View Single Post
03-09-2012, 10:12 AM
Join Date: Jul 2007
Originally Posted by
LG, I'll respond to your post tomorrow (or Sunday, depending on my... activities tomorrow night).
That said, overall, I think the biggest mistake Gauthier made so far - and it IS a big mistake - was not covering properly for Markov's extended absence. With Markov in fold we wouldn't have had a great d-corps but it would've been over-crowded and (imo) average.
Markov - Spacek
Subban - Gill
Gorges - Weber
ex. Emelin, Diaz
That was the projected line-up. Not great but over-crowded, Emelin and Diaz are both seasoned pros from other leagues, they're not rookie-rookies.
So the lack of Markov messed up Jacques Martin's plans, caused the signing of Campoli who has been at the very best TERRIBLE, the rather side-ways trade for Kaberle (which could be salvaged, more on that after) and basically where we're at now.
I like the Cammy trade. I'm sick of the smurf-tastic reputation the Habs had and it was pretty obvious he's an ornery guy who didn't fit in that well. I don't think we got too little value for him because size+speed are highly valued in the league, maybe too much so, but look at Gaustad. Cammy also had a NTC and 14m/2years left in cash, which leaves a lot of potential buyers out. A team like Nashville would've loved to have Cammy in theory but I doubt they'd be able to justify his meager
goals. So that's definitely not as bad as the Markov situation.
Regarding the Kaberle acquisition: I think he's either easily traded as he's better than Zidlicky and that doofus got moved, or he'll pick up his game to be at least useful. Leafs fans were repeating that Kaberle lost a step or two from his peak - a time where he was supposedly worth more than Markov - but if Kabs can still generate a ~40-50pt season from the backend he does have a place in the NHL and his contract is fair-value. I'd rather NOT have him but he does probably look much worse next to "Swiss-league" Campoli and a generally losing team.
Everything aside, morale and momentum have a ton to do with it. The Rangers flew off without their big guns (Gabs, Richards) carrying them. I think a positive, professional coach would do wonders for the team because everything aside we have some really solid pieces.
This isn't a team that's supposed to cling on for 8th like the
years. I just like what I see, and I think with a motivated team and a fresh start with a new coach they'll surprise a lot of people.
I mean, on paper, we're much better than friggin Ottawa and all they changed was their coach. And given that Goat's had 2.5years at the helm, and aside from the Markov fiasco which killed off this season, he's made good signings (Cole, Halpern basically) and good-looking draft picks. And if it were me, or Brian Burke or any star GM, they would've re-signed Markov too.
Again... you're looking at it from a micro level. His biggest mistake was not Markov or his failure to get a backup for him. His failure was what he DIDN'T do. He didn't exhibit much in the way of proactive thinking to make us competitive for the future. His whole attitude was to get 8th place.
You think dealing Cammy was a good move? Okay, that's fine. I have no problem with trading him. But to deal him for what we got made no sense unless you're trying to sneak into 8th place. That's what that move was about. That's what most of his moves were about. He's not a visionary and that's why I think he needs to be replaced.
Again, I don't care if he's better than Steve Tambellini or whoever... you can have that conversation with somebody else. It's meaningless to me. As I said, many of those guys have their hands tied and could only dream of having PG's situation. But compare PG to the best GMs and he falls flat on his face.
I don't know how old you are. I suspect you've grown up in an era where we've had terrible management and that's all you know. Someday we'll land a good GM and you'll see what you've been missing. PG is not a good GM dude.
Originally Posted by
You're not seriously back-pedalling and trying to have us believe that now are you?
Not only have you not said this many times, but you have not said it once.
You've always maintained the only way to build a team is by tanking for a few years and pile up on "superstars" through the draft.
UFA's have been exactly what you've been against. Don't change your tune now LG.
There are three ways to build a team; through the draft, through free-agency or via trade. That's it. When was the last time Detroit tanked? San Jose? On the other hand The Islanders and Oilers have tanked several times and have received great young prospects out of it and are still unsuccessful. And don't start telling me Detroit did tank 20 years ago as that's irrelevant as they have changed that team over several times over the last 20 years and continue to be successful without tanking for a draft pick.
1. I've been on this forum for years. Go find me a single post where I said the ONLY way to do this is rebuilding. I'd be surprised if you can. That's not my position and it never has been. If that's what you believe then you haven't been reading my posts clearly enough. What you will find if you search what I've said is that I've always maintained that there's more than one way to win. But the best way that I can see is rebuilding because it's yielded the most success and we suck at getting quality UFAs.
2. There is no backpeddling here. I want a cup, that's it.
I don't care how we get it.
If that means getting a bunch of UFAs and winning... great. It's not how I'd try to do it but if it works I couldn't care less. If I thought we could get superstars with the 400th pick the way Detroit has... then I'd be all for it. We (and no other team in the league) haven't demonstrated that capability. We've also shown no ability to sign superstar UFAs on the rare occassions where they have become UFAs. We sign the leftovers from other clubs and I don't think we'll win that way. I also don't think we'll win cups if we continue to finish 8th and drafting 15th. If we managed to do it that way though... great.
3. As I've said on here many times, I'd support signing say... Suter to a UFA contract. That makes sense to me. Problem is that it's not likely to happen. No way that guy signs here.
4. What I've said is this: Most clubs that have won cups have done so via rebuilding. Not ALL have done it this way but most have. It is a repeatable strategy. That's because it's awfully hard to win cups without a superstar. Superstars typically don't become UFAs in their prime and teams typically won't trade them so if you can't get them that way (and we've shown no ability to get them) then the alternative is to trade for picks and prospects. At least then you have a shot at getting a superstar. That's what I've argued for years.
Hope that clears things up for you.
Last edited by Lafleurs Guy: 03-09-2012 at
View Public Profile
Lafleurs Guy's albums
Find More Posts by Lafleurs Guy