting the most out of your TEAM, not out of one line. The order of the lines is irrelevant since it is all about match-ups. As The Great Weise said, I don't see a huge difference in TOI for the top-9, with Suzuki line also getting some minutes against the opponent's top line at even strength to round things out.

Sure, Suzuki between Toffoli and Anderson could be interesting but, Suzuki could likely get Drouin and Armia to produce at a pace Kotkaniemi couldn't. Anderson is fast as hell and scores regularly off the rush. Kotkaniemi is a good playmaker to spring the hulking yet speedy winger. Toffoli regularly finds open ice in the O-zone and Kotkaniemi can likely find him there while opposing Ds concentrate on the intimidating net presence of Anderson and the young Finn.

Maybe it becomes Drouin - Kotkaniemi - Anderson instead, so Suzuki gets a scorer like Toffoli instead; Toffoli - Suzuki - Armia, Drouin - Kotkaniemi - Anderson?

Toffoli - Suzuki - Armia
Tatar - Danault - Gallagher
Drouin - Kotkaniemi - Anderson
Lehkonen/Poehling - Evans - Byron/Lehkonen

I'm not arguing about who the best C is on the team. I believe it is Suzuki.

Eventually, I believe Suzuki has the potential of developing into a 1st line C of the type you would play against opposing team's best lines. I don't think he's ready for that yet and I don't believe that heaping all of the team's production onto his shoulders in what will be his sophomore year is a smart idea. I also don't think that throwing Kotkaniemi into the lion's den so early is a wise approach.

Danault's experience in tough situations and his line's production level at even strength over the last two seasons enables Montreal to keep easing their young talents into greater roles at a pace they can handle and in a way that will help them develop to their fullest.

I'm arguing to form the best lineup for the upcoming season, not the best lineup when the kids are fully developed.

Putting your three best players on a line doesn't automatically result in assured chemistry or the best offensive output from your top-9.

Your arguments are examples of tunnel-vision, IMO, and I say that without meaning to disparage them or you.

 

[Mrb1p]

Habs finally have center depth now which is a big difference, I see Danault getting similar ice time as Suzuki and KK. He'll be used heavily on the PK whereas KK and Suzuki play on the PP.

I agree, but that doesnt mean he needs to hog the best wingers on the team

 

[Scriptor]

I agree, but that doesnt mean he needs to hog the best wingers on the team

IMO, Suzuki would get as much out of Toffoli as he might out of Tatar as both can score and both aren't defensive sieves. The same goes for Anderson and his physical game that also benefits from a bigger frame than Gallagher and actually provides more breakaway speed.

Suzuki does not need Tatar and Gallagher to continue to produce more than in his rookie season.

Hell, Toffoli - Suzuki - Anderson is an option that provides quality scoring wingers fro Suzuki, without tearing down the Tatar - Danault - Gallagher line that excels at even strength while shutting down opponents' best offensive players. Toffoli - Suzuki - Anderson would also be defensively sound as both wingers and the young C have above average defensive awareness. a line of Drouin - Kotkaniemi -Armia would be a poor man's Toffoli - Suzuki - Anderson and could surprisingly (to you) bring quality results in a more shielded role against weaker opposition.

Unless, like Trump, you feel there is some sort of conspiracy theory aimed strictly at benefitting Danault (rather than actually trying to help the team and the young Cs) if Suzuki doesn't get Tatar and Gallagher as wingers

 

[Mrb1p]

IMO, Suzuki would get as much out of Toffoli as he might out of Tatar as both can score and both aren't defensive sieves. The same goes for Anderson and his physical game that also benefits from a bigger frame than Gallagher and actually provides more breakaway speed.

Suzuki does not need Tatar and Gallagher to continue to produce more than in his rookie season.

Hell, Toffoli - Suzuki - Anderson is an option that provides quality scoring wingers fro Suzuki, without tearing down the Tatar - Danault - Gallagher line that excels at even strength while shutting down opponents' best offensive players. Toffoli - Suzuki - Anderson would also be defensively sound as both wingers and the young C have above average defensive awareness. a line of Drouin - Kotkaniemi -Armia would be a poor man's Toffoli - Suzuki - Anderson and could surprisingly (to you) bring quality results in a more shielded role against weaker opposition.

