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

Dionne talks Habs and Francophones... "Not the Flying Frenchmen anymore"

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
08-24-2010, 12:03 PM
  #151
Kriss E
HFB Partner
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 26,363
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Whitesnake View Post
The only thing you are demonstrating in your post is that you don't believe in it. Fine. Like I said before, I'll respect that opinion. Personally, the day that I'll approach a season with only and solely the "business" aspect of it, I'll stop watching. To me, it's also a passion. It's a hockey team and while things have changed a whole, it still carries the history that it has. They didn't have any problems leaving the Forum and going in the Bell Centre 'cause it does prove the point that it's a business. They couldn't care less about the history that was playing in that place. Yet, the banners are following. They have so much hesitation to add a 3rd jersey or to make any kind of modications in their 2 actual ones. It does prove in my mind that while it is a business, and nobody can ever be as stupid enough as to be naive and pretend it's not ESPECIALLY in a cap salary world...., there's still a possibility to bring that passion level up ESPECIALLY since winning in this league is as tough as it never was before thanks to parity and numbers of team.

Pretty sure my point is also pretty clear. NOWHERE will I be satisfied enough if the only point to add a Québécois in the lineup is to make him speak between periods. So in the end, my way of adding those guys would not be detrimental to the team. And clearly, I agree with you as far as seeing guys on the team making efforts to communicate with the fans. It's just a question of respect like Cammy, Gomer and others have mentioned.

And there are no preferential treatments in my way of seeing things. I do not see how having the guys I want to be detrimental to the team like I said before. I am against the return of Christian Laflamme. Yet, I would take Lombardi, Laperrière, Latendresse etc. on my team any day of the week.

As far as the Cinderella crap you are not buying into, well I don't how old you are but it might be a factor. I'm old enough so that my father was able to speak elequently about what he witnessed live, the passion and the effort that the guys put in and how it translated into success. I can clearly see now that a kid who will be drafted next year at 18 yo, was probably not born when we won our last cup. Which could make his father (let's go with a 30yo father at the time of birth) a witness of the 93 Cup, he had 23yo for the 86 Cup, and 16yo for the 79 one.....Was the kid at that time that much interested in hockey? Did he really enjoyed and lived the moment of what those teams were? Can we actually put the 86 and 93 team in the same phrase as the teams that our fathers (for the older guy like me, and I'm just 38 though my father had me when he was much older) were talking about when they were talking about THE Montreal Canadians and who were forming that team? Pretty sure we can't.

So right now, I'd agree that the kid who will be drafted next year, does not see the Habs like the sole solution. By far. It doesn't mean that I have to share the same experience or feelings that he does 'cause I don't have the same background.

And this is why there's so many different opinions on the subject. That we should ALL agree to disagree based on where we're coming from.
It's not only a business, especially not for fans. Attending games could be free, I follow hockey because like you, I'm passionate about it.
I understand you're talking about adding good qc born players. I have no problem with that. But as you know, things are not so easy.
Certain players have chosen other destinations or decided to renew contracts with their current teams, when they know they could have had an offer from Mtl.
Others like Ribeiro and Latendresse have had their share of problems here which led to their move.
I have no problem with adding good local talent, not because the fans/city ''deserves'' it, but because it's the right fit. If we don't add some, I won't go into rant mode though because the priority at the end of the day is to win.

As for the Cinderella thing, as you said, maybe for your Dad it was and he translated that to you as you grew up. But right now, as you also mentioned, it holds no more barring on the kids. Qc born players had something to prove back in your dad's days. It's really incomparable. There's none of that today, and that's why I'm saying it really doesn't matter anymore who plays for the Habs.
There's always this little need to bring some locals because after all, we're Montreal, but it's not nearly as important as it used to be.

Kriss E is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
08-24-2010, 03:26 PM
  #152
Zam Boni
Registered User
 
Zam Boni's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: 8 km from the Globe
Country: Sweden
Posts: 1,161
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kriss E View Post
You're talking about Greats influencing people. I agree. If there's a Tremblay that enters the NHL in a few years and is good enough to deke Crosby with one hand and his eyes closed, he will make a lot of young Quebecers want to play hockey. It doesn't matter if he plays with the LA Kings or Mtl Habs, he will influence a great amount of locals.
That's not what I was talking about as I pointed out.
I did, and they do, yes.
Thing is though, a lot of great dont influence swedish or canadian kids. Nadal or Federer hasnt inspired a lot of swedish kids to pick up a tennis racket. Borg did.

Lance Armstrong. Michael Schumacher. Usain Bolt. Just to name three, you could pick just about anyone. Do they really inspire kids in Sweden or Canada? Honestly I doubt that. I believe that canadian kids are more inspired by canadian athletes and I dont think it is unreasonable to think that french canadian kids are more inspired by french canadian athletes. The same goes for swedish, german kids, or wherever.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kriss E View Post
But that's not really what I was talking about. I was talking about the ridiculous idea that a kid named Tremblay won't play hockey because he can't relate to any Qc born player with the Habs. That's a ridiculous notion. That kid will play hockey no matter who is with the Habs. Qc born players or not, Hockey will remain the talk around town when it comes to sports in Qc. Not only that, but there's a huge number of Quebecers that play around the NHL. So he can relate to many Qc born players outside of Mtl, and as soon as he follows a little bit, he'll understand how the drafts/trades work.
Yeah, but I do firmly believe that a true, local star player will make more kids hockey. Even the kids that werent intrested in the first place, and whose parent dont follow hockey. I these kids might be really talented. Thats what I meant with my swedish examples. The number of kids exploded once we got some swedes on the international stage. And in a larger pool of kids there is a higher chance of striking gold.

