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

The one thing that bothers me is the Habs seem so easy to play against

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
07-25-2010, 12:25 PM
  #426
JayBee*
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 3,652
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Koseegin View Post
But you haven't answered the question...what has Lou done since the lockout besides firing coaches and acquiring older/overpaid players?
What has PG done before, after, during the lockout? I always thought you judged someone based on their entire body of work, no?

Since the lockout he has not been great in the playoffs, basically the same as PG/BG.... I still think he's a superior GM.

JayBee* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-25-2010, 12:28 PM
  #427
katatoniak
Registered User
 
katatoniak's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Jonquiere, Qc
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,223
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JayBee View Post
What has PG done before, after, during the lockout? I always thought you judged someone based on their entire body of work, no?

Since the lockout he has not been great in the playoffs, basically the same as PG/BG.... I still think he's a superior GM.
I think he WAS a superior GM

katatoniak is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-25-2010, 12:29 PM
  #428
Ohashi_Jouzu
Registered User
 
Ohashi_Jouzu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Halifax
Country: Japan
Posts: 21,619
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Koseegin View Post
But you haven't answered the question...what has Lou done since the lockout besides firing coaches and acquiring older/overpaid players?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Metropolitsky View Post
You didn't answer his question.....what has he accomplished since the lock-out?
In fairness, he has managed a salary capped environment successfully enough that his team finished 1st in its division 4 out of the past 5 years (9 of the past 13, with 3 2nd place finishes in there). Or, in other words, he has consistently assembled rosters that are good enough to get home ice advantage for the playoffs. It's up to the coaches and players to make use of that advantage from there and adapt to playoff matchups. The GM doesn't lace up skates, nor stand on the bench directing traffic.

I mean, seriously. With all the post season struggles arguments against HIM (Lou), you might as well say that PG signing Moore last year had more to do with last year's success than the play of Halak and Cammy, because that's about all he directly contributed to that playoff run as GM.

Ohashi_Jouzu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-25-2010, 12:31 PM
  #429
Andy
Registered User
 
Andy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Montreal
Country: Canada
Posts: 17,959
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JayBee View Post
What has PG done before, after, during the lockout? I always thought you judged someone based on their entire body of work, no?

Since the lockout he has not been great in the playoffs, basically the same as PG/BG.... I still think he's a superior GM.
I think it is really important to look at pre and post lockout as two different entities since they pretty much are. There are different rules to play by.

This is Gauthier's first gig in the post lockout era and we pretty much can't make any decision on that so far as he has been GM for less than half a year.

Lou has struggles post-lockout. He keeps looking for quick fixes, hasn't look at the long-term. They have no replacement for Brodeur, they have old players at high salaries. They also gave up significant pieces for 6 months of Kovalchuk and now might have to move even more players to retain him given that they will be over the cap. Let's not forget the revolving door of coaches in NJ. God forbid that would happen in Montreal, you and I both know the fans will flip out.

Not impressed at all by Lou's post lockout record.

Andy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-25-2010, 12:35 PM
  #430
No Team Needed
Registered User
 
No Team Needed's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: essex
Posts: 3,126
vCash: 500
what's funny to me is i have watched hockey for a long time and one of the arguments on the 70s dynasty is that the canadiens were not physical enough. nobody wanted to call them a perfect team no matter how much they won because people argued that eventually they would be worn down into uselessness. i remember people saying that so many canadiens retiring in the 80s was because of the bruins and flyers physicality. yes, this was said before the internet!

80s come around the canadiens win a cup and make it to the cup finals between two powerhouse dynasties. again, people said the canadiens were not physical enough and guys like claude lemieux and brian skrudland couldn't gut it in the playoffs.

the canadiens have always relied on skill and thats why people became fans of them. maybe those who became canadiens fans because they are french don't understand that but people from outside quebec, watching montreal has always been like watching some foreign european team of skill and two way play. they may have a few tough guys from time to time or a guy like larry robinson who can do everything and then some, but they will always be the flying frenchmen, not the fighting frenchmen. even without any french players lol.

the canadiens have always seemed like pushovers but in the end, its about the scoreboard.

