HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Atlantic Division > Montreal Canadiens
Notices

All Habs-related Eklund rumours Part II

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
08-17-2010, 09:32 PM
  #251
Maxpac
Registered User
 
Maxpac's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: hockey city
Posts: 13,376
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by E = CH² View Post
Well, we have 6 regulars including Subban as regular.

O'byrne can easily be the 7th guy.

But if we did manage to get rid of Hamrlik without taking salary back, we should just go all the way trade AK and try and sign Kovalchuk. I mean, if we're going to dream, let's dream big.
Ya but, i want O'Byrne to play a full year with Markov, hitting hard and defendong teammates, replacing Komi for good.

Maxpac is offline  
Old
08-17-2010, 09:34 PM
  #252
RE-HABS
Registered User
 
RE-HABS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: CANADA
Country: Canada
Posts: 14,885
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Maxpac View Post
Ya but, i want O'Byrne to play a full year with Markov, hitting hard and defendong teammates, replacing Komi for good.
It would be nice to see him as a top 4 guy on the blueline in the next 3 years and then add a big boy like Tinordi there too.

That size would be ideal along with vets Markov and youngster Subban, not to mention steady Gorges.

RE-HABS is offline  
Old
08-17-2010, 09:44 PM
  #253
Ginu
Registered User
 
Ginu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 3,679
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by durojean View Post
what about Tinordi and AK for Bieksa and Schroeder and 2nd ?
The last thing we need is right wing prospects. Defense and left wing is where we should be focusing our drafting. Trading Tinordi for another right winger is silly

Ginu is offline  
Old
08-19-2010, 11:12 AM
  #254
Kimota
Nation of Poutine
 
Kimota's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: La Vieille Capitale
Country: France
Posts: 21,587
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Maxpac View Post
Ya but, i want O'Byrne to play a full year with Markov, hitting hard and defendong teammates, replacing Komi for good.
I'm not sure about O'Byrne with Markov. In the playoffs I think the Habs started to open up and play better when MAB replaced O'Byrne on the right of Markov. Even if MAB is usualy terrible he had more chemistry with Markov than Ryan. O'Byrne with Markov didn't click at all. And that's saying a lot, in that O'Byrne just doesn't give you that little extra, especially when things are on the line.

Kimota is offline  
Old
08-19-2010, 12:29 PM
  #255
overlords
Global Moderator
Jack Arse
 
overlords's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Trolling Brian Wilde
Posts: 26,030
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kimota View Post
I'm not sure about O'Byrne with Markov. In the playoffs I think the Habs started to open up and play better when MAB replaced O'Byrne on the right of Markov. Even if MAB is usualy terrible he had more chemistry with Markov than Ryan. O'Byrne with Markov didn't click at all. And that's saying a lot, in that O'Byrne just doesn't give you that little extra, especially when things are on the line.
Not so sure. O'byrne made very few mistakes in the playoffs. I think his lack of chemistry has to do with how nervous he was in losing his spot. I still remember one game where he made a mistake early on and his ass was nailed to the bench for almost the entirety of the game.

overlords is offline  
Old
08-19-2010, 12:47 PM
  #256
Monctonscout
Monctonscout
 
Monctonscout's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 30,356
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kimota View Post
I'm not sure about O'Byrne with Markov. In the playoffs I think the Habs started to open up and play better when MAB replaced O'Byrne on the right of Markov. Even if MAB is usualy terrible he had more chemistry with Markov than Ryan. O'Byrne with Markov didn't click at all. And that's saying a lot, in that O'Byrne just doesn't give you that little extra, especially when things are on the line.
I think that stems from sitting for weeks and being on a short leash. O'byrne has the size, mobility and skills to be a solid #3-4 at the NHL level, he just needs a coach that believes in him and doesn't nail him to the bench at the first sign of trouble.

Monctonscout is offline  
Old
08-19-2010, 12:52 PM
  #257
CareyClutch
Doing the job
 
CareyClutch's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Montreal
Country: North Korea
Posts: 4,942
vCash: 500
Send a message via MSN to CareyClutch
I have a feeling that O'byrne will not finish the season in Montreal.

CareyClutch is online now  
Old
08-19-2010, 12:55 PM
  #258
Monctonscout
Monctonscout
 
Monctonscout's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 30,356
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by jason allison'fans View Post
I have a feeling that O'byrne will not finish the season in Montreal.
If they move him it will probably turn into a bad move. I think he's a guy we'll need in 2-3 years once Hamrlik Gill and Spacek are all gone. Most of our prospects are skill guys, Tinordi is 3-5 years from being an NHL regular.