As for the Habs pursuing french canadian players, I dont have a horse in that race. As far as I am concerned, it doesnt alter my view of the team one bit.
Without fully understanding the unique situation in Montreal and Quebec, I am an insider looking, I can understand that alot of people do care.

Zam Boni is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-24-2010, 04:53 PM
  #153
icerocket
Registered User
 
icerocket's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Atlantis
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,466
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Teufelsdreck View Post
That "Basically you think .." is your choice of words. If you look at recent drafts you'll see that the top choices rarely come from Québec. Of course they don't. They come from everywhere else. There are no hidden gems in Québec that were totally overlooked and had to settle for non-hockey careers. Do you know of some Mario Lemieux the Habs should have drafted? The Habs drafted Leblanc, fine, but do you consider him to be someone who could step into the lineup? Right now all I can say is that he's probably better than Desharnais.
It's my words but you've implied it.

As this poster said:
Quote:
Originally Posted by CanadienErrant
Giroux instead of Fischer

Gagné instead of Chouinard

Perron instead of Paccioretty

Bergeron instead of Uruquart...

Proper scouts in Quebec would have caught those players. And don't tell me they wouldn't help our team.

icerocket is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-24-2010, 05:04 PM
  #154
Analyzer
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Renfrew, ON.
Country: Canada
Posts: 44,849
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by icerocket View Post
It's my words but you've implied it.

As this poster said:



Proper scouts in Quebec would have caught those players. And don't tell me they wouldn't help our team.
What about the other teams that passed on them ?

Proper scouts in Russia and we could have nabbed Datsyuk. Proper scouts in Sweden and we could have had Zetterberg and Alfredsson.

Analyzer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-24-2010, 05:07 PM
  #155
icerocket
Registered User
 
icerocket's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Atlantis
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,466
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Analyzer View Post
What about the other teams that passed on them ?

Proper scouts in Russia and we could have nabbed Datsyuk. Proper scouts in Sweden and we could have had Zetterberg and Alfredsson.
Habs should focus more on French players since there is a cultural and historical link to that particular group of people between the city and team.

Had there been the same link with Russian players or Swedish players I would argue in favor of having more scouts in that location.

icerocket is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-24-2010, 05:09 PM
  #156
NLHabsFan
Registered User
 
NLHabsFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Alberta
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,610
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Analyzer View Post
What about the other teams that passed on them ?

Proper scouts in Russia and we could have nabbed Datsyuk. Proper scouts in Sweden and we could have had Zetterberg and Alfredsson.
Not only that, you could nab them all you want, but how are you going to help in their development? Just because a certain player the Habs missed out on has turned out great doesn't necessarily mean he would have progressed the same way with the Habs.

NLHabsFan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-24-2010, 05:11 PM
  #157
icerocket
Registered User
 
icerocket's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Atlantis
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,466
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by NLHabsFan View Post
Not only that, you could nab them all you want, but how are you going to help in their development? Just because a certain player the Habs missed out on has turned out great doesn't necessarily mean he would have progressed the same way with the Habs.
This is another issue that I agree with. Habs need to work on developing their players. It seems we did the right think with Subban unlike with Guillaume. Hopefully they learned from these experiences.

But first and foremost we must draft these francophones.

icerocket is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-24-2010, 05:35 PM
  #158
Matteus
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 155
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CanadienErrant View Post
Agree...
But when you have a chance to draft

Giroux instead of Fischer

Gagné instead of Chouinard

Perron instead of Paccioretty

Bergeron instead of Uruquart...

An these kids are playing in your own backyard, you HAVE to make the effort.
Aaahhh...hindsight is a beautiful thing.

It's such a shame that scouts have to take the call 5 years before the kids have matured and not 5 years after, isn't it? Anyway.

Some of you might frown at this (or go flat out crazy), but I wouldn't be ready yet to trade Max Pac straight up for Perron. Let's see both of them in a couple of playoffs first.

Matteus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-24-2010, 05:50 PM
  #159
Fozz
Registered User
 
Fozz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 6,650
vCash: 500
As long as they're flying, I don't care if it's in French, English or any other freaking language.
Fly baby fly!!

Fozz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-24-2010, 06:56 PM
  #160
Kriss E
HFB Partner
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 26,363
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Edmontreal View Post
I did, and they do, yes.
Thing is though, a lot of great dont influence swedish or canadian kids. Nadal or Federer hasnt inspired a lot of swedish kids to pick up a tennis racket. Borg did.

Lance Armstrong. Michael Schumacher. Usain Bolt. Just to name three, you could pick just about anyone. Do they really inspire kids in Sweden or Canada? Honestly I doubt that. I believe that canadian kids are more inspired by canadian athletes and I dont think it is unreasonable to think that french canadian kids are more inspired by french canadian athletes. The same goes for swedish, german kids, or wherever.
Of course a Canadian born kid will be more inspired by a Canadian hockey star. A Qc born kid will be more inspired by a Qc born superstar, I never denied that and it's only logical.
My point was that whether that player plays in Mtl or in Phoenix, it won't change a thing for that kid. He'll still be inspired. Sure, it would be nice if they could see that player perform for the local team and therefore having the luxury of seeing every single game. But in the end it doesn't matter. Sakic was/is my all time favorite player, I couldn't see him play all the time and very rarely once the team moved to Colorado. But that didn't change anything.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Edmontreal View Post
Yeah, but I do firmly believe that a true, local star player will make more kids hockey. Even the kids that werent intrested in the first place, and whose parent dont follow hockey. I these kids might be really talented. Thats what I meant with my swedish examples. The number of kids exploded once we got some swedes on the international stage. And in a larger pool of kids there is a higher chance of striking gold.