No Team Needed is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-25-2010, 12:39 PM
  #431
Andy
Registered User
 
Andy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Montreal
Country: Canada
Posts: 17,959
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ohashi_Jouzu View Post
In fairness, he has managed a salary capped environment successfully enough that his team finished 1st in its division 4 out of the past 5 years (9 of the past 13, with 3 2nd place finishes in there). Or, in other words, he has consistently assembled rosters that are good enough to get home ice advantage for the playoffs. It's up to the coaches and players to make use of that advantage from there and adapt to playoff matchups. The GM doesn't lace up skates, nor stand on the bench directing traffic.

I mean, seriously. With all the post season struggles arguments against HIM (Lou), you might as well say that PG signing Moore last year had more to do with last year's success than the play of Halak and Cammy, because that's about all he directly contributed to that playoff run as GM.
How much of that success is directly attributed to lou? Since the lockout it seems to me that as Brodeur goes, so does the devils. There playoff record has been pretty bad for such a successful regular season team.

Also, his revolving door of coaches is concerning as well. San Jose gets a lot of flack for being chokers in the playoffs, but the Devils haven't faired any better, in fact their playoff performances in recent years have been quite poor and underwhelming.

Andy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-25-2010, 12:48 PM
  #432
JayBee*
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 3,652
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Koseegin View Post
I think it is really important to look at pre and post lockout as two different entities since they pretty much are. There are different rules to play by.

This is Gauthier's first gig in the post lockout era and we pretty much can't make any decision on that so far as he has been GM for less than half a year.

Lou has struggles post-lockout. He keeps looking for quick fixes, hasn't look at the long-term. They have no replacement for Brodeur, they have old players at high salaries. They also gave up significant pieces for 6 months of Kovalchuk and now might have to move even more players to retain him given that they will be over the cap. Let's not forget the revolving door of coaches in NJ. God forbid that would happen in Montreal, you and I both know the fans will flip out.

Not impressed at all by Lou's post lockout record
.
But you're impressed with Gainey's right?

JayBee* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-25-2010, 12:50 PM
  #433
JayBee*
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 3,652
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Koseegin View Post
How much of that success is directly attributed to lou? Since the lockout it seems to me that as Brodeur goes, so does the devils. There playoff record has been pretty bad for such a successful regular season team.

Also, his revolving door of coaches is concerning as well. San Jose gets a lot of flack for being chokers in the playoffs, but the Devils haven't faired any better, in fact their playoff performances in recent years have been quite poor and underwhelming.
Did you forget that Brodeur missed a lot of time a few years ago? You don't remember Clemenson stepping in an ddoing a good job?

You people try so hard to discredit non-Habs and prop up current Habs, it's disgusting.

JayBee* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-25-2010, 12:50 PM
  #434
Andy
Registered User
 
Andy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Montreal
Country: Canada
Posts: 17,959
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JayBee View Post
But you're impressed with Gainey's right?
I'm impressed at how Gainey changed a team that was in shambles to something respectable. The cupboard was bear and our roster was laughable before he came in. I respect him greatly for that.

Andy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-25-2010, 12:51 PM
  #435
icerocket
Registered User
 
icerocket's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Atlantis
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,310
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JayBee View Post
You people try so hard to discredit non-Habs and prop up current Habs, it's disgusting.
Funny the reverse is true of you.

icerocket is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-25-2010, 12:51 PM
  #436
Andy
Registered User
 
Andy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Montreal
Country: Canada
Posts: 17,959
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JayBee View Post
Did you forget that Brodeur missed a lot of time a few years ago? You don't remember Clemenson stepping in an ddoing a good job?

You people try so hard to discredit non-Habs and prop up current Habs, it's disgusting.
Habs finished 1st a few years ago, is that not a significant accomplishment as well?

It's not about discrediting non-habs, it's about looking at what actually is, the flaws of every team, not just their positives in relations to the Canadiens' flaws.

Lou hasn't impressed me, on the other hand Peter Chiarelli has.