PG looks to be a better "asset manager" than Gainey was.

Monctonscout is offline  
Old
08-19-2010, 01:27 PM
  #259
Ohashi_Jouzu
Registered User
 
Ohashi_Jouzu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Halifax
Country: Japan
Posts: 21,425
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Carey Price View Post
If they move him it will probably turn into a bad move. I think he's a guy we'll need in 2-3 years once Hamrlik Gill and Spacek are all gone. Most of our prospects are skill guys, Tinordi is 3-5 years from being an NHL regular.

PG looks to be a better "asset manager" than Gainey was.
I'm not sure if I'm ready to agree with that or not. PG looks to be more of an NHL 2K10 manager than Gainey was, so anyone who has done a lot of the manager mode in those games might be inclined to agree with you.

Seriously though, Gainey's major moves seemed to be designed for chemistry/synergy/character and stability for future development. PG seems to be completely willing to trade 80-ranked players for 75-ranked slightly younger players with 90 "potential" and a few flashy rankings in some skills departments, with only slight hints of design for the medium to long term future evident. That reeks of XBox management to me.

So, not surprisingly, you notice a lot of posters who list their age in the early 20s who post regularly in NHLXX video games threads agreeing with PG's moves all over the place, while I notice lots of those who criticize PG's moves tend to be the older crowd.

Ohashi_Jouzu is offline  
Old
08-19-2010, 01:33 PM
  #260
Markowicz
Simple Jacques
 
Markowicz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 2,991
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by overlords View Post
Not so sure. O'byrne made very few mistakes in the playoffs. I think his lack of chemistry has to do with how nervous he was in losing his spot. I still remember one game where he made a mistake early on and his ass was nailed to the bench for almost the entirety of the game.
I agree. I also think Martin got into this mode where he wanted to go with guys who had confidence at that particular moment in the playoffs, and O'Byrne wasn't one of those guys. I seriously doubt that will carry over into this season though, and I truly believe that O'byrne will get a ton of chances to play bigger minutes. It's in the Habs best interest to boost his minutes while dropping Hamrlik's. That way, when 2011 free agency rolls around, maybe the Habs won't have to focus on re-tooling their defence in a major way. Just like Gorges and i assume Subban, we really need O' Byrne to continue to develop, and i think he will.

Markowicz is offline  
Old
08-19-2010, 02:15 PM
  #261
vokiel
Registered Settler
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Montréal
Country: Martinique
Posts: 6,306
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ohashi_Jouzu View Post
I'm not sure if I'm ready to agree with that or not. PG looks to be more of an NHL 2K10 manager than Gainey was, so anyone who has done a lot of the manager mode in those games might be inclined to agree with you.

Seriously though, Gainey's major moves seemed to be designed for chemistry/synergy/character and stability for future development. PG seems to be completely willing to trade 80-ranked players for 75-ranked slightly younger players with 90 "potential" and a few flashy rankings in some skills departments, with only slight hints of design for the medium to long term future evident. That reeks of XBox management to me.

So, not surprisingly, you notice a lot of posters who list their age in the early 20s who post regularly in NHLXX video games threads agreeing with PG's moves all over the place, while I notice lots of those who criticize PG's moves tend to be the older crowd.
I'd say no hints of design for the medium to long term whatsoever and he even said so himself just before the draft. Essentially he said "I have no clue what the team will need in 5 years".

http://www.rds.ca/zv2/?categorie=hockey (page 44, Part I)

Oh yeah and then he continues with there's so many plans that there's not enough letters in the alphabet to annotate them. So we have one plan and we do what we can make it happen. That's regardless of the cost if you read between the lines. The hole thing is a contradiction in any case

vokiel is offline  
Old
08-19-2010, 02:29 PM
  #262
Goldthorpe
Meditating Guru
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Montreal
Posts: 4,109
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ohashi_Jouzu View Post
with only slight hints of design for the medium to long term future evident. That reeks of XBox management to me.
Like targetting a big center in Eller, something that we've been needing in our depth pool for how many years now?

Seriously, what moves did he made that make no long-term sense for you? I would say the exact opposite: Gauthier seems to be more willing to sacrifice today's value for tomorrow potential. And he seems way more a micromanager than Gainey ever was.

