With an elite goalie, should the Habs try and win 5-4 or 2-1?

With a strong goalie, should the Habs system emphasize offense or defense?


  • Total voters
    45

LyricalLyricist

Registered User
Aug 21, 2007
37,909
5,814
Montreal
Depends if you have an elite offense no? There's a shitload of variables that are unknown here. I'd love to say I know the answer but I really don't given its not black and white.

You do what makes the team win more games.

If you win same number of games regardless I suggest offense because its more entertaining.

Otherwise it's basically a huge question mark.

If they question is how to build the team then even then it's complicated. These days top Cs, Ds and so on are two-way guys who can do it all.

The most important part of any team or system is having the right personnel to force the other team to play a game they aren't comfortable with.

So if you're going against a slow team and pushing the pace then you want to catch them flat footed, get behind their D.

If you're facing a team with high quality snipers you want to have a strong puck possession game so they can't shoot a puck they don't have.

Fundamentally the goal of the game is to have the puck more than other team and be opportunistic when you do.

Not to mention when it comes to goalies it doesn't matter who you are, 2 on 1s, breakaways and so on will burn you. It always will eventually. In fact I would go as far as saying most goalies aren't .960 save % on breakaways or 2 on 1s. If you employ a run and gun offense(the extreme) it's almost worthless to have an elite goalie because he isn't going to stop much more than an average starter on those high scoring chances. What makes a guy like Price...Price...is his ability to read the play, to know where puck is going even through a screen, to be positionally sound. What happens when position means nothing and you just have 2 on 1s and odd man rushes? He's human.

I think it's a great question DA but man is it all over the place. My opinion is with all the variables that are unknown you gotta find a niche and stick to it. Adapt your style, depth talent and everything to emphasize strengths and reduce weaknesses.

All this doesn't take into account that I find an elite goalie a luxury than isn't as needed as say an elite C or D. The impact a great goalie and good goalie have on a game vs their contract makes this question a lot harder to answer.
 

Captain Mountain

Formerly Captain Wolverine
Jun 6, 2010
20,342
13,880
I'm not sure I understand the premise looking at the poll options. Is the question should Montreal forego D to try to score as much as possible or should they forego taking chances to prevent scoring chances against?

Because I'm not sure I really want to see the team pick either of those options.

Looking at Montreal as a team, their approach doesn't really fit either option. At ES they were 9th in CF, 17th in SCF, 9th in HDCF and 14th in shots for vs. 21st CA, 13th in SCA, 13th in HDCA and 15th in shots against.

Their shot locations were:

MTL


MTL


They played high event hockey, went to the net hard, didn't shoot from the slot much and gave up more than they should have in-close and in the slot. They also struggled a lot on D-zone face-offs.

Most teams want to win 3-2. I guess I'd lean more towards choice A since it takes luck out of the picture and presumably Price will bounce back. But Montreal doesn't really have the shooting talent for that, especially if they move Pacioretty. I just don't know how helpful it is to view it as a binary choice. Answering questions like How should Montreal go about defending? or trying to score? or moving the puck? is more interesting to me than if Montreal should be playing at a higher or lower pace.

Based on who Montreal has, they should be playing exactly as the way they were. Transition as a unit (because they don't have PMD), go for the net (because they lack shooting talent and center depth) and defend as a unit (since they have a mobility problem on D). The personnel issues are more significant than play-style ATM.

And the real answer is that you use that strategy that best fits the roster.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Phillip The Third

Le Barron de HF

Justin make me proud
Mar 12, 2008
16,248
3,879
Shawinigan
Trading for a rental in Wisniewski and then letting him go is not building from the net out. Markov was MIA due to injury, so Subban and Hamrlik had to carry the load. Hamrlik and Wisniewski would leave after the season. It was basically Subban carrying a huge defensive load for the team. Hamrlik fell off a cliff the next season in Washington and the retired after his second season after leaving Montreal. We had only one young gun rising up and carrying a huge load defensively and a bunch of aging vets on their last legs. Our future Ds would be anchored by Subban and Markov.
Was actually referring to 09-10 & 10-11, should have been more precise.
 

sandviper

No Ragrets
Jan 26, 2016
13,365
24,193
Toronto
Put it this way, if you got a team that can tilt the ice offensively, your goalie won’t be too busy.

