First off, I'd like to address the perception that the Habs
somehow had a need in those areas. In my
opinion, twitter user @felixpotvin put it best.
Loosely paraphrased, he tweeted on July 1 that "if your biggest
need is your 4th line, congratulations, you just won the Stanley
Cup". The Habs didn't finish 15th
in the East last year because they didn't have enough players willing to drop
the gloves. Almost every piece I've read
on the subject has indicated that fighting in no way impacts the momentum of
the game. The Habs finished 15th last
year because they misused their personnel, and simply did not have enough guys
capable of driving play effectively. It's
commonly said that you win with guys like Prust (or Moen, or any other tough
"hard-working player"). It's
all well and good to have "grit" guys like them, but hockey is still about
scoring more goals than the opposition.
You don't win with guys like Prust; you win with high-skill players
producing at an extremely high level. The
Boston Bruins didn't win the Stanley Cup because they had a lot of tough
players on their team. They won because
they had a lot of people who are very good at playing hockey.
The real issue is that players like Prust should represent
the cheaper, interchangeable parts of your roster. You can get Brandon Prust's production from plenty
of players without committing 4 years and 10 million dollars on July 1. This isn't to knock Brandon Prust; from what
I can see the guy played some tough minutes last year and didn't get
killed. Brandon Prust, however, is going
to be available in some shape or form all summer for about 1 million less in
salary and far less term. Brandon Prust,
Colby Armstrong and Francis Bouillon are all useful players. They are not, however, players you should ever
feel the need to chase on July 1 and overpay.
Outside of clichés and platitudes, I don't even see what the
point of having a "tough" 3rd line is. The commonly used explanations are that
"it's good to have some (sandpaper/jam) in the lineup", or "you
need to be able to grit out a few goals and get to the dirty areas". It's all well and good to say these things,
but there's no evidence that these expressions mean anything. I would have much rather seen a 3rd line that
could be dangerous offensively (for example, Bourque-Eller-Leblanc) and force
the other team to spread their defensive responsibilities a little thin.
This isn't me knocking Bergevin for not going and signing
some amazing top 6 forward on July 1. I
understand free agency isn't that simple, and that when the time comes Bergevin
will likely address that need. I'm also
not saying I won't cheer for these guys; odds are I'll be just as excited as
everyone else whenever Prust does anything.
My issue is that these signings weren't ones that needed to be done
right away. The Habs have plenty of
players who can fill the roles that Prust and Bouillon are going to be asked to
fill. Everyone understands that you
incur a premium when you sign someone on July 1. I don't see any evidence that these guys are
worth paying that premium for.
No comments:
Post a Comment