Andy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-25-2010, 01:03 PM
  #437
JayBee*
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 3,652
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Koseegin View Post
Habs finished 1st a few years ago, is that not a significant accomplishment as well?

It's not about discrediting non-habs, it's about looking at what actually is, the flaws of every team, not just their positives in relations to the Canadiens' flaws.

Lou hasn't impressed me, on the other hand Peter Chiarelli has.
So Gainey is credited for the team finishing 1st but Lou is not? C'mon

JayBee* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-25-2010, 01:03 PM
  #438
Ohashi_Jouzu
Registered User
 
Ohashi_Jouzu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Halifax
Country: Japan
Posts: 21,619
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Koseegin View Post
How much of that success is directly attributed to lou? Since the lockout it seems to me that as Brodeur goes, so does the devils. There playoff record has been pretty bad for such a successful regular season team.
Since he makes the final decisions on all personnel? A lot.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Koseegin View Post
Also, his revolving door of coaches is concerning as well. San Jose gets a lot of flack for being chokers in the playoffs, but the Devils haven't faired any better, in fact their playoff performances in recent years have been quite poor and underwhelming.
Yeah, I guess so. But like you said, given the disparity between regular season success (against almost everyone in the conference) and post season failure (against a singular opponent), if he thinks it's preparation for the match up that the team was lacking, he SHOULD perhaps look for new coaches if that's the conclusion he comes to.

But to look at it more deeply, sometimes they just got bad matchups. They were a 103 point team last year, but were something like 1-6 against the Flyers in the regular season. Obviously that continued to be a bad matchup for them in the post season. One regular season win difference, and they might have swapped seeds with Pittsburgh and played Ottawa instead. They were 3-1 versus Ottawa regular season, so maybe that would have been a better match up.

They were 106 point team the year before, but were 1-3 versus Carolina in the regular season. That proved to be a bad match up in the playoffs that year, too (eventually losing in 7 games). One more regular season win, and they could have swapped seeds with Washington and ended up playing NYR in the first round. They were 3-3 against NYR, so maybe THAT series could have gone differently, too.

The year before that, they DID play the Rangers (and lost), who they were 1-7 against in the regular season, despite being something like 38-19 against the rest of the conference. Possibly the worst possible match up for them.

I could go on, but in summary, it's not as simplistic as some are trying to paint it here, and a whole lot of responsibility for post season struggles is being lumped onto Lou somewhat erroneously, imo. The teams flourished against most of the league every year, but struggled against a certain few teams in the regular season and the players/coaches seemingly were unable to make successful adjustments when the post season came around.

Ohashi_Jouzu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-25-2010, 01:12 PM
  #439
Andy
Registered User
 
Andy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Montreal
Country: Canada
Posts: 17,959
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JayBee View Post
So Gainey is credited for the team finishing 1st but Lou is not? C'mon
I never said that, I asked you a question. If Lou is as responsible for his team finishing where it does, then Gainey is as responsible for his team finishing first, which hadn't happen in 15 years at the time.

Is not missing the playoffs 4 of 5 years prior to Gainey's tenure but making it 5 out of 6 with at the helm a significant accomplishment given where this team has been?

Our playoff record has been as good or better than Jersey's since the lockout, so how much better is Lou as a gm? His team is generally favored in the playoffs playing lower seeded teams, yet struggle to get passed the first round.

Of course this all has to be put into context as to what came before Gainey's tenure and looking at that to me indicates that he did a good job. He might have stayed one year too long, but he did what he had to do and did it well. Now we'll see where Gauthier takes the team and so far he's doing a good job.


Last edited by Andy: 07-25-2010 at 03:27 PM.
Andy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-25-2010, 02:56 PM
  #440
HH
GO HABS GO!
 
HH's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Montreal
Country: Canada
Posts: 17,265
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JayBee View Post
Hockey Hall of Fame

Thanks
Bob Gainey is in the Hall of Fame too.

Thanks.

HH is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-25-2010, 03:25 PM
  #441
JayBee*
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 3,652
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by HarryI View Post
Bob Gainey is in the Hall of Fame too.

Thanks.

