View Single Post
01-17-2013, 04:53 PM
Lafleurs Guy
Global Moderator
Lafleurs Guy's Avatar
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 44,207
vCash: 500
Originally Posted by Teufelsdreck View Post
You mean Gauthier lusted after Bourque? I naively assumed that he wanted to get rid of Cammalleri. Of course, the prospect and draft pick obtained in the deal were mere driftwood. Same for the return for Gill and Kostitsyn.
Gauthier was an idiot. The broadcasters the day after his rant were talking about the returns we could get on Cammy... when the trade went down they were shocked and then several GMs commented that they had no idea about the deal.

PG was a **** poor GM who grasped at straws to make the playoffs. Make no mistake that was a short term move designed to try to make the playoffs and save face from Cammy's comments. The timing of the deal (which made absolutely no sense) confirm this. Everyone knows this and Bob McKenzie himself said you'd have to be a complete idiot to think that Cammy's comments didn't have something to do with this.

Just another example of the dumb, dumb management we've had in recent years.
Originally Posted by Teufelsdreck View Post
So why have the Habs been mediocre (and at times worse than that) since 1993? It's difficult to explain two decades in one gulp. I could point to a fewl things: the parsimonious outlook of the old Molson ownership, the appointment of Houle and Tremblay (and later of Carbonneau), the dumping of Koivu, the Gomez trade, and errors in drafting (incliuding, IMO. the selection of Leblanc instead of Kreider). No doubt other posters could add to the dossier.
How about the fact that we sign the leftovers from other clubs and never drafted high? How about the fact that rather than rebuild (which we should've done an infinite number of times) we went for 8th place?

8th place and making the playoffs became the target for success and many people here became satisified with it. That was the problem.
Originally Posted by Teufelsdreck View Post
You choose to close your eyes to the acquisition of quite a few prospects (besides Galchenyuk) who could help the Habs pull themselves out of the mire in a few years. I'm sure you could name them, so I won't bother.
I think acquiring prospects is great. I just think we should do a whole lot more of this...

Originally Posted by Miller Time View Post
while I agree in part, do you not see the value in the team having/retaining some quality veteran players, even while focusing on building toward a long term target of roster success?
Veteran presence is great. But not at the expense of picking up young talent. Nobody had to show Yzerman how to play. Nobody had to show Subban or Price. Good players will develop no matter what. In fact, when you build with a bunch of kids it's probably even better because they grow up together.

And we have vets that we can keep. Hal Gill was supposedly a good vet, Josh Gorges can fill that role. We don't need to turn down good opportunities for the sake of keeping a vet. Markov is woth a hell of a lot more to us as trade bait than he is as a veteran leader.

I know a whole bunch of people are going to freak out on this but it's true. We just never seem to learn this lesson.

Originally Posted by Miller Time View Post
it's not just about having enough players to ice a team, or picking up scrap veterans off of the UFA pile to make do while waiting for top picks/prospects to take over... it's also about making sure that those up & coming players get exposed to the right culture within the organization every step of the way.

a big part of Detroits sustained success, long after they had been a conistent contender without the benefit of restocking with quality picks, was the way they brought along guys like Datsyuk, Zetterberg, Franzen, Flipula, Kronwall.

Plekanec, imo, is exactly the type of veteran you want to have around when bringing a stud like Gally or Collberg into the fold. Good enough to be a leader by virtue of his play/performance, meticulously committed to details in all areas of his game, consistent work ethic & willingness to play whatever role the team wants.
Gionta, and it seems cole, also fit that billing, though of the three I'd argue Pleks to be the most useful in the "lead by example/performance" pov.

all this isn't to say you don't move him for the right deal, but moving him just for the sake of adding a 13th overall pick in a draft class that wasn't particularly deep/talented? no thanks... pass.
You wouldn't deal Markov for Filip Forsberg? Why not?

Who do you think will be the better player in two years or three years? How long do you think Forsberg will be in the league? And even if he flops... what are we losing here? And if he's great... what do we gain?

How the hell is this not worth the risk?

Lafleurs Guy is online now   Reply With Quote