Unless, like Trump, you feel there is some sort of conspiracy theory aimed strictly at benefitting Danault (rather than actually trying to help the team and the young Cs) if Suzuki doesn't get Tatar and Gallagher as wingers

Tatar and Suzuki can feed off each other as dual threat shooter/playmaker and Tatars speed and elusiveness opens up space for Suzuki, who's more of a slow player, Toffoli is slow as molasse and isn't as good of a playmaker. Toffoli isn't bad, but he's not the best.

Anderson size is misleading, he's big and skates fast but he can't be the third wheel on a line anymore, and Suzukis brain won't work out with Anderson, just like its not working with Byron. Anderson needs to be used along side another bruising forward to open up space for him and to help him down low.

Drouin and Armia are the worst wingers for KK, it hasn't worked in 100+ games, why would it magically start to work now ? Armia is slow and fails on every nice play KK makes and Drouin turns the puck over and over and hogs the puck for too long when it should be KK that has the puck on his stick. KK is going to turn into Eller 2.0 if he keeps playing with these two, mark my words.

 

[The Great Weal]

I agree, but that doesnt mean he needs to hog the best wingers on the team

I mean the Habs don't really have a superstar winger. They have a bunch of 2nd liners. Some high end, and some low end. The difference(at least production wise) isn't that great, and Danault won't be on the PP.

 

[Mrb1p]

I mean the Habs don't really have a superstar winger. They have a bunch of 2nd liners. Some high end, and some low end. The difference(at least production wise) isn't that great, and Danault won't be on the PP.

Gallagher isn't a second line winger, by every measures he ranks as a solid first liner. Tatar has been pushing offensive first line production but I agree he's mostly a second line winger.

With that said though, the difference is that KK and Suzuki are high-end offensive players with skillsets that get complimented by skills, Danault isn't one of those, say all you want about him, but he's a meat and potatoes guy, and meat and potatoes guys can fit in anywhere in the line-up, but not high-end skill guys. Really, really need to stop plugging these Armias and these Byrons and these Drouins and these Lekhonens on the offensive players wings, like yesterday.

It really makes no sense why people are refusing change this hard, we've already seen what they could do broken up, Danault did not miss a beat, he did exactly what he had been doing during his 250+ games centering them, whats the logic behind keeping them together ? It boggles my mind, really.

 

[TannedBum]

With that said though, the difference is that KK and Suzuki are high-end offensive players with skillsets that get complimented by skills, Danault isn't one of those, say all you want about him, but he's a meat and potatoes guy, and meat and potatoes guys can fit in anywhere in the line-up, but not high-end skill guys. Really, really need to stop plugging these Armias and these Byrons and these Drouins and these Lekhonens on the offensive players wings, like yesterday.

Okay buddy, yes, you don't watch hockey. You don't have to remind us over and over.

 

[Habs Halifax]

I mean the Habs don't really have a superstar winger. They have a bunch of 2nd liners. Some high end, and some low end. The difference(at least production wise) isn't that great, and Danault won't be on the PP.

I think we improved in many areas but the PP will still be an issue.

 

[Habs Halifax]

Gallagher isn't a second line winger, by every measures he ranks as a solid first liner. Tatar has been pushing offensive first line production but I agree he's mostly a second line winger.

With that said though, the difference is that KK and Suzuki are high-end offensive players with skillsets that get complimented by skills, Danault isn't one of those, say all you want about him, but he's a meat and potatoes guy, and meat and potatoes guys can fit in anywhere in the line-up, but not high-end skill guys. Really, really need to stop plugging these Armias and these Byrons and these Drouins and these Lekhonens on the offensive players wings, like yesterday.

It really makes no sense why people are refusing change this hard, we've already seen what they could do broken up, Danault did not miss a beat, he did exactly what he had been doing during his 250+ games centering them, whats the logic behind keeping them together ? It boggles my mind, really.

1) Agree on Gallagher and Tatar. 1st line wingers for sure. Maybe fringe ones but their production has been 1st line quality and stats prove it

2) Danault is a team need. I know you want things shuffled a bit so he plays the 3C role and not with Gallagher and Tatar but that will come the more Suzuki and Kotkaniemi mature. We seen that in the playoffs. Told you last year you were too early and we got a bit more time to go yet. Danault is a core part cause our plan is to roll three 2nd lines. He's not easy to replace based on what he has provided in the last 2 or 3 seasons now. Lacks offensive skills and production yeah but he's better than you give him credit for. Think of it this way... Danault on the main boards gets more attention than Patch did when he was being shopped. Many teams looking for a Danault type of center bud

You going to flip out if Danault gets 5 years at $6M? Pretty sure he gets $5.5M - $6M range and 4-6 years in term. $5M or under will be an insult type of offer to Danault. Might be what Bergevin offered him and hence his comments?

