View Single Post
01-11-2004, 07:01 PM
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Laprairie, dans la belle Province
Originally Posted by
Maybe romantic, but also superstitious. Until achieving stability with Koivu, the role of captain on the Habs was a curse, usually ending in a bad trade and a mild scandal. This Captain's Curse was one of the stains that characterized the (later) Savard and Houle era.
Not too long ago this team was swirling around the bottom half of the league. It was unstable and suffered eerie bad luck with injuries. But the Curse has hopefully run its course. Koivu's dramatic recovery from cancer is a metaphor for the team's return to where it sits now. Trading away Koivu would be tempting the Return of the Curse.
Winning teams play for something greater than their paycheque, whether it's self-respect, team solidarity, or team pride. Koivu generally inspires his team to play for these things. Whatever he lacks of Lecavalier's talent, he at least brings that.
This post I should print it and put in a frame on my wall. You tell the deep secret of Saku's beleivers. Saku's value to the team is something greater than what he brings on ice, Saku will bring us Lord Stanley, this is like a vision, something some of you have seen in a dream, etc. A parallel world?
Trying to be “l'avocat du diable” i'll expose you how your post can be wrong: Hockey games are won on the ice, it's something physical, muscular, endurance, especially when a team tries to reach the Stanley Cup, it takes more than a smallish gritty center to acheive it, it takes physical strenght. Which Lecav is more designed to than Koivu.
Last year Koivu played all 82 games and the team didn't make the PO. How can you explain it? Is that team was playing for something greater than a paycheck? That team didn't have a strategy coach, Therrien was a grinder coach, pusching the players to go, go, go! I saw Koivu being pushed away, getting hits without any defender/revenge. Where was his influence, his leadership? Therrien got fired by a bunch of players not playing as a team at all. A team led by anyone, Koivu was a non-factor last year in terms of leadership. Gilmour was taking all the place, Juneau was a bigger influence than Koivu.
So where was that: “something greater than their paycheque, whether it's self-respect, team solidarity, or team pride. Koivu generally inspires his team to play for these things. Whatever he lacks of Lecavalier's talent, he at least brings that”? This doesn't apply for last season and last season was a complete season with Koivu first center and captain.
On the ice 2 years ago it was Theodore who led to a spot in the playoffs. Koivu was an inspiration but he wasn't there on the ice. Last year he was on the ice and Habs didn't made the PO. Who makes Habs the spot in the PO? The goalie or the first line production?
It makes me laught when I read many of you won't make a Koivu for Lecav one for one. Now I understand more because of the superstitious explanation. Do you beleive Bob Gainey would eat that kind of superstition? I mean, Koivu is not Guy Lafleur. Since Koivu is our first center, Habs never got a place in the PO. And many of you beleive he will suddently get us to the PO and lead us to Lord Stanley? Is this is magic thinking?
This year the team is playing better, playing as a team, the Gainey effect, they have more leaders in the lockeroom. In fact, Souray is the new leader. He's like the new captain,
. Many of Koivu beleivers are very angry at these french medias, angry at Mike Ribeiro, at José Théodore. Koivu has become the center of a war between french and anglos fans, Koivu is the anglo leader side, and all the success of players speaking french is considered as ennemies, acting in the hidden agendas of french crap journalists.
I mean get this paranoid ideas off of your heads. This is just hockey, it's just a matter of bringing the best team possible on the ice. I don't care if Lecav is french speaking, I will always be an Habs team fan before any individual player. If Vinny Lecav is 6 years younger and have enough skills for his frame, I do beleive that when he'll get 26 of age he'll be more mature and with a serious team he can lead us to Stanley. Lecav will become better with the years I beleive. For example Sundin was not acheived at 23, he looks better at 32.
ps: sorry for that long post.
View Public Profile
Find More Posts by HABitude