HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Atlantic Division > Montreal Canadiens
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

1989 Habs/Flames

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
11-11-2004, 12:35 AM
  #1
Hackett
HF Needs Feeny
 
Hackett's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 16,622
vCash: 500
1989 Habs/Flames

I watched most of the game and there were a few things I have to say after watching that.

1) Man, was rick green ever solid...

2) With Gainey, Carbo, Keane, McPhee, Skrudland, and Lemieux, the habs had the deepest bunch of quality checkers/PK guys that I have ever seen.

3) How many times did Lemieux run Vernon? I lost count

I dont mind watching classics like these... where they invlove the habs and aren't too old.

Hopefully, we will get to see some of those 1993 games as well as some habs/flyers classics on the main TSN network. I know espn classics showed the 93 habs a little while ago but for people like me with no access to that channel, it would sure make my day.

Hackett is offline  
Old
11-11-2004, 10:13 AM
  #2
Guy Caballero
Registered User
 
Guy Caballero's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,857
vCash: 500
IMO, that team was better than both the 86 team and the 93 team. They were undisputedly of championship caliber, and the only reason they don't get the recognition is because they failed to win the Cup (which is fair enough, I guess). But if I could have any Hab roster from the past 20 years, it would be that one in a heartbeat. They were a complete team.

Guy Caballero is offline  
Old
11-11-2004, 10:27 AM
  #3
Gros Bill
Registered User
 
Gros Bill's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Country: Rwanda
Posts: 5,903
vCash: 500
It's funny, I have no memory whatsoever of the 1988-89 finals, except for a lot of swearing and a dull aching pain in my gut.

Gros Bill is offline  
Old
11-11-2004, 11:06 AM
  #4
Darz
Registered User
 
Darz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Where's the ANY key?
Country: Canada
Posts: 15,430
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Guy Caballero
IMO, that team was better than both the 86 team and the 93 team. They were undisputedly of championship caliber, and the only reason they don't get the recognition is because they failed to win the Cup (which is fair enough, I guess). But if I could have any Hab roster from the past 20 years, it would be that one in a heartbeat. They were a complete team.
Agreed. The '89 hab team was the best hab team since 1979. They had no real weaknesses. The only problem was the '89 Flames was one of the best teams of the past 25 years.

Darz is offline  
Old
11-11-2004, 02:20 PM
  #5
Fan
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: London Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 204
vCash: 500
Wow,that 89 team sure had a lot of grit and toughness to go along with the skill part .
Too bad Patrick Roy sucked in the series.

Fan is offline  
Old
11-11-2004, 02:31 PM
  #6
Joey
Registered User
 
Joey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,091
vCash: 500
Send a message via MSN to Joey
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fan
Too bad Patrick Roy sucked in the series.
That between-the-leg PP goal that he let in from Gilmour in Game 6 was just terrible. But I guess taking half of your penalties from hitting Vernon made the goaltending situation a bit more fair

Joey is offline  
Old
11-12-2004, 02:23 PM
  #7
Brisson11
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: On the rink
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,264
vCash: 500
Send a message via MSN to Brisson11
Courtnall was a good stick handler from what i saw... and damn dougy had to spoil our stanley cup chances

Brisson11 is offline  
Old
11-12-2004, 03:42 PM
  #8
loudi94
Master of my Domain
 
loudi94's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Alberta
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,676
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brisson11
Courtnall was a good stick handler from what i saw... and damn dougy had to spoil our stanley cup chances
Too bad he always tried to deke the ushers behind the net instead of passing or shooting. And Roy looked like he was scared of Big Al's slapper. Always turned his head.

loudi94 is online now  
Old
11-13-2004, 06:40 AM
  #9
CHareth
Registered User
 
CHareth's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 2,075
vCash: 500
Thanks for bringing back memories of a great team, Hackett. Gotta agree with Guy that the 1989 team was rock solid. I simply loved that team. Alas, Al MacInnis absolutely terrorized everyone that year, and you could almost sense Roy's fear whenever MacInnis touched the puck. I still remember my own pain from the Lanny McDonald goal. Man, did that ever hurt.

CHareth is offline  
Old
11-13-2004, 05:11 PM
  #10
Hackett
HF Needs Feeny
 
Hackett's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 16,622
vCash: 500
I cant believe Desjardins played in that game. He must have been like 20 years old or something.

Was he in the game as a replacement for an injured player or was he just that good of a prospect that he had to be in there?

I have always been a desjardins fan and he supplied me with one of my favorite habs moments ever but I cant believe he was actually around in 1989 at such a tender age. I was a 5 year old at that time and I remember most of the habs players from that game but I had no clue desjardins was a part of it.

Hackett is offline  
Old
11-14-2004, 12:21 PM
  #11
rocketlives
Registered User
 
rocketlives's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Montreal, QC
Posts: 793
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fan
Wow,that 89 team sure had a lot of grit and toughness to go along with the skill part .
Too bad Patrick Roy sucked in the 1989 series.
Patrick Roy sucked in the 1989 series? He played in 19 games, had a 13-6 win-loss record, a GAA of 2.09 and a saving percentage of .920 That's not shabby by any means.