 

[Le Barron de HF]

Gallagher isn't a second line winger, by every measures he ranks as a solid first liner. Tatar has been pushing offensive first line production but I agree he's mostly a second line winger.

With that said though, the difference is that KK and Suzuki are high-end offensive players with skillsets that get complimented by skills, Danault isn't one of those, say all you want about him, but he's a meat and potatoes guy, and meat and potatoes guys can fit in anywhere in the line-up, but not high-end skill guys. Really, really need to stop plugging these Armias and these Byrons and these Drouins and these Lekhonens on the offensive players wings, like yesterday.

It really makes no sense why people are refusing change this hard, we've already seen what they could do broken up, Danault did not miss a beat, he did exactly what he had been doing during his 250+ games centering them, whats the logic behind keeping them together ? It boggles my mind, really.

I suppose the logic behind keeping the line together is a) it's success based on its chemistry which means that we will get consistent results one night after another, which is to take into account given how we added the likes of Anderson and Toffoli on the team which will both take time to adjust to the new system and build chemistry. B) The fact that we can use that line against other top lines and we know they'll come out on top is great since it means that the the Suzuki and KK lines can face weaker opposition. Since we don't know for sure if KK's play of the playoffs will carry over, and the fact that Suzuki might experience the sophomore slump, having that line is a fantastic 'safety net' for the coaching staff and will help in avoiding disasters in this shortened season where we will have rookies playing (Romanov and Evans) along with the new guys settling in.

I do agree with the premise of your post, but I think for the regular season, or at least for half of it, it'd the smart approach to keep that line together while the rest of the roster builds chemistry and we find out what we have with Suzuki and KK. It's not as much of a big deal given that KK and Suzuki will both have good linemates unlike previous years with the likes of Cousins or Weal occupying a spot in the top 9.

 

[Habs Halifax]

I suppose the logic behind keeping the line together is a) it's success based on its chemistry which means that we will get consistent results one night after another, which is to take into account given how we added the likes of Anderson and Toffoli on the team which will both take time to adjust to the new system and build chemistry. B) The fact that we can use that line against other top lines and we know they'll come out on top is great since it means that the the Suzuki and KK lines can face weaker opposition. Since we don't know for sure if KK's play of the playoffs will carry over, and the fact that Suzuki might experience the sophomore slump, having that line is a fantastic 'safety net' for the coaching staff and will help in avoiding disasters in this shortened season where we will have rookies playing (Romanov and Evans) along with the new guys settling in.

I do agree with the premise of your post, but I think for the regular season, or at least for half of it, it'd the smart approach to keep that line together while the rest of the roster builds chemistry and we find out what we have with Suzuki and KK. It's not as much of a big deal given that KK and Suzuki will both have good linemates unlike previous years with the likes of Cousins or Weal occupying a spot in the top 9.

I said we were tracking to have Three 2nd lines well ahead of this. My personal strategy was to keep the Danault line in place and find better wingers for Suzuki and KK. We did exactly that. I think we have various options we can tinker with in our top 9F! Danault line in place or not. I trust Julien on this.

Waiting for the next season to start is painful!

 

[Aces on the road]

Suzuki is a high draft pick, one of the best rookie weve ever had
Suzuki showed he could handle tough matchups
Gallagher is actual the best two way player on this team and Danault benefits a lot more from him than the other way around


Even ignoring that, why was Danault given Radulov and Pacioretty in 2016? Was he a better player than suzuki is at this point?

The answer is clearly no, but yet, here we are, five years later Danault has developped immensile without missing a beat but fans still dont understand that "bringing him up slowly" isnt a necessity, especially when youre talking about players that already have two-way acumen like Suzuki and Danault.

Fans who don't want to see Danault off the first line are the same as people who didnt want civil rights movement to move forward, finding comfort in their little cozy shell instead of trying to build something better and actually meaningful.

I have never seen Gallagher defending, his is worst after Drouin

 

[ZUKI]

Suzuki is a high draft pick, one of the best rookie weve ever had
Suzuki showed he could handle tough matchups
Gallagher is actual the best two way player on this team and Danault benefits a lot more from him than the other way around


Even ignoring that, why was Danault given Radulov and Pacioretty in 2016? Was he a better player than suzuki is at this point?