As for the Habs pursuing french canadian players, I dont have a horse in that race. As far as I am concerned, it doesnt alter my view of the team one bit.
Without fully understanding the unique situation in Montreal and Quebec, I am an insider looking, I can understand that alot of people do care.
There is no doubt a local charismatic superstar will inspire people. I'm not arguing otherwise, what I'm saying is that it matters very little where that player performs.

Kriss E is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
08-24-2010, 07:52 PM
  #161
dcyhabs
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Montreal
Country: Canada
Posts: 731
vCash: 500
Remember his crappy advice for Gilbert...

The yahoo blog gushed about Marcel in LA, recently, but this is the guy who told Gilbert "forget the team, pad your stats." He put up amazing numbers while his team lost, year in, year out. Great individual player, lousy team player.

Who cares what he has to say? He has no clue how to make a team win, only a great talent for making teams lose (Leclair! No!!!!!).

dcyhabs is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-24-2010, 09:18 PM
  #162
Not The One
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Montréal, Qc.
Posts: 1,487
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kriss E View Post
Of course a Canadian born kid will be more inspired by a Canadian hockey star. A Qc born kid will be more inspired by a Qc born superstar, I never denied that and it's only logical.
My point was that whether that player plays in Mtl or in Phoenix, it won't change a thing for that kid. He'll still be inspired. Sure, it would be nice if they could see that player perform for the local team and therefore having the luxury of seeing every single game. But in the end it doesn't matter. Sakic was/is my all time favorite player, I couldn't see him play all the time and very rarely once the team moved to Colorado. But that didn't change anything.



There is no doubt a local charismatic superstar will inspire people. I'm not arguing otherwise, what I'm saying is that it matters very little where that player performs.
It's fascinating just how many strange things people can say to justify their opinion.

Of course if he plays in Montreal he'll have more expose and more "influence".

Which player was the most idolised in the 70's: Dionne, Perreault or Lafleur?

Not The One is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-24-2010, 09:29 PM
  #163
Corey
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 3,300
vCash: 500
Kids who grow up as fans but are exceptionally talented and are signed by professional teams become fans of the teams that signed them. Kids with little talent who aren't good enough to be signed can remain faithful to their boyhood idols. As a kid playing baseball (probably my bst sport, although I wasn't that good a hitter) I worshipped Ted Williams even though I didn't live in Boston. If I had been offered a minor league contract by the Detroit Tigers or the Chicago Cubs I would have become an instant fan. My all-time hockey hero was Maurice Richard but I would have been very hppy to play against the Habs( if only I could skate and shoot. What did I end up doing? i went to a good university and graduate school and forgot about playing sports (I do play tennis occasionally and I'm not great at that either).

Corey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-24-2010, 11:21 PM
  #164
Kriss E
HFB Partner
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 26,363
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Not The One View Post
It's fascinating just how many strange things people can say to justify their opinion.

Of course if he plays in Montreal he'll have more expose and more "influence".

Which player was the most idolised in the 70's: Dionne, Perreault or Lafleur?
If Marcel Dionne would have won five Stanley Cups, he'd be more recognized than Lafleur or at least just as much, and if Guy wouldn't have won any cups he wouldn't have been idolized as much. Dionne also played in the West for most of his career in an era where you rarely saw Western teams play.

Who was more influent Damphousse or Lemieux???..Obviously, talk around Montreal will always concern the Habs players first but I fell to see how this is somehow a reason as to why we should focus on getting more local talent.
We should focus on getting TALENT first and foremost.

But again, it always comes back to this. Talking about the 50's, 60's and 70's as if they're comparable times. Drop the nostalgia, we're talking about 40years ago, nothing outside the concept of the game is the same anymore.

Kriss E is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
08-24-2010, 11:44 PM
  #165
Zam Boni
Registered User
 
Zam Boni's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: 8 km from the Globe
Country: Sweden
Posts: 1,161
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kriss E View Post
My point was that whether that player plays in Mtl or in Phoenix, it won't change a thing for that kid. He'll still be inspired. Sure, it would be nice if they could see that player perform for the local team and therefore having the luxury of seeing every single game. But in the end it doesn't matter. Sakic was/is my all time favorite player, I couldn't see him play all the time and very rarely once the team moved to Colorado. But that didn't change anything.

There is no doubt a local charismatic superstar will inspire people. I'm not arguing otherwise, what I'm saying is that it matters very little where that player performs.
Yeah, I get that. I guess we just dont agree.

