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
08-25-2010, 01:19 PM
  #176
Kriss E
HFB Partner
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 25,427
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Whitesnake View Post
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.....
I do get where you're coming from. I understand your point and view. I just don't see it as a priority to get local talent. Would be great if we could have more local talent of course, but it's not a necessity in my eyes.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Not The One View Post
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.
You're the one that asked the question. I'm explaining to you why Lafleur was more idolized. Like you said, people saw him more. Nowadays, you can pretty much see any team play every single game. If not on TV, then on the net. If I'm a young kid and love Doughty, I can see the Kings play every game.
I never said that a local superstar won't influence a lot of local masses, more so than an outside Superstar.
I said that the kid that wants to play hockey, will play it whether there's quebecers on the team or not.


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.
Well the same can said about your comparison of Dionne vs Lafleur.

Point was to show Superstars outside Mtl can influence a lot of people as well.
As Whitesnake pointed out, Ovechkin and Crosby are present in every city. If we had either one here, they would influence as much as any Queb superstar would.

If Price can live up to his ''Jesus'' nickname, and we can become part of the best teams in the East then we will be a lot more influent as well.

Winning will influence a lot more masses than a local superstar. Of course, if you can have the best of both worlds it would be ideal.
But like I said, it isn't a necessity. Winning is a necessity.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Not The One View Post
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.
Carbo-Roy-Damph-Turgeon were all traded during the Houle era. I don't know why you bring these guys up, we all know how the was completely destroyed.
Beauchemin was ''stolen''. There was an agreement among all GMs to not pick up any player placed on waivers during the lockout. One of them decided to break that agreement and pick up Beauchemin. That GM no longer works.
Ribeiro was a mistake. Remember when we got Kovalev for Balej?..GMs screw up sometimes.
Robidas moved around a lot before stepping up. From Mtl to Atl to Dallas to Chi to Germany (Lockout) back to Dallas.
Latendresse for Pouliot was still a pretty even deal. We will see in the future if there's a clear winner.

I'd take Cammalleri over Ribeiro, so like I said, we need Talented players, local or not.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Not The One View Post
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...
How many Q players were picked in the first round last year??..
It's not just us that draft less Q players buddy. I'd have no problem beefing up our Q scouting, we have an advantage with that league being in our own backyard. But I don't think it's a coincidence how the number of Q players seems to keep dropping.

Kriss E is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-25-2010, 01:55 PM
  #177
Whitesnake
Habs of steel
 
Whitesnake's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Lorraine, QC
Country: Canada
Posts: 50,022
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SeriousFan09 View Post
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.
All that I was saying is that Beauchemin was good. Never was talking about a future HOF here. Same for Robidas who you were mentioning at one point that he was pretty average, yet understand that at one point he was 11th as far as Canadians are concerned. And for having seen some games, Robidas is more than just average. He has become a pretty good player all-around. We are not going to go back to Ribeiro and Latendresse. As "bad" as Ribeiro was, look at his stats and he wasn't that bad. Yet, he was the worst human being on the planet 'cause of that 1 fake seizure he had (like Bégin who's the worst hockey player ever 'cause of this one penalty he had, funny how it doesn't take a whole lot for the locals to be hated...). As far as Lats is concerned, he had a bad start of the year after showing improvement every single year, after working as hard as ever during the summer but was paired with a even more struggling Lapierre and never got his chance offensively. But that's another story where there are 2 camps there as well. The ones who believed he had his chance without being able to prove it....and the other ones.

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.
Drafting was bad all over from the Q to the rest. Not sure we can pinpoint specifically the Q to mention how we were bad at drafting. As far as the Gagné explanation...this is where I draw the line. You can't be serious. Thank god we got Chouinard 'cause he didn't have that injury history...yet he's 502 points behind Gagné. THIS YEAR is the year when you have to be careful about Gagné. You still would have used him really well before and he would have been able to give you a whole lot in return. So you might NOW look at replacing him sooner than you thought, still the years he would have given to you are irreplacable.


Quote:
Originally Posted by SeriousFan09 View Post
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.
Last decade was a problem all around. Thing is first you are saying that the Q WAS the problem to begin with but then you now reply that it was a problem all around. As bad and terrible most of our 1st rounders were in the 90's, you still have 1998 who you ended up with Ribeiro, Beauchemin, Markov and Ryder. And chances are, all 4 could STILL be part of your team. All 4 are proven NHL'ers that gave us great hockey and are still giving good to great hockey TO THIS DAY. And that's 12 years after being drafted. So only 1 year, out of 10ish terrible ones could still, TO THIS DAY, form 1/4 of your team. Yes, I know, salary cap and all.....well even if we would not have been able to retain them, if we would have traded when their value was at their highest, the return would have been more significant than Niinimaa, nothing and nothing.