Don’t get me wrong, you still need good goaltending, but you build a team that can move the puck in all three zones you’d be better off.

Anyhow, it is clear from last season that building a team around a goalie with a “defensive” d-core, no PMD and anemic offense from the forwards doesn’t work.
 

Walrus26

Wearing a Habs Toque in England.
May 24, 2018
3,115
4,833
Peterborough, UK
Keep the GAA around 2.25 and have defensemen that can avoid trouble in their own end and find the same-coloured jersey with a forward pass from their own end. Simple enough unless you assemble a team that has real problems scoring 3 goals a game......
 

Sorinth

Registered User
Jan 18, 2013
10,937
5,387
I think it's a great question DA but man is it all over the place. My opinion is with all the variables that are unknown you gotta find a niche and stick to it. Adapt your style, depth talent and everything to emphasize strengths and reduce weaknesses.

All this doesn't take into account that I find an elite goalie a luxury than isn't as needed as say an elite C or D. The impact a great goalie and good goalie have on a game vs their contract makes this question a lot harder to answer.

The coach should obviously adapt to the players he has.

The GM on the other hand should have a vision for how he wants his team to play and then acquire the players that fit that vision.
 

nhlfan9191

Registered User
Aug 4, 2010
19,585
17,344
Put it this way, if you got a team that can tilt the ice offensively, your goalie won’t be too busy.

Don’t get me wrong, you still need good goaltending, but you build a team that can move the puck in all three zones you’d be better off.

Anyhow, it is clear from last season that building a team around a goalie with a “defensive” d-core, no PMD and anemic offense from the forwards doesn’t work.

I’m not sure how we got where we are with this building around a goalie team philosophy. Has there ever been a team that has even tried this? Maybe Buffalo with Hasek who was arguably the best goalie to ever play and it got them nowhere in the end? It’s so flawed it makes my head hurt.
 
  • Like
Reactions: mariolemieux66

V13

Fire Sell Tank
Sep 21, 2005
13,922
1,806
M1 Habsram
As someone who is absolutely sick of watching the Habs being built around hot goalies...i so wish they would change philosophy and go into a more offensive mindset.

Thing is with Price and Weber both signed until they're almost 40 and with Julien as coach i don't see this happening anytime soon. We don't have the offensive tools to play an high tempo offensive style anyway but i really hope that the next time they rebuild (if it ever happpen) they will start to build from the front. I mean i can't be the only one who is very annoyed that we haven't found a true bonafide PPG #1 center since the mid 90's ?
 

Sorinth

Registered User
Jan 18, 2013
10,937
5,387
I’m not sure how we got where we are with this building around a goalie team philosophy. Has there ever been a team that has even tried this? Maybe Buffalo with Hasek who was arguably the best goalie to ever play and it got them nowhere in the end? It’s so flawed it makes my head hurt.

New Jersey with Brodeur, LA with Quick. Even many of the great Habs teams could be said to have been build around a great goalie.

There tends to be this misconceptions that building around a goalie means you have a crap team and an amazing goalie. That's not what I would call building around a goalie, since you haven't actually BUILT a team.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Milhouse40

nhlfan9191

Registered User
Aug 4, 2010
19,585
17,344
New Jersey with Brodeur, LA with Quick. Even many of the great Habs teams could be said to have been build around a great goalie.

There tends to be this misconceptions that building around a goalie means you have a crap team and an amazing goalie. That's not what I would call building around a goalie, since you haven't actually BUILT a team.

New Jersey wasn’t built around Brodeur. They were built around an incredible defence. That’s not the same as building around a goalie. I guess you can say this management currently tried to go that route by improving our D corps but not only is the NJ model dated, they failed miserably at it as well. Same can be said about Quick. The team was big, tough, could grind out anyone, and excellent defensively. All those things were more important then just Quick. This difference between us and the teams you referenced is Price is the most important aspect of our team while those other teams biggest strength didn’t come in the form of only goaltending.
 

admiralcadillac

Registered User
Oct 22, 2017
7,460
6,655
Habs are better off tanking, Price might be declining.

Other than that, 5-4 games are more fun to watch more often than not.
 