Zam Boni is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-25-2010, 12:07 AM
  #166
Whitesnake
Habs of steel
 
Whitesnake's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Lorraine, QC
Country: Canada
Posts: 51,909
vCash: 709
Quote:
Originally Posted by Edmontreal View Post
Yeah, I get that. I guess we just dont agree.
Like I said before, there is 2 camps on that question. While I disagree with Kriss E, I know where he is coming from. I haven't seen as much young fans from anything BUT the Habs. There are A LOT of Ovechkin fans. A lot of Crosby fans. A lot of other players' fans of other cities way more than it used to be in the past. For one reason only. The lack of Habs success in the past 15 years. And the fact that we didn't finish low enough to get those "stars" while we weren't able to draft them everywhere else in the draft.

I just wish THEY'd see and respect where we're coming from (I think Kriss E does though) and either for the oldest guys like me, or even some of the young ones who either chooses to beleive in this or still ends up having relatives really passionnate with what the Habs were all about, that in the end, our desire to add some fine local talent as nothing to do with diluting the overall talent of the team and just has to do with getting back somehow the identity we used to have and that maybe it would reflect in the end result for the benefit of everyone.

Thing is, in the debate even for in the "doesn't matter where he comes from" camp, you have that feeling that the "doesn't matter" isn't necessarily true.....A whole lot of people do not believe in the Q products nor do they seem to want that local flavor based on the fact that it either might create a distraction OR that it would please the media we love to hate. So in the "doesn't matter" (for some) seems to hide a " well it might not be bad if we don't have a lot of those locals" type of thinking.....

Whitesnake is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
08-25-2010, 12:10 AM
  #167
Not The One
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Montréal, Qc.
Posts: 1,487
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kriss E View Post
If Marcel Dionne would have won five Stanley Cups, he'd be more recognized than Lafleur or at least just as much, and if Guy wouldn't have won any cups he wouldn't have been idolized as much. Dionne also played in the West for most of his career in an era where you rarely saw Western teams play.
If pigs had wings, they could fly. At "equal" talent, Lafleur was the idol of a generation and and an inspiration to millions of fans, who saw him play at least 80x more than the other two HoFers. I really don't see what's to debate here.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kriss E View Post
Who was more influent Damphousse or Lemieux???...
A bit of an unfair comparison, no? If Lemieux had played his whole career here, he'd have an arena named after him in every town in the province.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kriss E View Post
Obviously, talk around Montreal will always concern the Habs players first but I fell to see how this is somehow a reason as to why we should focus on getting more local talent.
We should focus on getting TALENT first and foremost.
That's why we need TALENTed local players, which we tend to trade away for peanuts around here. Seriously, what did we get for Carbonneau, Roy, Damphousse, Turgeon, Beauchemin, Robidas, Ribeiro, Latendresse. That's a massive loss of talent, and they were all lost in bad trades.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kriss E View Post
But again, it always comes back to this. Talking about the 50's, 60's and 70's as if they're comparable times. Drop the nostalgia, we're talking about 40years ago, nothing outside the concept of the game is the same anymore.
Obviously. Nobody is asking for a whole team of Quebecois, we just want more than one regular third-liner. And it's pretty difficicult to get those TALENTED players nowadays if you don't draft them in the first place. One first-round pick from the Q in 20 years does not give us a lot of TALENT to build from, does it?

We sure do like those college players though. We got 8 of them in the first round in the last 11 years. Probably a coincidence.

Even beefing up our Q scouting would be a terrific first step to build up our supply of local talent, but apparently even that is controversial around here...

Not The One is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-25-2010, 12:38 AM
  #168
SeriousFan09
Registered User
 
SeriousFan09's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Mississauga, Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,164
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Not The One View Post
A bit of an unfair comparison, no? If Lemieux had played his whole career here, he'd have an arena named after him in every town in the province.



That's why we need TALENTed local players, which we tend to trade away for peanuts around here. Seriously, what did we get for Carbonneau, Roy, Damphousse, Turgeon, Beauchemin, Robidas, Ribeiro, Latendresse. That's a massive loss of talent, and they were all lost in bad trades.



Obviously. Nobody is asking for a whole team of Quebecois, we just want more than one regular third-liner. And it's pretty difficicult to get those TALENTED players nowadays if you don't draft them in the first place. One first-round pick from the Q in 20 years does not give us a lot of TALENT to build from, does it?

We sure do like those college players though. We got 8 of them in the first round in the last 11 years. Probably a coincidence.

Even beefing up our Q scouting would be a terrific first step to build up our supply of local talent, but apparently even that is controversial around here...
If Lemieux had joined the Habs in 1984, this would likely be a different organization, with about 3-5 more Stanley Cups. Lemieux at the front with Roy at the back? That would have been ridiculous. It likely would have inspired more young people to play hockey, but it doesn't guarantee quality, which Quebec has failed to produce in the last 20 years.

Carbonneau, Damphousse, Turgeon and Roy are not in the same category as the second half, Beauchemain made his career being the D partner of Pronger or Niedermayer, Robidas isn't that much and Ribiero and Latendresse were empty between the ears and lacked a 1/4 of the heart Carbonneau played with in his day, let alone the others. There's talent and then there's heart, those guys had it, brats like Ribiero and Latendresse have an empty cavity in their chest when their team needs them.

We drafted out of the Q in the 80s and 90s, with weak results and the Q was even better than for producing the talent but we haven't had real solid results of Quebecois drafting since what, 1987? The Q has produced miserable results in the last decade especially.