JayBee* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-25-2010, 03:29 PM
  #442
Ohashi_Jouzu
Registered User
 
Ohashi_Jouzu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Halifax
Country: Japan
Posts: 21,619
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by HarryI View Post
Bob Gainey is in the Hall of Fame too.

Thanks.
As a player or "builder"?

Thanks.

Ohashi_Jouzu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-25-2010, 03:33 PM
  #443
guest1467
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 24,824
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ohashi_Jouzu View Post
As a player or "builder"?

Thanks.
Probably both when its all said and done.

guest1467 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-25-2010, 03:48 PM
  #444
Miller Time
Registered User
 
Miller Time's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 8,117
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Koseegin View Post
I'm impressed at how Gainey changed a team that was in shambles to something respectable. The cupboard was bear and our roster was laughable before he came in. I respect him greatly for that.
As shown over and over again this is simply not true.
The conference winning team and the improved results from 04-08 were accomplished with a core of players that were mostly assembled when he got here.

Miller Time is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-25-2010, 03:52 PM
  #445
JackieChan
Registered User
 
JackieChan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Montreal
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,561
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Koseegin View Post
I never said that, I asked you a question. If Lou is as responsible for his team finishing where it does, then Gainey is as responsible for his team finishing first, which hadn't happen in 15 years at the time.

Is not missing the playoffs 4 of 5 years prior to Gainey's tenure but making it 5 out of 6 with at the helm a significant accomplishment given where this team has been?

Our playoff record has been as good or better than Jersey's since the lockout, so how much better is Lou as a gm? His team is generally favored in the playoffs playing lower seeded teams, yet struggle to get passed the first round.

Of course this all has to be put into context as to what came before Gainey's tenure and looking at that to me indicates that he did a good job. He might have stayed one year too long, but he did what he had to do and did it well. Now we'll see where Gauthier takes the team and so far he's doing a good job.
Gauthier's tenure is pretty much an extension to Gainey's, so all credit and/or blame goes to both men imo. So with that in mind, he didn't stay one year too long. If he really didn't work closely with Gauthier on last year's reshape, doing that a few months before leaving would have been really irresponsible and un-Gainey-like.

One thing that Lou has done really well pre and post lockout is the upbringing of his very own players. They always seem to have a new player blossom at the right time one after the other, making that team competitive year in and year out, cemented by Brodeur. Again, if one chooses to give most credit to Brodeur, then one has to give some to Lou for Brodeur as well, since he agreed to stay in NJ for a lot less than his market value since the environment created by Lou fits him so well.

JackieChan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-25-2010, 03:53 PM
  #446
Andy
Registered User
 
Andy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Montreal
Country: Canada
Posts: 17,959
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Miller Time View Post
As shown over and over again this is simply not true.
The conference winning team and the improved results from 04-08 were accomplished with a core of players that were mostly assembled when he got here.
in 07-08, the entire team was contributing. Price, Huet, Kovalev, Streit, Andrei Kostitsyn, Hamrlik were all brought in by Gainey and played a significant role in the success of our team that year, so to say the core was mostly assembled prior, while true, isn't the whole story. Kovalev was the biggest factor to our success and that was a Gainey move.

Andy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-25-2010, 04:03 PM
  #447
Russian Warrior
SWAG
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 1,363
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by No Team Needed View Post
what's funny to me is i have watched hockey for a long time and one of the arguments on the 70s dynasty is that the canadiens were not physical enough. nobody wanted to call them a perfect team no matter how much they won because people argued that eventually they would be worn down into uselessness. i remember people saying that so many canadiens retiring in the 80s was because of the bruins and flyers physicality. yes, this was said before the internet!

80s come around the canadiens win a cup and make it to the cup finals between two powerhouse dynasties. again, people said the canadiens were not physical enough and guys like claude lemieux and brian skrudland couldn't gut it in the playoffs.

the canadiens have always relied on skill and thats why people became fans of them. maybe those who became canadiens fans because they are french don't understand that but people from outside quebec, watching montreal has always been like watching some foreign european team of skill and two way play. they may have a few tough guys from time to time or a guy like larry robinson who can do everything and then some, but they will always be the flying frenchmen, not the fighting frenchmen. even without any french players lol.

the canadiens have always seemed like pushovers but in the end, its about the scoreboard.
Great post! I'm only 20, I didn't know this.

