We need to clear one thing

[Dagistitsyn]

A Game like tonight explains exactly why I question on gally

In that case, is anyone on our team top 6 besides Pacioretty?

 

[bsl]

In that case, is anyone on our team top 6 besides Pacioretty?

Be careful what questions you ask. You may not like the answer.

On a contender? And able to score with and beat Tampa in multiple series over the next 5 years?

Galchenyuk is yeah. Gallagher is hard working 2nd line on most contenders, not a game breaker. With a great heart. And possibly Sekac next year. Pleks is getting older, and his offensive is on and off.

Habs have a LOT of work to do on offense and scoring. At F, Max aside, bad high picks, lost picks, and bad development the last 10 years are coming home to roost.

Leblanc and Chipchura picks were bad. Chips injury does mitigate, but he was never touted as a game breaker, and I never like a high F pick chosen for reasons other than scoring talent, or hugeness with skating and skill. Bad high pick. Collberg is looking pretty bad too.

Scherbak can't develop fast enough. No guarantees either. Can't take any other F prospects seriously as true offensive threats at this point, including Mac. That will not be his role.

It's a bummer that it has come to hoping ONE pick pans out as a true game breaker top three since Max in 2007. I'm not counting Galchenyuk.

To follow up Scherbak, Timmins needs to hit a first or second round home run F pick next year, no question. A star. A 70-80 point player that is ready in 2-3 years. Not a potential 70-80 point player. A 70-80 point player. Every other contender can do it every 7 years, Habs need to now. Crucial. Getting tired of waiting for miracles from the no. 55 overall 50 pound Lehkonens.

I think that is what this thread is really about. Habs need true game breakers, and Gallagher is not a game breaker. Nothing wrong with saying it. It's true.

All that said, if Scherbak, Tinordi and McCarron all pan out, Habs are looking ****ing great.

 

[Sir Jacques Demers]

I think Gallagher is one of those players who is best used if the other two guys on the line combine for an average of 60-70 pts each. It doesn't really matter if he only gets 50 pts, because the energy and space he creates (not to mention all puck battles he seems to win).

He's the perfect player to play in a top 6. Just ideally, if your want your team to elite, the other guys around him need to score more points than he does. I don't think he will be as useful on a 3rd line if the other two guys suck and get 35-40 pts each.

 

[FerrisRox]

Stop defending him and be honest.

So you want people to offer their opinion, but before they do, you tell them to "stop defending him."

Seems like you don't want people's opinion, you want people to agree with you. Seems rather pointless.

 

[HabsDieHard*]

So you want people to offer their opinion, but before they do, you tell them to "stop defending him."

Seems like you don't want people's opinion, you want people to agree with you. Seems rather pointless.

Ya, that was funny.

 

[ProspectsFanatic]

RW always been our weakest position since Gally is here, so we put him on the first line by default. Otherwise, he can score 20-25 goals; that 2nd liner.

 

[Wats]

Yeah, but then you run into the problem of calling things something different from what they are.

Defining a top pairing defenseman as something other than a defenseman who's good enough to play on one of the 30 NHL top pairings might be ok in your head but when you speak to other people you just spend most of your time explaining to them that the thing they're looking at that they think is an apple is actually a banana, by your definition.

I think that's an interesting discussion that might be relevant in this case. If a player plays a #1/2 D role on a team but he would not be able to on any other team but good enough to be a #3/4 on most teams, is he a #1/2 D or a #3/4 D filling in at #1/2 D out of necessity for that team?

couldnt be more wrong.

This is a direct quote on what you thought a 3rd liner's value to the team is:

Sorry, 3rd liners arent important part of teams, they're usually replaceable quite easily.

 

[ECWHSWI]

I think that's an interesting discussion that might be relevant in this case. If a player plays a #1/2 D role on a team but he would not be able to on any other team but good enough to be a #3/4 on most teams, is he a #1/2 D or a #3/4 D filling in at #1/2 D out of necessity for that team?



This is a direct quote on what you thought a 3rd liner's value to the team is:

except, I'm not living in this fantazy where 45/50 pts players 25 or so goal scorers are 3rd liners... I watch the game, I look at stats, look at usage of various players, and I know full well that 50 pts players will be at worst 2nd liners on almost every team - including contenders - unless they literally bring nothing else than these 50 pts to their team (and even then, some team will be desperate enough to play them top 6 anyway)...

 

[Sorinth]

I think that's an interesting discussion that might be relevant in this case. If a player plays a #1/2 D role on a team but he would not be able to on any other team but good enough to be a #3/4 on most teams, is he a #1/2 D or a #3/4 D filling in at #1/2 D out of necessity for that team?

By definition anybody who plays that role is one. So a top pairing guy is anyone who plays on the top pairing. However since that leads to situations like Malkin being a 2nd line center, it's not particularly useful label. That's why it's normally adjusted to assume an equal distribution of talent. So you rank the players from best to worst and then take all the players who would still have that spot.

So for Gallagher there are 180 top-6 spots, if you can find 180 forwards better than him he's not a top-6 forward, if you can't he is. You can further refine it by looking only at wingers. Personally I have Gallagher at around 100-120, so an above average 2nd liner.

The real confusion is that some take it one step further and mean only the above average ones. They do this because if you have the below average ones then you probably aren't going to do very well because the top teams will have above average ones.