US hockey has produced better players than Quebec has for the last while, it makes sense to scout them more than Quebec. Name me a Quebecois-born kid with the talent of Kane, Ryan, Parise or the defensive abilities of a Bogosian or Eric Johnson. It doesn't exist and frankly this team shouldn't feel obligated to draft sub-standard talent because putting on the CH doesn't make you a better player automatically, get enough examples of that.

We have a full-time scout for the Q and that's probably enough, when Quebec hockey rights itself the Canadiens and the rest of the NHL will pay more attention but right now, you're better off scouting the states, they're actually producing first-round talent.

SeriousFan09 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-25-2010, 01:06 AM
  #169
Not The One
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Montréal, Qc.
Posts: 1,487
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SeriousFan09 View Post
If Lemieux had joined the Habs in 1984, this would likely be a different organization, with about 3-5 more Stanley Cups. Lemieux at the front with Roy at the back? That would have been ridiculous. It likely would have inspired more young people to play hockey, but it doesn't guarantee quality, which Quebec has failed to produce in the last 20 years.
Nothing is ever certain, but I'll bet that Lafleur inspired a lot of other talented players frafted in the 80's, like Savard, Damphousse, Turgeon. Likewise, Roy in in good part responsible inspiring many of the talented Quebec goalies from the 90's. Who inspired the kids drafted in the 00's?

Quote:
Originally Posted by SeriousFan09 View Post
Carbonneau, Damphousse, Turgeon and Roy are not in the same category as the second half, Beauchemain made his career being the D partner of Pronger or Niedermayer, Robidas isn't that much and Ribiero and Latendresse were empty between the ears and lacked a 1/4 of the heart Carbonneau played with in his day, let alone the others. There's talent and then there's heart, those guys had it, brats like Ribiero and Latendresse have an empty cavity in their chest when their team needs them.
I don't disagree at all, I'm just illustrating how we lost all the local talent the previous poster was mentionning. We gave it all away for almost nothing.

Quote:
Originally Posted by SeriousFan09 View Post
We drafted out of the Q in the 80s and 90s, with weak results and the Q was even better than for producing the talent but we haven't had real solid results of Quebecois drafting since what, 1987? The Q has produced miserable results in the last decade especially.
Carbonneau ('79), Lemieux, Richer, Roy, Desjardins, Brisebois. We drafted in the 80's some of the core pieces of two stanley cup teams. Aside from Chelios, Corson and LeClair, none of the non-Q draftees are that impressive.

In the 90's management decided they wanted some western beef. Stevenson, Bilodeau, Wilkie, Ryan, Higgins. All first round picks from the WHL, all colossal disasters that set the franchise back for years at a time where good drafting became more important than ever. THAT is dismal drafting. Why didn't you mention that instead of dwelling on Q picks, of which Chouinard is the only one that stands out as a bad one. We did get Théodore (Hart, Vezina), Ribeiro, Robidas, Beauchemin, Ryder, and there was only one first rounder.

The last decade is what it is, but there is certainly no local star to inspire the current crop of local players. You stand a better chance of being drafted by the Habs if you go play in the US.

Quote:
Originally Posted by SeriousFan09 View Post
US hockey has produced better players than Quebec has for the last while, it makes sense to scout them more than Quebec. Name me a Quebecois-born kid with the talent of Kane, Ryan, Parise or the defensive abilities of a Bogosian or Eric Johnson. It doesn't exist and frankly this team shouldn't feel obligated to draft sub-standard talent because putting on the CH doesn't make you a better player automatically, get enough examples of that.
Would you care to point the great americans drafted by the habs in the last decade? With EIGHT first-round picks, there has to be SOMEONE contibuting to our present team?

Good thing we're not drafting "sub-standard local talent".

Quote:
Originally Posted by SeriousFan09 View Post
We have a full-time scout for the Q and that's probably enough, when Quebec hockey rights itself the Canadiens and the rest of the NHL will pay more attention but right now, you're better off scouting the states, they're actually producing first-round talent.
I still can't believe there is so much resistance here to better scouting in the Q... this I truly don't get. As previous examples illustrate, WE NEED TO PICK BETTER PLAYERS (and better scouts).


Last edited by Not The One: 08-25-2010 at 01:21 AM.
Not The One is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-25-2010, 01:33 AM
  #170
Whitesnake
Habs of steel
 
Whitesnake's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Lorraine, QC
Country: Canada
Posts: 51,909
vCash: 709
Quote:
Originally Posted by SeriousFan09 View Post
Carbonneau, Damphousse, Turgeon and Roy are not in the same category as the second half, Beauchemain made his career being the D partner of Pronger or Niedermayer, Robidas isn't that much and Ribiero and Latendresse were empty between the ears and lacked a 1/4 of the heart Carbonneau played with in his day, let alone the others. There's talent and then there's heart, those guys had it, brats like Ribiero and Latendresse have an empty cavity in their chest when their team needs them.
I can tell you that Patrick Traverse would not have made his career by being partner of Pronger or Niedermayer. Beauchemin had the talent to begin with and he had to follow the pace to still be their partner. Robidas isn't that much? Yeah, 'cause being considered strongly for Team Canada isn't that much....As far as the Ribeiro and Lats comments, well we just see where you are coming from. At least you are not hiding it. Even if true, every freakin NHL player do not come with the greatest of attitude and greatest of character. It often comes with maturity and as far as I'm concerned, it didn't refrain Ribeiro for being a pretty good hockey player nor will it refrain Latendresse for becoming one as well. We just preferred taking the easy way out and let others develop our players....