Quote:
Originally Posted by vokiel View Post
I'd say no hints of design for the medium to long term whatsoever and he even said so himself just before the draft. Essentially he said "I have no clue what the team will need in 5 years".

http://www.rds.ca/zv2/?categorie=hockey (page 44, Part I)

Oh yeah and then he continues with there's so many plans that there's not enough letters in the alphabet to annotate them. So we have one plan and we do what we can make it happen. That's regardless of the cost if you read between the lines. The hole thing is a contradiction in any case
Any GM who says he knows what his team will need in 5 years is either a liar or a moron. It's difficult to evaluate how a player will develop in one year or two, how the hell is this suppose to be possible over 5 years?

Goldthorpe is offline  
Old
08-19-2010, 02:36 PM
  #263
Monctonscout
Monctonscout
 
Monctonscout's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 30,356
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Goldthorpe View Post
Any GM who says he knows what his team will need in 5 years is either a liar or a moron. It's difficult to evaluate how a player will develop in one year or two, how the hell is this suppose to be possible over 5 years?
A GM can look at his depth chart and have a pretty good idea what the team will need in 5 years. I'm pretty sure that was the driving force behind trading for Tinordi because Hamrlik and Gill won't be here in 3-5 years.

Monctonscout is offline  
Old
08-19-2010, 02:43 PM
  #264
Goldthorpe
Meditating Guru
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Montreal
Posts: 4,109
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Carey Price View Post
A GM can look at his depth chart and have a pretty good idea what the team will need in 5 years. I'm pretty sure that was the driving force behind trading for Tinordi because Hamrlik and Gill won't be here in 3-5 years.
But that's on the high level only. Tinordi could never develop. Or, a guy we don't rate very high could suddendly become a hot commodity. 5 years is a long time in professional sports. You can place your pieces and hope for the best, but the end result is difficult to predict.

Looking at the pieces Gauthier went after this summer, I think it's pretty much obvious what his plan is. I could understand someone not agreeing with the plan, but claiming there's simply none? It reeks bad faith.

If Gauthier was aiming at winning now now now and trading valuable youngsters for proven but ultimately aging vets, and sacrifying the habs ability to substains itself on the long term, then yes, I would agree he doesn't have a very good plan. But he's doing the exact opposite.

Goldthorpe is offline  
Old
08-19-2010, 02:45 PM
  #265
Ohashi_Jouzu
Registered User
 
Ohashi_Jouzu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Halifax
Country: Japan
Posts: 21,425
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Goldthorpe View Post
Like targetting a big center in Eller, something that we've been needing in our depth pool for how many years now?

Seriously, what moves did he made that make no long-term sense for you? I would say the exact opposite: Gauthier seems to be more willing to sacrifice today's value for tomorrow potential. And he seems way more a micromanager than Gainey ever was.
To me, that fits pretty well within the definition of XBox manager mode strategy. You're obviously completely free to disagree.

Ohashi_Jouzu is offline  
Old
08-19-2010, 02:45 PM
  #266
swimmer77
What's an ROW?
 
swimmer77's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: in water
Country: Czech_ Republic
Posts: 3,369
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ohashi_Jouzu View Post
I'm not sure if I'm ready to agree with that or not. PG looks to be more of an NHL 2K10 manager than Gainey was, so anyone who has done a lot of the manager mode in those games might be inclined to agree with you.

Seriously though, Gainey's major moves seemed to be designed for chemistry/synergy/character and stability for future development. PG seems to be completely willing to trade 80-ranked players for 75-ranked slightly younger players with 90 "potential" and a few flashy rankings in some skills departments, with only slight hints of design for the medium to long term future evident. That reeks of XBox management to me.

So, not surprisingly, you notice a lot of posters who list their age in the early 20s who post regularly in NHLXX video games threads agreeing with PG's moves all over the place, while I notice lots of those who criticize PG's moves tend to be the older crowd.
One of the older crowd checking in to say to date I'm okay with PG's moves. I'm okay with acquiring the younger Eller for the future, okay with keeping Hamrlik and his smarts and okay with giving Kostitsyn another shot to prove himself.

swimmer77 is offline  
Old
08-19-2010, 02:47 PM
  #267
Ginu
Registered User
 
Ginu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 3,679
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Goldthorpe View Post
But that's on the high level only. Tinordi could never develop. Or, a guy we don't rate very high could suddendly become a hot commodity. 5 years is a long time in professional sports. You can place your pieces and hope for the best, but the end result is difficult to predict.

Looking at the pieces Gauthier went after this summer, I think it's pretty much obvious what his plan is. I could understand someone not agreeing with the plan, but claiming there's simply none? It reeks bad faith.

