View Single Post
Old
06-28-2011, 07:57 AM
  #51
Patccmoi
Registered User
 
Patccmoi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 1,142
vCash: 500
I'll go with the 'herd of brainless sheeps'. This argumentation is far too one-sided, takes things out of context and ignores everything positive that they had done, not to mention results, in order to bash management.

I didn't like all trades and all moves. But there is nothing 'objective' in your post. A lot of people seem to get confused between being objective and being negative/going 'against the masses'. That's just not what objectivity is.

And I also think people really fail in general in analyzing trades/acquisition/non-signing in the global context. Like, giving a 2nd for Moore and then not re-signing is a fail. But Moore helped us a lot the year he was there, and management considered that the team would be better using only 600k on Halpern in cap than something like 2M that Moore was asking to play here, and Halpern was actually very similar in the regular season. Moore was better in the playoffs sure, but that might be because we had to use Halpern totally out of the position we signed in for, while Eller was actually doing very well as 3rd line center (which Moore was in TB) and more importantly getting some really good experience. I wanted Moore resigned btw and I'm not all that happy that we let him go and I'm not saying it was a great move by management, but it wasn't terrible either. The reason we lost in the first round was not Halpern instead of Moore, it was missing MaxPac, Markov and Gorges. And going into next year, I'm happier with Eller as a 3rd center than Moore and would you pay 2M or a 4th line center?

The only thing that matters is "is the team improving" and what is best going FORWARD, not what we might have gained/loss in a particular trade. If it's better for the team going forward to not resign Wiz (not saying it is, but if that's what they analyze is better) then I DON'T CARE what we gave up for him, the important part is what makes the team better next year. And imo, it really is improving since Gauthier came here. I actually think up to now he does a lot better job than Gainey because Gainey was doing very dangerous trades giving quality assets (the Gomez one, Ribeiro, etc...) which in many cases did not pay off. Gauthier seems to have a clear plan, and he's following it and gradually improving the team, and while he's giving away some assets, he's not doing anything reckless, like say 1st and Tinordi for Penner (now THAT would've hurt).

And newsflash : making the playoffs is VERY IMPORTANT for an NHL team in terms of revenues. A 2nd round pick for them is a perfectly fine price to pay to make the playoffs, no matter if you lose the player you got for it later. Sure it's not perfect long term management, but there is absolutely no garantee that the 2nd round pick will help your team later while the rental allowing you to make the playoffs now is worth a lot of money for them. I'm sure that the owners have 0 problem whatsoever with the Moore or Wiz deal, as they allowed them to make a good amount of money. And that's true for every single team, a 2nd round pick for being able to take part in the playoffs instead of missing them is something any of them would do. As for the long term, while you do miss out on a player, I think that the playoff experience your youth get is also very important. Trust me : if Montreal goes 2-0 on the road against a team next year, they're not going to relax and joke and not take game 3 seriously as they seemed to have done this year (per Price's words). They'll remember this year, and they'll try to finish the jobs. The Bruins seemed like they learned from these mistakes they made in the previous years, and I'm not sure at all that they would've won 3 games 7 without it.

Patccmoi is offline