Quote:
Originally Posted by SeriousFan09 View Post
We drafted out of the Q in the 80s and 90s, with weak results and the Q was even better than for producing the talent but we haven't had real solid results of Quebecois drafting since what, 1987? The Q has produced miserable results in the last decade especially.
We drafted most of our 1st rounders in the 80's and 90' NOT out of the Q with the poorest results of them all. Funny thing is that since 1984, guess what our best 2 drafts are coming from? 1998 with Ribeiro, Beauchemin, Ryder and Markov, 3 of which from the Q (yeah Markov is the most important one yet all the other 3 are legitimate NHL'ers) Imagine if we would have went with Gagné instead of Chouinard, Gagné also from the Q. And 1984 with Svoboda, Corson, Richer and Roy, 2 of which are Q products. We could add 1987 with Cassels, Leclair, Desjardins and Schneider, 1 of which are coming from the Q.

Take the 90's and realize that out of the 27 Q players picked, 6 are still playing in the league with more than that having at least played 100 games in the league. If you compare to the rest of the picks, out of the remaining 119 picks, 11 are still playing with a few others that played some kind of role with their respective team. But just as far as longetivity is concerned, we're talking about a 22% for the Q compared to 9% for the rest of the world.

I know something....Slovenia has sucked terribly producing hockey players.....But it only takes 1 guy.....

Quote:
Originally Posted by SeriousFan09 View Post
US hockey has produced better players than Quebec has for the last while, it makes sense to scout them more than Quebec. Name me a Quebecois-born kid with the talent of Kane, Ryan, Parise or the defensive abilities of a Bogosian or Eric Johnson. It doesn't exist and frankly this team shouldn't feel obligated to draft sub-standard talent because putting on the CH doesn't make you a better player automatically, get enough examples of that.
Yes, US has had the upper hand for sure. But what does not having talent à la Kane, Ryan, Parise, Bogosian and the rest have anything to do with it? It's not like we would be suggesting that at the rank they were chosen, that we should have went with a Quebecer anyway? But chances are at the rank we were picking, Giroux, Perron, Letang (if you didn't like Latendresse) and others were probably the BPA at that point and time. Yes, quantity isn't there. Nobody is denying it. But quality is still present.

Quote:
Originally Posted by SeriousFan09 View Post
We have a full-time scout for the Q and that's probably enough, when Quebec hockey rights itself the Canadiens and the rest of the NHL will pay more attention but right now, you're better off scouting the states, they're actually producing first-round talent.
How do we know if it's enough? Since Gainey came on board, we just happened to have that one full-time scout....this year. And we are even not talking about a reknown scout here, clearly not a guy who has a chance to play with the other on the same field especially with the new acquisitions we made. I appreciate the gesture they made. Finally one full-time guy. Remains to be seen the power he'll have and the word he'll be able to say at the table. And we'll know soon enough. 2011 seems to be the perfect combination of not that deep everywhere, some pretty nice talent in quality and quantity in the Q. Clearly our best year to come in a long time. If Boisvert can show what he got this upcoming year, chances are he never will.

The best part of Quebec rights itself is that while we need to work on quantity, Quebec hockey and the Q came to the conclusion that it sucked big time based on the fact that we didn't have 1 1st rounder in 2010. Clearly disregarding the 4 guys we had the year before and the possible 4 guys we'll have next year. Where I totally don't agree with you is that you don't take that reactive approach of "We'll wait till they fix the league and then we'll consider it...". Not sure that the teams who take the chances in countries you would not have considered took the same approach.

And in the end.....it just takes one great one. You don't necessarily need a PERFECT LEAGUE and an incredible quantity of players to be able to end up with at least 1 or 2 fine products each year.

Whitesnake is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
08-25-2010, 03:38 AM
  #171
SeriousFan09
Registered User
 
SeriousFan09's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Mississauga, Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,164
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Whitesnake View Post
I can tell you that Patrick Traverse would not have made his career by being partner of Pronger or Niedermayer. Beauchemin had the talent to begin with and he had to follow the pace to still be their partner. Robidas isn't that much? Yeah, 'cause being considered strongly for Team Canada isn't that much....As far as the Ribeiro and Lats comments, well we just see where you are coming from. At least you are not hiding it. Even if true, every freakin NHL player do not come with the greatest of attitude and greatest of character. It often comes with maturity and as far as I'm concerned, it didn't refrain Ribeiro for being a pretty good hockey player nor will it refrain Latendresse for becoming one as well. We just preferred taking the easy way out and let others develop our players....
Beauchemain was good, but come on, Komisarek and Soury built their careers next to Andrei Markov and I love Andrei, but Nieds/Pronger are better than he is so they can raise him better than Markov could. Robidas entered the Team Canada question because of the underwhelming seasons of Bouwmeester and Phaneuf and Green was still ahead of him, he was maybe 10th, 11th in consideration. Maturity didn't hold Ribiero back from being talented, but his on-ice play was always held back by his immaturity on it and frankly, his party boy issues were well-known. Latendresse was the poster child for pouting in 09-10, didn't work hard one game of the season before he was traded. Complained endlessly in the media and self-admitted he hadn't been trying to keep his job. Teams can take our heartless players if this is what they have to offer us. Ribiero has apparently already worn out his welcome in DAL and Latendresse, no proof he's going to stick around at his 'I'm actually going to try' approach in MIN.