If Gauthier was aiming at winning now now now and trading valuable youngsters for proven but ultimately aging vets, and sacrifying the habs ability to substains itself on the long term, then yes, I would agree he doesn't have a very good plan. But he's doing the exact opposite.
Any player could never develop. That's what you have scouts for. You have to evaluate based on information. There's no sure thing in sports. Do you think every single prospect that Chicago drafted and played on their Cup winning team was a home run? You have to evaluate and develop prospects. We're low on D prospects so Tinordi is a great fit. You evaluate their progress each year hence why McDonaugh was let go, Valentenko was traded, etc.

Ginu is offline  
Old
08-19-2010, 02:51 PM
  #268
shutehinside
Registered User
 
shutehinside's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,311
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Carey Price View Post
A GM can look at his depth chart and have a pretty good idea what the team will need in 5 years. I'm pretty sure that was the driving force behind trading for Tinordi because Hamrlik and Gill won't be here in 3-5 years.
This was Montreal's roster 5 years ago. Do you REALLY think any GM would know what we needed in 5 years after looking at this roster? C'mon, and be honest
Goaltenders:

30 David Aebischer - gone
39 Cristobal Huet - gone
75 Yann Danis - gone
Defensemen

8 Mike Komisarek - gone
25 Mathieu Dandenault - gone
28 Todd Simpson - gone
32 Mark Streit - gone
44 Sheldon Souray - gone
51 Francis Bouillon - gone
52 Craig Rivet - A - gone
64 Jean-Philippe Cote - gone
79 Andrei Markov
Wingers

3 Raitis Ivanans - gone
20 Richard Zednik - gone
21 Christopher Higgins - gone
26 Pierre Dagenais - gone
27 Alexei Kovalev - A - gone
37 Niklas Sundstrom - gone
42 Alexander Perezhogin - gone
46 Andrei Kostitsyn
47 Aaron Downey - gone
73 Michael Ryder - gone
86 Jonathan Ferland - gone
Centres

11 Saku Koivu - C - gone
14 Radek Bonk - gone
22 Steve Begin - gone
35 Tomas Plekanec
38 Jan Bulis - gone
40 Maxim Lapierre
57 Garth Murray - gone
71 Mike Ribeiro -gone

shutehinside is offline  
Old
08-19-2010, 03:01 PM
  #269
vokiel
Registered Settler
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Montréal
Country: Martinique
Posts: 6,306
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Goldthorpe View Post
Any GM who says he knows what his team will need in 5 years is either a liar or a moron. It's difficult to evaluate how a player will develop in one year or two, how the hell is this suppose to be possible over 5 years?
So Gainey was a liar with his 5 year plan? Different GMs, different approaches.

vokiel is offline  
Old
08-19-2010, 03:18 PM
  #270
Goldthorpe
Meditating Guru
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Montreal
Posts: 4,109
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ohashi_Jouzu View Post
To me, that fits pretty well within the definition of XBox manager mode strategy. You're obviously completely free to disagree.
Before disagreeing with this, I would like to understand your argument, because I just don't get it. Acquiring a player who isn't in his prime right now but should when you'll need it the most is just a type of long-term investment.

If I'm stuck in a 15$/hour job for the rest of my life, and I decide to make a career change and get my bachelor degree, knowing full well that I'm going to be poorer for a few years but with the hope that I'm reap the benefits on the long term, would you also qualify this as a lack of long-term planing?

Quote:
Originally Posted by vokiel View Post
So Gainey was a liar with his 5 year plan? Different GMs, different approaches.
Having a 5 years plan doesn't mean you'll know your needs in 5 years. People have hyper-analysed way too much that 5 years plan and what it entails.

In any industry, a manager will first try to create a long-term plan of its goals. Doesn't mean he'll know every little details of what will happen down the road. It doesn't even mean that his plan will still be relevant in 5 years.

Goldthorpe is offline  
Old
08-19-2010, 03:35 PM
  #271
Ohashi_Jouzu
Registered User
 
Ohashi_Jouzu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Halifax
Country: Japan
Posts: 21,425
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Goldthorpe View Post
Before disagreeing with this, I would like to understand your argument, because I just don't get it. Acquiring a player who isn't in his prime right now but should when you'll need it the most is just a type of long-term investment.
As a GM, one of the main difficulties faced is reconciling what you have on paper with what you can get out of them on the ice. That's why things like an overall "vision" of type of game you want to play, and an understanding of the type of players you will need to fulfill each role are crucial when you're in charge of an organization that is constantly in competition for unproven assets (draft picks) and hoping to develop them into pieces that fit within the framework of the "style" you hope to employ on the ice.