Russian Warrior is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-25-2010, 04:10 PM
  #448
Kriss E
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 23,231
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ohashi_Jouzu View Post
Since he makes the final decisions on all personnel? A lot.



Yeah, I guess so. But like you said, given the disparity between regular season success (against almost everyone in the conference) and post season failure (against a singular opponent), if he thinks it's preparation for the match up that the team was lacking, he SHOULD perhaps look for new coaches if that's the conclusion he comes to.

But to look at it more deeply, sometimes they just got bad matchups. They were a 103 point team last year, but were something like 1-6 against the Flyers in the regular season. Obviously that continued to be a bad matchup for them in the post season. One regular season win difference, and they might have swapped seeds with Pittsburgh and played Ottawa instead. They were 3-1 versus Ottawa regular season, so maybe that would have been a better match up.

They were 106 point team the year before, but were 1-3 versus Carolina in the regular season. That proved to be a bad match up in the playoffs that year, too (eventually losing in 7 games). One more regular season win, and they could have swapped seeds with Washington and ended up playing NYR in the first round. They were 3-3 against NYR, so maybe THAT series could have gone differently, too.

The year before that, they DID play the Rangers (and lost), who they were 1-7 against in the regular season, despite being something like 38-19 against the rest of the conference. Possibly the worst possible match up for them.

I could go on, but in summary, it's not as simplistic as some are trying to paint it here, and a whole lot of responsibility for post season struggles is being lumped onto Lou somewhat erroneously, imo. The teams flourished against most of the league every year, but struggled against a certain few teams in the regular season and the players/coaches seemingly were unable to make successful adjustments when the post season came around.
So I guess you're not a believer of the saying ''team built for POs''.
We hear that crap a lot here. Just two seasons ago after finishing first but coming short in the 2nd round people were saying that.

And to blame their post season disappointments on poor match-ups is a very sour loser type of excuse.
This is the POs, season has nothing to do with it. Boston were 0-8 versus us, yet we came very close to losing to them.

Sure, some teams match up vs another better but that's not an excuse. Not when it happens 5 years in a row. If you can't beat the teams that match up well versus you, then you really don't deserve to win the cup at all.

Lou has done a decent job of keeping his team competitive. But he did start out the lockout years with a pretty established roster.

Both teams were in completely different situations.
With NJ though, it seems like they've been taking lateral steps since the lockout.

Kriss E is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-25-2010, 04:20 PM
  #449
Andy
Registered User
 
Andy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Montreal
Country: Canada
Posts: 17,959
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kriss E View Post
So I guess you're not a believer of the saying ''team built for POs''.
We hear that crap a lot here. Just two seasons ago after finishing first but coming short in the 2nd round people were saying that.

And to blame their post season disappointments on poor match-ups is a very sour loser type of excuse.
This is the POs, season has nothing to do with it. Boston were 0-8 versus us, yet we came very close to losing to them.


Sure, some teams match up vs another better but that's not an excuse. Not when it happens 5 years in a row. If you can't beat the teams that match up well versus you, then you really don't deserve to win the cup at all.

Lou has done a decent job of keeping his team competitive. But he did start out the lockout years with a pretty established roster.

Both teams were in completely different situations.
With NJ though, it seems like they've been taking lateral steps since the lockout.
The bolded part of your post is exactly what ticks me off. There are always seems this double standard where an "excuse" is valid for other teams, but never for the Canadiens.

Everyone here is willing to give every other team the benefit of the doubt in regards to rookies, ufas, trades etc, but never for their own team.

Andy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-25-2010, 05:55 PM
  #450
Ohashi_Jouzu
Registered User
 
Ohashi_Jouzu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Halifax
Country: Japan
Posts: 21,619
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kriss E View Post
So I guess you're not a believer of the saying ''team built for POs''.
We hear that crap a lot here. Just two seasons ago after finishing first but coming short in the 2nd round people were saying that.
Don't know how you can infer that, although I certainly don't see how such an extremely subjective analysis of a 20 man squad can be used as any kind of fundamental arguing point. Many people would point to Briere's slight stature/style of play and straight-faced tell you he's "not built for the playoffs", for example (87 pts in 86 PO games).