Sorinth

Registered User
Jan 18, 2013
10,937
5,387
New Jersey wasn’t built around Brodeur. They were built around an incredible defence. That’s not the same as building around a goalie. I guess you can say this management currently tried to go that route by improving our D corps but not only is the NJ model dated, they failed miserably at it as well. Same can be said about Quick. The team was big, tough, could grind out anyone, and excellent defensively. All those things were more important then just Quick. This difference between us and the teams you referenced is Price is the most important aspect of our team while those other teams biggest strength didn’t come in the form of only goaltending.

Did you read the second paragraph? If so please explain what you consider building around a goalie.

Because we haven't built around Price, we assembled a crap team with a superstar player. That's not building around a player, it's simply not building.
 

nhlfan9191

Registered User
Aug 4, 2010
19,585
17,344
Did you read the second paragraph? If so please explain what you consider building around a goalie.

Because we haven't built around Price, we assembled a crap team with a superstar player. That's not building around a player, it's simply not building.

The goaltender being the best player on the team and thinking he can cover up other holes that just about every championship team has needed to win is what I consider building around a goalie. I’d take my chances with a team like New Jersey and LA without Quick and Brodeur on their roster 10/10 times before I’d take a team with Price and a weak/average/alright support cast.
 

Milhouse40

Registered User
Aug 19, 2010
22,058
24,580
I don't think there's only one way to play the game or one way to win.
It should always be about scoring has many goals as possible while allowing as little as possible.
Winning games 4-1.

The biggest problem with the Habs is that they are really not equipped to play an open game.
They are going to get destroy.....but again, i would have more fun watching them lose a game 5-4 than 2-1.
 
  • Like
Reactions: paddy

L4br3cqu3

Matter of principle.
Sponsor
May 5, 2002
6,832
3,997
La Tuque
Offense is the best defense, never believed the other way around...

You play to outscore the opponent.

When your focus is to score goals, you play as a winner.

When your focus is to prevent the opponent from scoring, you play as a loser.

Defensive hockey is anti-hockey, you just try to hide the lack of skill/creativity of a team... (that's on Julien and Muller shoulders, communication is key, at least this time Julien got rid of imposed foxhole staff)

Over-simplified, I know, and I'm not advocating all-out offense all the time, but I prefer aggressive, creative offense than grinding and simple, repetitive patterns. (that's on the GM and Ducharme shoulders)

Goalie has a job, but as long as we outscore the opponent, I don't care how many goals he allows. (that's on Price and Waite shoulders, BUT damn Price needs a wayyy better defensive coverage, and better dmen overall, that's on the GM)

And please, quicker reactions from more skilled Dmen instead of always running after the puck cause we can't get out of our zone properly... (that's on the GM and defense coach shoulders)
 
  • Like
Reactions: paddy and sandviper

Sorinth

Registered User
Jan 18, 2013
10,937
5,387
The goaltender being the best player on the team and thinking he can cover up other holes that just about every championship team has needed to win is what I consider building around a goalie. I’d take my chances with a team like New Jersey and LA without Quick and Brodeur on their roster 10/10 times before I’d take a team with Price and a weak/average/alright support cast.

Which is the stupidest definition of building around a player ever.

I guess you can't build around a center, either since even McDavid can't cover up all the holes a bad team has.
 

nhlfan9191

Registered User
Aug 4, 2010
19,585
17,344
Which is the stupidest definition of building around a player ever.

I guess you can't build around a center, either since even McDavid can't cover up all the holes a bad team has.

Price is in a specialized position. If McDavid doesn’t score, there’s 11 other forwards, and 6 defenceman who can contribute. Price doesn’t have the same luxury of being lifted if he’s off. Not to mention he cant play every game and has little impact on what’s happening on the other side of the ice. McDavid can’t be compared because the positions are far to different and that’s exactly why I think it makes no sense to build around a goaltender period.
 
Last edited:

OldCraig71

Registered User
Feb 2, 2009
34,826
53,839
No one cares
I would love to see a habs team be able to win games 5-4 but we lack talent and a coaching philosophy that would ever allow it to happen.
 

SirClintonPortis

ProudCapitalsTraitor
Mar 9, 2011
18,546
4,421
Maryland native
Price is in a specialized position. If McDavid doesn’t score, there’s 11 other forwards, and 6 defenceman who can contribute. Price doesn’t have the same luxury of being lifted if he’s off. Not to mention he cant play every game. McDavid can’t be compared because the positions are far to different and that’s exactly why I think it makes no sense to build around a goaltender period.
You cannot "build around" someone who basically has no interaction with the forwards and limited interaction with the Dmen. You put something in front of him. Those are skaters. The skaters have two jobs. Scoring and limiting scoring opportunities.