Patrick Roy in the playoffs


Last edited by rocketlives: 11-14-2004 at 12:34 PM.
rocketlives is offline  
Old
11-14-2004, 04:20 PM
  #12
Fan
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: London Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 204
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by rocketlives
Patrick Roy sucked in the 1989 series? He played in 19 games, had a 13-6 win-loss record, a GAA of 2.09 and a saving percentage of .920 That's not shabby by any means.


Patrick Roy in the playoffs
The stats don't show how ROY let softies in and in the final game seived out.
Stats are for Agents and G.M 's to argue about at contract time.
Bottom line is Roy let the better team down.

Tell you one thing though ,the hockey then was better than the cycle the **** out of the puck game that is played today.

Fan is offline  
Old
11-14-2004, 04:28 PM
  #13
FTK
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Longueuil
Posts: 560
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fan
The stats don't show how ROY let softies in and in the final game seived out.
Stats are for Agents and G.M 's to argue about at contract time.
Bottom line is Roy let the better team down.

Tell you one thing though ,the hockey then was better than the cycle the **** out of the puck game that is played today.
the better team? Sorry but that's just wrong. The flames had a wicked team.

FTK is offline  
Old
11-14-2004, 04:32 PM
  #14
loadie
Official Beer Taster
 
loadie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: New Brunswick
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,185
vCash: 500
I just get a sick feeling everytime I think of that series. Oh well, at least we won another since to deaden the pain, it took Calgary forever just to make the playoffs after that year.

loadie is offline  
Old
11-14-2004, 07:35 PM
  #15
CHareth
Registered User
 
CHareth's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 2,075
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fan
The stats don't show how ROY let softies in and in the final game seived out.
Stats are for Agents and G.M 's to argue about at contract time.
Bottom line is Roy let the better team down.

Tell you one thing though ,the hockey then was better than the cycle the **** out of the puck game that is played today.
While I agree that Roy was not as sharp as he could have been, I wouldn't go so far as to say he let the better team down. The 1989 Flames were a stellar group.

Also, as for the hockey back then being supposedly better and free-wheeling, I suppose that's up for debate but it's interesting to note how all my friends at that time used to curse and whine about how boring Habs games were with their dump, chase and cycle routine.

CHareth is offline  
Old
11-15-2004, 12:31 AM
  #16
Hackett
HF Needs Feeny
 
Hackett's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 16,622
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by anon
While I agree that Roy was not as sharp as he could have been, I wouldn't go so far as to say he let the better team down. The 1989 Flames were a stellar group.

Also, as for the hockey back then being supposedly better and free-wheeling, I suppose that's up for debate but it's interesting to note how all my friends at that time used to curse and whine about how boring Habs games were with their dump, chase and cycle routine.
I'm only speaking in terms of Game 6 only but that goal that Lemieux scored against Vernon was twice as bad as anything Roy let in.

I hope we are not mixing up the standards that are put on a goalie these days to the standards that were laid on goalies back then. Vernon would have been crucified if he let that goal in today's game.

In this game, Patrick Roy didn't look bad but he didn't exactly grab the game by its throat either. I certainly wouldn't blame patrick for the loss though.

Hackett is offline  
Old
11-15-2004, 12:09 PM
  #17
mcphee
Registered User
 
mcphee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 19,105
vCash: 500
I always thought that Calgary was just the better team that year. I thought Mtl. depended on Richer too much for their offense. They had a good hard working team that had to work too hard for their goals as there wasn't a lot of natural offense.

mcphee is offline  
Old
11-15-2004, 09:18 PM
  #18
Hackett
HF Needs Feeny
 
Hackett's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 16,622
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by mcphee
I always thought that Calgary was just the better team that year. I thought Mtl. depended on Richer too much for their offense. They had a good hard working team that had to work too hard for their goals as there wasn't a lot of natural offense.
Again I was super young at this time. I've heard great things about Mats Naslund but I guess he was past his prime that year the way he played.

One of my first memories as a hab was Courtnall and Richer battling it out for the goalscoring lead all year long. I guess that was a year or two later that Courtnall really cranked it up to Richer's level.

But I agree, after you take all those guys out, you are left with a bunch of excellent checkers, grinders, and character players that must have a been a real pain in the rear end to play against.

The offensive powerhouse just wasn't quite there.

Hackett is offline  
Old
11-15-2004, 11:57 PM
  #19
FerrisRox
Registered User
 
FerrisRox's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Toronto, Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,086
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hackett
Again I was super young at this time. I've heard great things about Mats Naslund but I guess he was past his prime that year the way he played.

One of my first memories as a hab was Courtnall and Richer battling it out for the goalscoring lead all year long. I guess that was a year or two later that Courtnall really cranked it up to Richer's level.

But I agree, after you take all those guys out, you are left with a bunch of excellent checkers, grinders, and character players that must have a been a real pain in the rear end to play against.