It's further confused by the good enough for a contender label which people like to throw around. Chicago won the cup with Handzus as the 2nd line Center, so clearly good enough for a contender doesn't have a lot of meaning. The reason is that contenders will have some elite players that will make up for other weaknesses. So for Chicago the fact that they have Toews, Kane, Hossa, Sharp (All 1st line players) means they can have a relatively crappy 2nd line center and it doesn't hurt them.

 

[Wats]

except, I'm not living in this fantazy where 45/50 pts players 25 or so goal scorers are 3rd liners... I watch the game, I look at stats, look at usage of various players, and I know full well that 50 pts players will be at worst 2nd liners on almost every team - including contenders - unless they literally bring nothing else than these 50 pts to their team (and even then, some team will be desperate enough to play them top 6 anyway)...

except, the quote said "3rd liners arent important part of teams, they're usually replaceable quite easily" and your reply does nothing to refute that you have a negative view on what a 3rd liner is to a team. In fact, IMO it only strengthens that you are overreacting based on your own negative perceptions on what a 3rd liner is...

Gallagher is still young, he has one ~40 point season. It's completely realistic he ends the season with ~35 points this season or maybe ~50 points. Nobody knows for sure. I don't think you react as strongly to someone saying '2nd/3rd' liner unless you thought so lowly of the 3rd liners...which by your own words is true. Once Gallagher becomes more of a sure thing, IMO he can be deemed a 2nd liner. Until then I don't think 2nd/3rd liner is unfair, we don't really know how good he'll be yet. He's only 22, it's not uncommon for his player types to stagnate/regress or breakout.

 

[CrAzYNiNe]

He scores like a top 6 RW, but not a top line RW.

 

[Fazkovsky]

So you want people to offer their opinion, but before they do, you tell them to "stop defending him."

Seems like you don't want people's opinion, you want people to agree with you. Seems rather pointless.

You are going way off board. The reason why is if you have been like me on these boards for 10 year we tend to overhype or overrate our own players. We tend to defend our players all the time like we used to do with Diaz, Gionta and some young players we had that are all gone. I just wanted an honest assessment and not just defend Gallagher because he is a young fiesty player who's trade value is higher than Taylor Hall.

 

[Habssince89]

2nd liner, therefore top6

/thread

 

[calder candidate]

He is a second liner on most team so yes top 6

 

[Kojo]

Not as useful on a third line as he is on the first line.

He has a 30-30 scorer potential on a first line.

 

[ECWHSWI]

except, the quote said "3rd liners arent important part of teams, they're usually replaceable quite easily" and your reply does nothing to refute that you have a negative view on what a 3rd liner is to a team. In fact, IMO it only strengthens that you are overreacting based on your own negative perceptions on what a 3rd liner is...

Gallagher is still young, he has one ~40 point season. It's completely realistic he ends the season with ~35 points this season or maybe ~50 points. Nobody knows for sure. I don't think you react as strongly to someone saying '2nd/3rd' liner unless you thought so lowly of the 3rd liners...which by your own words is true. Once Gallagher becomes more of a sure thing, IMO he can be deemed a 2nd liner. Until then I don't think 2nd/3rd liner is unfair, we don't really know how good he'll be yet. He's only 22, it's not uncommon for his player types to stagnate/regress or breakout.

there's nothing negative about it, for the most part 3rd liners are 30 pts players who will bring other stuff to the table, physicality, defense, whatever... it's neither negative or positive, it's just the way it is.

 

[mariemarie]

Hes already a top 6 and played 2 years 1st line against best dman in the league. The guy can only improve and i think his potential is underrated here.

 

[beowulf]

I have no problem with him playing on a second line. He can produce points and is full on energy which is rarely a bad thing.

 

[Wats]

there's nothing negative about it, for the most part 3rd liners are 30 pts players who will bring other stuff to the table, physicality, defense, whatever... it's neither negative or positive, it's just the way it is.

You are literally quoted in this thread saying they "arent important part of teams" and "replaceable quite easily"...which can be deemed negative. Our 3rd liners are Eller - Sekac and imo they are not only important but hard to replace.

 

[ECWHSWI]

You are literally quoted in this thread saying they "arent important part of teams" and "replaceable quite easily"...which can be deemed negative. Our 3rd liners are Eller - Sekac and imo they are not only important but hard to replace.

Yes they are, and it's mostly because on our top 9 they're probably the only ones who can provide solid board play in a regular basis, If the Habs had a balanced top 6, they'd be considered trade bait or replacable by a young forward on the rise. Sekac could develop into something more though - he's a rookie, lets wait a little before putting a label on him.

and yes, 30 pts players are replacable, I dont get how you conclude it's a negative... but replacable doesnt mean you flip one of them and replace him by a 4th liner like Weise or Malhotra, it simply mean that as long as you get your 30 pts 3rd line C (for example) from elsewhere your team will be fine, than on a team with a balanced top 6, whatever they bring to the table outside their 30 pts can be had from another 30 pts C...

it may be different on the Habs as we have little physicality on the 1st line and none at all on the 2nd, so yeah Eller and Sekac are important and needed, but it's not because they're exceptionnal players.

anyway, I'm done on the 3rd line thing and all, that would be stuff for a different thread.

Gallagher's still a top 6 player though!