The answer is clearly no, but yet, here we are, five years later Danault has developped immensile without missing a beat but fans still dont understand that "bringing him up slowly" isnt a necessity, especially when youre talking about players that already have two-way acumen like Suzuki and Danault.

Fans who don't want to see Danault off the first line are the same as people who didnt want civil rights movement to move forward, finding comfort in their little cozy shell instead of trying to build something better and actually meaningful.

You do realize that you are insulting a big, big part of the Habs fans with your stupid civil rights rhetoric ? Also with yours "Fans who don't share my view are " this " . Fans don't understand " that" , are ignoring " this " ....?
What a narcissist attitude .

 

[ZUKI]

Precisely. Mrb1P's fixation on line attribution is a pointless obsession.

Because Danault was rushed into a situation for lack of actual depth on the Habs' team doesn't mean that using Suzuki differently, while exploiting what we do have of Danault today, isn't the way to actually go.

I never said Suzuki couldn't handle tough match-ups. I just don't see the point of swapping him in for Danault right now. I'd rather see him play with a genuine scorer like Toffoli or a power forward that can score off the rush like Anderson and Drouin, for lack of another more physical, yet skilled LW.

Of course, you hate Drouin and claim he's a worthless husk so, that conversation stops right there.

Toffoli - Kotkaniemi - Armia actualyl appears to be a complementary line, with a scorer that jumps on rebounds like an octopus and a puck possession beast in Armia. Also, Toffoli - Kotkaniemi - Anderson seems to have potential.

I'd settle for Drouin - Suzuki - Armia to see if we can capitalize on the start of some chemistry that had formed in the recent playoffs.

Toffoli - Kotkaniemi - Anderson
Tatar - Danault - Gallagher
Drouin - Suzuki - Armia
Lehkonen/Poehling - Evans - Byron/Lehkonen

It's about getting the most out of your TEAM, not out of one line. The order of the lines is irrelevant since it is all about match-ups. As The Great Weise said, I don't see a huge difference in TOI for the top-9, with Suzuki line also getting some minutes against the opponent's top line at even strength to round things out.

Sure, Suzuki between Toffoli and Anderson could be interesting but, Suzuki could likely get Drouin and Armia to produce at a pace Kotkaniemi couldn't. Anderson is fast as hell and scores regularly off the rush. Kotkaniemi is a good playmaker to spring the hulking yet speedy winger. Toffoli regularly finds open ice in the O-zone and Kotkaniemi can likely find him there while opposing Ds concentrate on the intimidating net presence of Anderson and the young Finn.

Maybe it becomes Drouin - Kotkaniemi - Anderson instead, so Suzuki gets a scorer like Toffoli instead; Toffoli - Suzuki - Armia, Drouin - Kotkaniemi - Anderson?

Toffoli - Suzuki - Armia
Tatar - Danault - Gallagher
Drouin - Kotkaniemi - Anderson
Lehkonen/Poehling - Evans - Byron/Lehkonen

I'm not arguing about who the best C is on the team. I believe it is Suzuki.

Eventually, I believe Suzuki has the potential of developing into a 1st line C of the type you would play against opposing team's best lines. I don't think he's ready for that yet and I don't believe that heaping all of the team's production onto his shoulders in what will be his sophomore year is a smart idea. I also don't think that throwing Kotkaniemi into the lion's den so early is a wise approach.

Danault's experience in tough situations and his line's production level at even strength over the last two seasons enables Montreal to keep easing their young talents into greater roles at a pace they can handle and in a way that will help them develop to their fullest.

I'm arguing to form the best lineup for the upcoming season, not the best lineup when the kids are fully developed.

Putting your three best players on a line doesn't automatically result in assured chemistry or the best offensive output from your top-9.

Your arguments are examples of tunnel-vision, IMO, and I say that without meaning to disparage them or you.

That's exactly what Julien said during his press conference , no ? running 3 lines with similar time, if one is in fire, then it will receive more time that game. Next game it could change, adapting the ice time to the play/pp/pk .

When you say "Precisely. Mrb1P's fixation on line attribution is a pointless obsession." i totally agree with you.We have a very good matching line, we let them play together, and it's to the other line/players to do better and challenge them for ice time.
Also the other fixation in the attribution of that fan is about Danault playing with the best linemates of the team , is also pointless. I don't think that Tatar/Gally are better then all of Drouin, KK, Suzuki, Toffoli and even Anderson( for Tatar ).

 

[angusyoung]

I think we improved in many areas but the PP will still be an issue.