As such, making a bunch of deals (no matter if "big" or "small") that seem to simply improve specific individual components of your team on paper, without necessarily having an idea of how they're expected to work within the great unit they are joining and contribute to overall "improvement" of the team's performance (especially/hopefully longer term than simply 1 year at a time), and taking the mindset that "oh well, if it doesn't work out, we can always try something else next year" aligns very closely with my idea of the mentality of a manager mode video game player who enjoys putting pieces together and hitting "simulate season" to see how it turns out.

Now, I didn't claim that this is exactly what PG is doing (nor could I, having never discussed his motivations at length personally with him), but I can still connect enough dots to say that it seems similar, to me. Or, I should qualify that to say I see more similarities than I did under the Gainey "regime", which is what we're really talking about here, isn't it. Of course it's not going to seem the same to everyone, and thus our discussion of the topic. Also not commenting on which is more likely to be successful, because that involves crystal balls, and is an extension of the conversation, rather than the actual point that I think we're discussing.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Goldthorpe View Post
If I'm stuck in a 15$/hour job for the rest of my life, and I decide to make a career change and get my bachelor degree, knowing full well that I'm going to be poorer for a few years but with the hope that I'm reap the benefits on the long term, would you also qualify this as a lack of long-term planing?
This has nothing to do with the mindset of someone assuming the role of a GM in an XBox hockey game, where every team is always open to trading possibilities as long as you offer enough "value", and thus you don't have to consider whether you're "stuck" with the results of a move for multiple years because of being unable to simply go back into the "transactions" page and make a quick trade to "fix" it.

But to address you're analogy, if you went back to get that Bachelor's degree in a dying field or one with extremely limited prospects for employment, then yes - you lacked long-term planning.


Last edited by Ohashi_Jouzu: 08-19-2010 at 03:41 PM.
Ohashi_Jouzu is offline  
Old
08-19-2010, 04:01 PM
  #272
vokiel
Registered Settler
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Montréal
Country: Martinique
Posts: 6,306
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Goldthorpe View Post
Having a 5 years plan doesn't mean you'll know your needs in 5 years. People have hyper-analysed way too much that 5 years plan and what it entails.

In any industry, a manager will first try to create a long-term plan of its goals. Doesn't mean he'll know every little details of what will happen down the road. It doesn't even mean that his plan will still be relevant in 5 years.
I was originally quoting Gauthier for mild humorous purposes. I mean it's never black or white, but Gauthier's quote sounded like someone who didn't see the value in signing Plekanec, Cammalleri, Gionta & etc.. for more than 5 years as he said he had no clue what the team needs would be at the end of their contracts (5 years). That you have to put in context also as he was answering a question about drafting by need vs BPA. Well not a very good answer to give

That said, I wouldn't say that a GM who can honestly say has a 5 year plan is a liar. Anybody doing this job has a base to go with. You can at least have a mild pictures of what your needs will be and make a sound medium to long term road map. I mean your current contracts is a serious hint don't you agree?

Ex: In 5 years we might actually need a midget winger who is fearless. Do we have that now? No? Well lets draft one

Edit: Well actually I think we got one in 2009 hehehe

vokiel is offline  
Old
08-19-2010, 04:06 PM
  #273
Ohashi_Jouzu
Registered User
 
Ohashi_Jouzu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Halifax
Country: Japan
Posts: 21,425
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by vokiel View Post
Ex: In 5 years we might actually need a midget winger who is fearless. Do we have that now? No? Well lets draft one

Edit: Well actually I think we got one in 2009 hehehe
Or how about this summer, at 147th overall.

Ohashi_Jouzu is offline  
Old
08-19-2010, 04:58 PM
  #274
neme6
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 33
vCash: 500
I have a friend who works for the habs organisation, and he told me yesterday that they stopped all commercials for the habs for a major trade, and he told me it was probably about Price! But this isn't official at all, but it would explain the reason why they got Rammo! If this is true though, then the habs really messed up the Price/Halak situation!

neme6 is offline  
Old
08-19-2010, 05:07 PM
  #275
vokiel
Registered Settler
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Montréal
Country: Martinique
Posts: 6,306
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by neme6 View Post
I have a friend who works for the habs organisation, and he told me yesterday that they stopped all commercials for the habs for a major trade, and he told me it was probably about Price! But this isn't official at all, but it would explain the reason why they got Rammo! If this is true though, then the habs really messed up the Price/Halak situation!
I don't understand what you mean by "stop all commercials"?

vokiel 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 12:29 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.