Quote:
We drafted most of our 1st rounders in the 80's and 90' NOT out of the Q with the poorest results of them all. Funny thing is that since 1984, guess what our best 2 drafts are coming from? 1998 with Ribeiro, Beauchemin, Ryder and Markov, 3 of which from the Q (yeah Markov is the most important one yet all the other 3 are legitimate NHL'ers) Imagine if we would have went with Gagné instead of Chouinard, Gagné also from the Q. And 1984 with Svoboda, Corson, Richer and Roy, 2 of which are Q products. We could add 1987 with Cassels, Leclair, Desjardins and Schneider, 1 of which are coming from the Q.
I already mentioned post '87, I acknowledge Serge Savard's 80s success but it came to a grinding halt after that year and well, we don't want to talk about the Houle era do we? Yes mistakes were made when we ran to the WHL but honestly, I doubt Savard or Houle could have done any better if they'd selected out of the Q. We might as well gripe we missed on Dennis Savard, Larry Murphy and Paul Coffey in 1980. I guess I was trying to focus in on more about the pathetic last decade of Quebec-born talent coming out more than anything. Also, kinda glad with Gagne's injury history we don't have him.


Quote:
Take the 90's and realize that out of the 27 Q players picked, 6 are still playing in the league with more than that having at least played 100 games in the league. If you compare to the rest of the picks, out of the remaining 119 picks, 11 are still playing with a few others that played some kind of role with their respective team. But just as far as longetivity is concerned, we're talking about a 22% for the Q compared to 9% for the rest of the world.

I know something....Slovenia has sucked terribly producing hockey players.....But it only takes 1 guy.....
It's nice the Quebec-born players made it better than most of the rest, but that is such a dark period of drafting for MTL that what does it matter? Still most of that talent didn't really make a real name for itself in the NHL. Yes they produced more compared to others picked but the team was picking so poorly that it doesn't matter and again, 90s are nice but the last decade is the real problem.


Quote:
Yes, US has had the upper hand for sure. But what does not having talent à la Kane, Ryan, Parise, Bogosian and the rest have anything to do with it? It's not like we would be suggesting that at the rank they were chosen, that we should have went with a Quebecer anyway? But chances are at the rank we were picking, Giroux, Perron, Letang (if you didn't like Latendresse) and others were probably the BPA at that point and time. Yes, quantity isn't there. Nobody is denying it. But quality is still present.
Claude Giroux isn't Quebecois for one thing, he was born in Bathurst, Ontario and I know since his name is French, Quebec would like to adopt him as one of their own but he isn't. Same as Ben Pouliot.

11 Americans went in the first 30 picks this year, last time that happened with the Q was when? Danny Kristo is a top prospect for Montreal as is Jarred Tinordi. Max Pacioretty's career isn't done either. Paying better attention to the United States is good business for MTL as their talent is rising well above the Q.

There were the Letangs and Giroux here and there, but a ton of Q guys have failed to make the grade as well like Gilbert Brule, Marc Pouliot, Alex Picard and others who simply were no better than people born elsewhere and drafted later. The US makes sense, their talent pool is going up, Q's is stagnant.

Quote:
How do we know if it's enough? Since Gainey came on board, we just happened to have that one full-time scout....this year. And we are even not talking about a reknown scout here, clearly not a guy who has a chance to play with the other on the same field especially with the new acquisitions we made. I appreciate the gesture they made. Finally one full-time guy. Remains to be seen the power he'll have and the word he'll be able to say at the table. And we'll know soon enough. 2011 seems to be the perfect combination of not that deep everywhere, some pretty nice talent in quality and quantity in the Q. Clearly our best year to come in a long time. If Boisvert can show what he got this upcoming year, chances are he never will.

The best part of Quebec rights itself is that while we need to work on quantity, Quebec hockey and the Q came to the conclusion that it sucked big time based on the fact that we didn't have 1 1st rounder in 2010. Clearly disregarding the 4 guys we had the year before and the possible 4 guys we'll have next year. Where I totally don't agree with you is that you don't take that reactive approach of "We'll wait till they fix the league and then we'll consider it...". Not sure that the teams who take the chances in countries you would not have considered took the same approach.

And in the end.....it just takes one great one. You don't necessarily need a PERFECT LEAGUE and an incredible quantity of players to be able to end up with at least 1 or 2 fine products each year.
Americans again have put more talent into the first round than Quebec has by a wide margin, so it does make sense to scout them as they're putting more talent into the league. And still in the last five years if the best we can point at is Letang, Giroux and Perron as the three names out of Q than honestly, it's a sad state considering the OHL or the WHL cough 3 guys like that each draft year and Giroux before the Q was a product of ONT hockey.

Also, I would argue is that Q talent really Quebecois that goes first? Arguably the most talented player out of the Q this season was Kirill Kabanov, the highest drafted was Brandon Gormley, a maritimer. In 2009, the first Q player picked was Dmitri Kulikov and so far Jordan Caron has trouble staying healthy in the Q and Paradis and Depres are far from being locks for NHL players. The top prospect for 2011 is a US born, N.B.-raised Sean Couturier. The lower Q leagues and the Q itself is doing little to actually produce actual French-Canadian, Quebec-born talent. Quebec seems to be producing more top prospects from other countries or provinces than actually Quebec-born. It's a system that has to be fixed from the leagues under the Q I would say.