Tough call,terrible at home but top 5 on the road. Adding Anderson and Toffoli should only help improve along with more experience and maturing of NS and KK and cross your fingers JD smartens up.

 

[waitin425]

Precisely. Mrb1P's fixation on line attribution is a pointless obsession.

Because Danault was rushed into a situation for lack of actual depth on the Habs' team doesn't mean that using Suzuki differently, while exploiting what we do have of Danault today, isn't the way to actually go.

I never said Suzuki couldn't handle tough match-ups. I just don't see the point of swapping him in for Danault right now. I'd rather see him play with a genuine scorer like Toffoli or a power forward that can score off the rush like Anderson and Drouin, for lack of another more physical, yet skilled LW.

Of course, you hate Drouin and claim he's a worthless husk so, that conversation stops right there.

Toffoli - Kotkaniemi - Armia actualyl appears to be a complementary line, with a scorer that jumps on rebounds like an octopus and a puck possession beast in Armia. Also, Toffoli - Kotkaniemi - Anderson seems to have potential.

I'd settle for Drouin - Suzuki - Armia to see if we can capitalize on the start of some chemistry that had formed in the recent playoffs.

Toffoli - Kotkaniemi - Anderson
Tatar - Danault - Gallagher
Drouin - Suzuki - Armia
Lehkonen/Poehling - Evans - Byron/Lehkonen

It's about getting the most out of your TEAM, not out of one line. The order of the lines is irrelevant since it is all about match-ups. As The Great Weise said, I don't see a huge difference in TOI for the top-9, with Suzuki line also getting some minutes against the opponent's top line at even strength to round things out.

Sure, Suzuki between Toffoli and Anderson could be interesting but, Suzuki could likely get Drouin and Armia to produce at a pace Kotkaniemi couldn't. Anderson is fast as hell and scores regularly off the rush. Kotkaniemi is a good playmaker to spring the hulking yet speedy winger. Toffoli regularly finds open ice in the O-zone and Kotkaniemi can likely find him there while opposing Ds concentrate on the intimidating net presence of Anderson and the young Finn.

Maybe it becomes Drouin - Kotkaniemi - Anderson instead, so Suzuki gets a scorer like Toffoli instead; Toffoli - Suzuki - Armia, Drouin - Kotkaniemi - Anderson?

Toffoli - Suzuki - Armia
Tatar - Danault - Gallagher
Drouin - Kotkaniemi - Anderson
Lehkonen/Poehling - Evans - Byron/Lehkonen

I'm not arguing about who the best C is on the team. I believe it is Suzuki.

Eventually, I believe Suzuki has the potential of developing into a 1st line C of the type you would play against opposing team's best lines. I don't think he's ready for that yet and I don't believe that heaping all of the team's production onto his shoulders in what will be his sophomore year is a smart idea. I also don't think that throwing Kotkaniemi into the lion's den so early is a wise approach.

Danault's experience in tough situations and his line's production level at even strength over the last two seasons enables Montreal to keep easing their young talents into greater roles at a pace they can handle and in a way that will help them develop to their fullest.

I'm arguing to form the best lineup for the upcoming season, not the best lineup when the kids are fully developed.

Putting your three best players on a line doesn't automatically result in assured chemistry or the best offensive output from your top-9.

Your arguments are examples of tunnel-vision, IMO, and I say that without meaning to disparage them or you.

Interesting points and I think that Drouin-KK-Anderson line would be sick.

Do you think Lehk could fit in with Danault and Gally? I think that would still be a balanced line and would allow for Toffoli to play on the right side.

Drouin-KK-Anderson
Tatar-Suzuki-Toffoli
Lehk-Danault-Gally
Poehling-Evans-Byron

 

[OB5]

I wonder if they are going to trade Tatar before the season starts....either for a high end future package or a defensive option.

Makes no sense to make the offense worse but depending on the return...could be worth it to move him when his value is high.

 

[Habs Halifax]

Tough call,terrible at home but top 5 on the road. Adding Anderson and Toffoli should only help improve along with more experience and maturing of NS and KK and cross your fingers JD smartens up.

Who's entering the zone with puck possession though? Maybe we improve on the PP but how much? I have my doubts. We need our centers to be puck possession guys and not sure Suzuki and KK can do that yet. Suzuki has the vision, IQ, and edge work but not sure his skating can create separation. We will see about that... Suzuki is on a steep curve up hill. I think KK will take some time