The offensive powerhouse just wasn't quite there.
I think you are confused. Naslund had 33 goals and 84 points, both team-bests so its hard to understand how figure he was "past him prime that year the way he played."

Also, neither Richer or Courtnall were even in the mix in terms of goals. Russ had 22 and Richer had 25.

It's also puzzling that you would say scoring was a problem for this team. They didn't have one big gunner, and in fact, didn't even have a 40-goal man. But they did have two 30 goal scorers and a whopping five other guys that scored 20 or more.

That kind of scoring balance would be the envy of the league.

Look at these goal totals...

NASLUND 33
SMITH 32
LEMIEUX 29
CARBONNEAU 26
CORSON 26
RICHER 25
COURTNALL 22

Thats 193 goals right there.

Mike McPhee had 19 goals and missed 7 games so they could have had another 20-goal guy. Chelios also had a great offensive year with 15 goals and 73 points.

FerrisRox is online now  
Old
11-16-2004, 06:36 AM
  #20
mcphee
Registered User
 
mcphee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 19,105
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by FerrisRox
I think you are confused. Naslund had 33 goals and 84 points, both team-bests so its hard to understand how figure he was "past him prime that year the way he played."

Also, neither Richer or Courtnall were even in the mix in terms of goals. Russ had 22 and Richer had 25.

It's also puzzling that you would say scoring was a problem for this team. They didn't have one big gunner, and in fact, didn't even have a 40-goal man. But they did have two 30 goal scorers and a whopping five other guys that scored 20 or more.

That kind of scoring balance would be the envy of the league.

Look at these goal totals...

NASLUND 33
SMITH 32
LEMIEUX 29
CARBONNEAU 26
CORSON 26
RICHER 25
COURTNALL 22

Thats 193 goals right there.

Mike McPhee had 19 goals and missed 7 games so they could have had another 20-goal guy. Chelios also had a great offensive year with 15 goals and 73 points.
Guess I'm wrong. Without looking it up yesterday, I thought 89 was one of Richer's 50 goal years. In fact 89 was sandwiched between the 2 years. I remember watching one of the early games of the series and a friend commenting how aside from Richer they weren't generating scoring chances. I guess memory led to a wrong conclusion. My clearest memories from that series was the ot game that Ryan Walter won, possibly in the 3rd.[if I'm wrong here, I'm worried]. My friend and I went outside after the 2nd ot and tried to remove my pool cover, learning a lesson in so doing. Alcohol and early AM pool maintenance don't mix. I missed game 6 because I had a ball game. The problem with taping playoff games is that the ot can screw you up and you don't know when to turn off the tape. It became academic as the guys on the other team had a radio. I remember Courtnall scored because I heard them and yelled at their bench to keep it down. Can't remember if my team won though I'm sure I was brilliant.

mcphee is offline  
Old
11-16-2004, 03:23 PM
  #21
tinyzombies
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Calif via Montreal
Posts: 11,766
vCash: 500
I always thought it was a given that the 89 Habs were superior to the 89 Flames and that the 86 Flames were superior to the 86 Habs but the results happened in reverse because of injuries and/or the Flames were tired in 86. I talked with a guy from Calgary this weekend about it actually and he agreed.

tinyzombies is offline  
Old
11-18-2004, 10:06 PM
  #22
Hackett
HF Needs Feeny
 
Hackett's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 16,622
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by FerrisRox
I think you are confused. Naslund had 33 goals and 84 points, both team-bests so its hard to understand how figure he was "past him prime that year the way he played."

Also, neither Richer or Courtnall were even in the mix in terms of goals. Russ had 22 and Richer had 25.

It's also puzzling that you would say scoring was a problem for this team. They didn't have one big gunner, and in fact, didn't even have a 40-goal man. But they did have two 30 goal scorers and a whopping five other guys that scored 20 or more.

That kind of scoring balance would be the envy of the league.

Look at these goal totals...

NASLUND 33
SMITH 32
LEMIEUX 29
CARBONNEAU 26
CORSON 26
RICHER 25
COURTNALL 22

Thats 193 goals right there.

Mike McPhee had 19 goals and missed 7 games so they could have had another 20-goal guy. Chelios also had a great offensive year with 15 goals and 73 points.
I'm just basing this on game 6. I know its a crummy formula to base everything on one game but that's all I remember. My very first memory of the NHL ever was this game and that's why I like to talk about it.

And Mats Naslund seemed absolutely invisible and useless. I know he had big years but I also know he left the NHL like a year later. So that's why I suggested that he may have been past his prime. I never looked up his numbers for that year before I posted anything.

My, how times have changed. Calude Lemieux got 29 that year. These days, that total could lead some teams in goal scoring.

Wow, McPhee had 19... I just remember him as a true soldier with a porno style mustache but he did well that year, I guess. He stood out in this game with his relentless work ethic.

Also, I wonder if those 26 goals were a career high for Carbo. I never really remembered him as a goal scorer but rather an excellent 2 way player as well as a dominant PK guy and a terrific shotblocker.

Hackett is offline  
Closed Thread

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:52 PM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2015 All Rights Reserved.