Goalies stop the shots that get through. Skaters help limit the shot attempts.

Therrien hockey was nonsensical because it let shots through to the goalie but didn't reduce the quality of the shots. All while nerfing offense.
 
  • Like
Reactions: nhlfan9191

Sorinth

Registered User
Jan 18, 2013
10,937
5,387
If McDavid doesn’t score, there’s 11 other forwards, and 6 defenceman who can contribute.

Exactly my point, McDavid relies on the rest of the team to contribute when he isn't dominating. Same as Price.

Price doesn’t have the same luxury of being lifted if he’s off.

We haven't given Price that luxury, but building around the goalie means we get players that can give him that luxury.

Not to mention he cant play every game.

A starting goaltender will play more minutes in a season then a player. And come playoff time it's not even close.

McDavid can’t be compared because the positions are far to different and that’s exactly why I think it makes no sense to build around a goaltender period.

You can't build a winning team around a single player, that goes for every position and every player. No matter who you are, you need other great players on your team if you want to win the cup.
 

nhlfan9191

Registered User
Aug 4, 2010
19,585
17,344
You cannot "build around" someone who basically has no interaction with the forwards and limited interaction with the Dmen. You put something in front of him. Those are skaters. The skaters have two jobs. Scoring and limiting scoring opportunities.

Goalies stop the shots that get through.

That’s what my point was and the poster was either ignoring it or maybe I didn’t do a good enough job to make him understand.
 

Cole Caulifield

Registered User
Apr 22, 2004
27,967
2,465
Disclaimer: I haven't read the thread, but I find the idea interesting and I wanted to give my thoughts without having been influenced by other people's ideas, also because I don't have the time to read the whole thing. So perhaps other people have already said what I will write in this post. If so, I apologize.

It depends on what type of goalie you have. Do you have a goalie who's making saves on high % shots ? Or do you have a goalie who's ultra reliable to make the save on low % shots ? Is your goalie a good puck mover ?

If it's the guy who saves your butt on high % shots then go with high offense, low defense.

If it's the guy who is ultra reliable on low % shots, then you are better off with a strong defense, and low offense.

Another factor that plays into it is how good of a puck distributor your goalie is. Because a goalie who can dish the puck properly will really help your D shine more.

Of course, it's assuming you need to make a choice in terms of where to distribute your cap hits throughout the lineup, and you actually have the pick of the litter. In reality, you are constrained by whichever players you already have, and whichever players are actually available out there.

Additionally, I think goalies are really unreliable whereas skaters are more reliable in their performances. So even if your D plays stellar, your goalie could wet the bet on low % shots and sink your team. I think you're always better off with a good offense. And often the good offense, comes with the good defense. You want those centers who can control the game with a good mix of offense/defense, guys like Crosby (mostly offense), Malkin (mostly offense), Kopitar (good mix), Bergeron (mostly defense), etc.

Ultimately, I don't know if you can come to a conclusion on this.
 

nhlfan9191

Registered User
Aug 4, 2010
19,585
17,344
Exactly my point, McDavid relies on the rest of the team to contribute when he isn't dominating. Same as Price.



We haven't given Price that luxury, but building around the goalie means we get players that can give him that luxury.



A starting goaltender will play more minutes in a season then a player. And come playoff time it's not even close.



You can't build a winning team around a single player, that goes for every position and every player. No matter who you are, you need other great players on your team if you want to win the cup.

I agree with most of what you’re saying, but building around someone who has little to no effect on offence, which is half of the game makes no sense at all. Skaters have an effect in all aspects. Price or any goalie does not.
 

Sorinth

Registered User
Jan 18, 2013
10,937
5,387
I agree with most of what you’re saying, but building around someone who has little to no effect on offence, which is half of the game makes no sense at all. Skaters have an effect in all aspects. Price or any goalie does not.

There's certainly an argument to make.

A star forward gives you 20 minutes where he impacts GF and GA, a star D might give you 27 minutes. A goalie is giving providing only half the impact (Only GA) but for the full 60 minutes. So is it bad to have half the impact but do it for 2-3 times longer?
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->