View Single Post
01-11-2013, 05:05 PM
Andy's Avatar
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Montreal
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,309
vCash: 500
If Gainey decided to let go everybody, it had to be because it was not so great to begin with
It was the same team as the year before which played great for the most part. They added two pieces which theoretically should have improved the team. On paper they looked great.

But with all due respect, this argument makes no sense. DaChampion explains Gainey's philosophy change because we went from bad team in need of great picks, to a contender able to win it all.
The team was a contender at that time. You can't deny this. Everyone put us in a contending position that year. Most media pundits and even non-habs fans on this board. Gainey loaded up for possible contention like every other team does when they feel it's comi.

Why the heck would it only count for that 1 year? Why the need to blow it up immediately in the summer of that "contending" year? How's a bunch of contracts ending a reason? Why weren't we able to re-sign them?
A bunch of contracts ending leaves your team in limbo. For instances the Habs did offer Kovalev AND Komisarek deals. Both players refused to go for literally 500k to an extra 1 million elsewhere. This is what we know from the outside looking in, but from all accounts, the room wasn't stable. Higgins, Price, Sergei, Andrei etc all partying it up etc etc. Kovalev vs Koivu.

And a team isn't stacked to win it all if everything imploded and there were problems in the dressing room.
On paper they were stacked, not sure how you can deny this. They added two scoring forwards to a team which was one of the higher scoring teams the year prior. They brought in two ES players to balance the reliance on PP scoring the year before.

To be winning team, you need to be great on and off the ice. If there are cliques everywhere, the team was stacked on paper....not on reality.
I honestly don't know what you are trying to say here, but yes there were problems in the room. Kostopoulos admitted this. It's probably the reason why the UFA guys were let go and a new core was sought.

Yeah, we had the points we had, yet, didn't show anything in the playoffs.
Which year was this? In 07-08 the team looked pretty darn good and they lost against Philly pretty much because of Price's lackluster play. You can blame this on Gainey for throwing him to the wolves I guess. Also, just because you are a contending team, doesn't mean you are guarenteed to win the playoffs. Similarly, just because you don't do well in the playoffs doesn't mean you are not a contending team. See the Flyers who are contending every year but haven't been that successful as they ought to be.

I love how people keeps dissing everybody in the league because they don't show up when it count the most but we don't do it for our own team?
Not sure what you are saying here.

Look WS. The team finished first in 07-08. They weren't perfect, but the discourse around the team that they were a contending team if they could rely less on the PP and if they could get a big centre. This lead to the Sundin saga, we eventually acquired Lang and Tanguay, both of which were good even strength scorers.

The team had a lot of UFAs. A lot of injuries. Locker room problems. Off-ice problems. That's what happened during and post-season. But prior to the season, when all the moves were actually made, the team was considered a contender and moves were made to "fix" the holes the team had the year before in order to improve on what was already a successful season. The team imploded, and many many many things went wrong; no one could have guessed this. The core was dismantled subsequently for reasons we will never truly know, though they do appear quite obvious. Was it the right moves in the end? No, hindsight helps with that. As for the moves made between those two seasons, they made absolute sense.

Andy is offline