It does only take one great one, but drafting is also about the numbers and simply, it makes more sense to more extensively scout and study the regions that are producing more talent. If Louis Leblanc becomes a star, I'll do cartwheels but MTL doesn't owe Quebec anything. Take a better look for the Girouxs (Not born in QC anyway) Perrons and Letang's fine but honestly, it's not like they're coming out of the woodwork, they were the rare gems of a bad lot. Max Lapierre is one of top 10 Quebec-born centers in scoring in the last decade!

SeriousFan09 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-25-2010, 06:45 AM
  #172
Not The One
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Montréal, Qc.
Posts: 1,487
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SeriousFan09 View Post
I already mentioned post '87, I acknowledge Serge Savard's 80s success but it came to a grinding halt after that year and well, we don't want to talk about the Houle era do we? Yes mistakes were made when we ran to the WHL but honestly, I doubt Savard or Houle could have done any better if they'd selected out of the Q. We might as well gripe we missed on Dennis Savard, Larry Murphy and Paul Coffey in 1980. I guess I was trying to focus in on more about the pathetic last decade of Quebec-born talent coming out more than anything. Also, kinda glad with Gagne's injury history we don't have him.

It's nice the Quebec-born players made it better than most of the rest, but that is such a dark period of drafting for MTL that what does it matter? Still most of that talent didn't really make a real name for itself in the NHL. Yes they produced more compared to others picked but the team was picking so poorly that it doesn't matter and again, 90s are nice but the last decade is the real problem.
Mistakes were made? MISTAKES WERE MADE? That's your answer to FIVE wasted first round pick from the WHL in only seven years?!? By your own line of thinking regarding to the Q, that would be reason enough to avoid the WHL for the next 20 years.

Regarding the rest of your post, I must say that you have pathetic debating skills. Your argue that our Quebec drafting was awful, we prove that it was better than the rest of the picks, and come back to say that it doesn't matter anyways. Cool story bro!

You keep arguing on and on against general hockey talent in Quebec, while I thought you drafted an individual, not his entire nationality. We get it, Quebec=Bad and Untalented, the Rest=Good and Talented. But what does it matter for us that Patrick Kane is American if he plays for Chicago?

Drafting WHLers = Good, even though it might be a Terry Ryan. Because Canadians are Talented.
Drafting Americans = Good, even though it might be a David Fischer Because Americans are Talented.
Drafting Quebecois = Bad, even though iit might be a Guillaume Latendresse. Because Quebecois are Untalented.

Good thing we don't judge players by their ethnicity.

Not The One is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-25-2010, 07:56 AM
  #173
ppil
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Quebec
Country: Canada
Posts: 647
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Not The One View Post
Regarding the rest of your post, I must say that you have pathetic debating skills. Your argue that our Quebec drafting was awful, we prove that it was better than the rest of the picks, and come back to say that it doesn't matter anyways. Cool story bro!
I think you really don't understand his point... He's saying that overall, in the lasts couple of years, see decades, for the NHL, the Americans, and other Canadian leagues, have produced more and better players.

You counter argument was that it didn't work for the habs even if they picked Americans, because we would be better if we had picked Perron, Giroux, etc…

First, the real problem with that isn't where we picked players, but the quality of our scouts, and I think (well hopefully) it has been addressed this year by the many changes in that department.

Secondly, your counter argument is weak because as much as there are a couple of good Q players that we could have picked, that won't convinced me that we should get more scouts in Q because I could also point out many good players from other leagues that we could have picked and say that we should put more scouts there instead of the Q.

My last point, and I think that is the biggest problem, it's development… We couldn't bring Latendresse to his potential, we certainly could have done better with Price, and frankly, I convinced that you wouldn't be that happy if we had picked Giroux and Perron, because I'm sure that they wouldn't have become the player they are if they had played for Montreal (Perron would never have made the habs on his first year).

You point out many Quebecers that went on doing well elsewhere, but why couldn't they do it here (don't tell me that Beauchemin, Robidas, Ribeiro and Latendresse were playing like that in Montreal).

I think it's a mix of development, pressure and no place for error. I think that sadly for us (but we got to take a part of the blame) Montreal is a place for veteran (see media and fans reaction toward Price, Pac, Maxwell, Weber, Latendresse), because people learn by doing errors but it seems that here you can't do some without getting criticized…

ppil is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-25-2010, 09:54 AM
  #174
NLHabsFan
Registered User
 
NLHabsFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Alberta
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,610
vCash: 500
I don't know how anyone can argue that we should have better scouting in the Q. The Habs should definitely have better scouting in the Q. But not at the expense of scouting other areas. Montreal is one of the most profitable organizations in the entire league and because of the salary cap on players they should be out doing most teams with their drafting and player development. They should improve their drafting in the Q and the rest of the CHL, across the US and Europe. For the amount of profits the organization makes compared to most others they should be doing better. I hope that with the new changes we could start to see some real improvements.

NLHabsFan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-25-2010, 10:01 AM
  #175
JrHockeyFan
Registered User
 
JrHockeyFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,520
vCash: 500
I'd hope we have good scouting everywhere. It should be a bit easier in the Q, but hey, there has to be something good to find in the first place, and they have to be in the right position in the draft to make that pick. Not to mention the player position has to fit our needs.

Sounds easy, but lots of stuff has to line up just right to get these picks.

JrHockeyFan 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 09:41 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.