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kriss E View Post
And to blame their post season disappointments on poor match-ups is a very sour loser type of excuse.
It's not an "excuse", it's a factor. What would the worst match up for a primarily offensive team be? How about a team with a top goalie who gets hot and puts together a solid plan for shutting down the key players? Happens all the time. Case in point: Washington and Pittsburgh vs Montreal last year. It's not a magic formula, and it doesn't work every time (it would be like the Buckley's mixture of hockey strategy if it did).

All I can say though, is that without the benefit of hindsight, there is next to a 0% chance that you look at those NJ teams before the trade deadline in recent years and find major moves that should be made. Thusly, you can't fault the GM for NOT making those imaginary moves in anticipation of 1st round struggles against a team that you didn't even know you'd face until very near the end of the season.

Bottom line: no one has ever questioned Lou's ability to put together a "built for playoffs" team, nor has he failed to assemble a cast that earns a top playoff berth year after year after year. Perhaps he has recently had trouble finding a coach who is able to make the proper adjustments once the post season begins (who hasn't... how many coaches have WE gone through?), and perhaps he was let down by a few key players along the way as well. I'm not "absolving" him of blame, I'm spreading it out to all the areas that many of you can't see in this incredibly myopic discussion/comparison.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kriss E View Post
This is the POs, season has nothing to do with it. Boston were 0-8 versus us, yet we came very close to losing to them.
Wait, what? We DID lose to them 2 seasons ago. 4-0. After losing the season series to them 0-6. Are you referring, then, to 3 years ago? 'Cause yeah, the Habs won that series after dominating the season series. And if it wasn't for 5 goals on 24 shots in a horrible slightly momentum-shifting game 5, the series wouldn't have even seemed as close as the 6th game made it seem. Look no further than the absolute drumming we gave them in game 7 to make that point sink home.

You have a point (POs =/= regular season), but you've used perhaps one of the worst examples possible in an attempt to prove it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kriss E View Post
Sure, some teams match up vs another better but that's not an excuse. Not when it happens 5 years in a row. If you can't beat the teams that match up well versus you, then you really don't deserve to win the cup at all.
Overly simplistic, but I'll let it slide. Some teams have "bogey" opponents that they struggle against some years. I showed you that NJ just happened to have a lot of 1st round match ups against that exact type of team for them (for whatever reasons... doesn't matter, nor is it especially relevant to this thread). Montreal made it to the ECF, but might things have been different if they faced Ottawa (1-5 vs them regular season, and that "French goalie" factor that no one seems inclined to dismiss)? Not to use a "what if" as an concrete argument, but let's not lose perspective here just because it's convenient or doesn't suit our fancy. It's funny to see how people (not necessarily yourself) have seemingly forgotten their own arguments that were shared in threads discussing which teams they'd prefer to face in the 1st round, and why.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kriss E View Post
Lou has done a decent job of keeping his team competitive. But he did start out the lockout years with a pretty established roster.
And who established that roster? That's right: Lou. And without having to lean on FAs heavily to do so. Mostly drafted and developed in house. Thusly, he has earned enshrinement in the HoF under the builder category as one of the premier GMs of his era (at least).

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kriss E View Post
Both teams were in completely different situations.
With NJ though, it seems like they've been taking lateral steps since the lockout.
Their performance has plateaued perhaps, but when you start out on top (since we're focusing on what has "changed" since the lockout), and then you're expected to maintain that dominance on a more level, salary-capped playing field, in an increasingly competitive league... yeah, still hovering around the top ("lateral steps", as you put it) can hardly be taken as a knock against them.


Last edited by Ohashi_Jouzu: 07-25-2010 at 06:02 PM.
Ohashi_Jouzu is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

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 04:01 AM.

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

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2014 All Rights Reserved.