Quote:
Originally Posted by SeriousFan09 View Post
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.
Don't worry, I know he's not Québécois. He's still a franco who playing his junior years in Québec, being rejected by all the teams in the OHL. If you know me, you'll know that I like my locals. That I also like my francos but that I also like all the players that played in the Q. Giroux fits 2 out of 3, therefore he's amongst the players I take a closer look to. You can't compare Pouliot to him though. First, to care about Pouliot, he'll have to prove he's worth it. Then, you don't forget he was traded for a popular Québécois. Then, he didn't play his junior years in the Q so the "attachment" to Pouliot is not as much (needless to say some people remember his comment at the draft when he didn't want to be drafted by the Habs, but to me that's irrelevant, he's a Habs now and I hope people are behind him)

Quote:
Originally Posted by SeriousFan09 View Post
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.
Again, not sure why you are trying to prove that the US has the upper hand. I stated that before. I even agree myself. But there's a freakin difference between knowing this and not even having 1 full-time scout in the Q before this year, a full time scout that is now Serge Boisvert who has more experience than everybody here based on the fact that he played the game....but that's it. I'd personnally even wish that we would have 1 full time for Quebec East, 1 full time for West and Maritimes. So how's that detrimental to the fact that we'll still scout the US? Have 4 or 5 in there if you want, but just don't disregard the Q based on the fact that there's only 20 to 30 guys being drafted every year. 'Cause like I said before...it only takes 1. And the upcoming year will be a good year. And there might be other years after. I'd wish the Habs would be the best scouting and development squad of the league. I wish that since we can't spend 80 M$ on the cap, that this money would served at getting the best guys and develop them the best way possible even if scouting might be an unexact science. We did, in general, are amongst the best scouting squad as far as number of players that played in the NHL. Yet, most of those guys are 3rd and 4th liners that you can now have for 1 M$ in the UFA market. That's not what you want from your drafting. And yes, I did state how it looks much better for the upcoming future. That Timmins and Co analysis can change pretty fast. But as of now, you do not have proof that our US drafting is that much better than our Q drafting. Since 2004, we are talking about 16 guys from the American system, for 8 players from the Q (don't count Leblanc who,s actually....a product of both). And so far, while it's too soon for the years that might shift the balance, the guys that ended up, so far, playing a role in this team are Lapierre and Latendresse. Yes, some might see McDonagh's value as being the greatest 'cause of the return he got us. And then I personnaly based my evaluation of a better use of Latendresse would have permit him to do better than he did even if he had proven except last year a continuous progression in his game. Again, I know Tinordi, Bennett, Kristo, Quailer, MaxPac, can TOTALLY change this evaluation. It's a work in progress, I'm not dumb enough to believe that what I'm seeing now, will be the future as well. So we'll see there. We also don't know what Leblanc, who's kinda hybrid, Dumont, Carle, Ellis and Fortier will end up doing. Clearly the potential is in the US camp. But at this time, we have to talk with what we have in front of us.

Quote:
Originally Posted by SeriousFan09 View Post
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.
My turn...., Brule is not from the Q. Yes, some Q failed and it's more spectacular 'cause the overall quantity isn't there, while there is a lot of fails elsewhere but doesn't show as much 'cause quantity is more there. The US makes sense, never said otherwise. Again, being more present in the Q, doesn't mean more absent in the US. We aren't talking about adding 1 guy there so we'd have to remove 1 guy over there.

Quote:
Originally Posted by SeriousFan09 View Post
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.
Yes, there's some work to be done as far as our french-canadian Quebec-born talent. Nobody is every denying it. Not sure how you can have such opinions on guys like Caron and Despres while I personnally share your opinion on Paradis but they are what they are. First-rounders. Why judging them already and not accept that at this point and time, they were judged as 1st-rounder material. And yes, there's a LOT of fixing. By far. The Quebec system cannot SOLELY blame everybody but them by what's going on. Far from it and I totally agree with you.

Quote:
Originally Posted by SeriousFan09 View Post
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!
See, I'll repeat by Slovenia/Kopitar example. And I'll mention the numbers drafts that the Detroit scout was able to get relatively unknown players 'cause nobody was used to draft there. I just wish that with the means that we have, we HAVE to be on top of that game. We can't spend money more to get players, we have to spend it so that the draft becomes our main way to attract people. Yes, we were able to do without and 2 years ago, UFA was our way to get people but guess what.....chances are we wouldn't be able to make that kind of move for the next 5 years....so where do you take your players? Habs needs to be on top of drafting as far as quality is concerned. And it has been proven that while being more difficult, you can have top-6 players, top-4 d-men while drafting at our ranks or after us.

Yes, we are stronger in some position than others. Not sure it matters since I keep hearing how we should always go for the BPA since needs are tough to determine.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ppil View Post
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).
I really hope that one day we stop with that. For one reason. If it works that way, it could work the other way around. I remember some posters here laughing at me and others who wanted Gilbert Brule in 2005. I was furious at getting Price and though we missed the boat big time. Well what was their replay 4 years later? "Well, Price is still fine but it could have been worst...imagine if we would have drafted Brule..." Guess what though....who knows if he would have developed the same way if he would have been chosen by us? Is it too far fetched to believe that as tough we are with our players that every other team is better at developing youngsters than Hitchcock was at least in Columbus? To me, Brule was a surefire prospect but needed to work on 1 thing...realize his size and not play the pinball machine he used to play in Juniors. That was my statement at the time and guess what...didn't he got injured right from the start, thinking he'd was stronger than he actually was and that was already the end for him.

And how about all these other players that didn't work elsewhere....do we know if they wouldn't have worked better here despite our development record? We don't know, some players work better in an environment than others. But we still don't know where that's headed. The only thing we know is that a good player ends up being a good player even if it takes a longer time to happen.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ppil View Post
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).
Well Beauchemin couldn't play like that in Montreal, 'cause he never got his chance in Montreal. Robidas was let go at 24. Ribeiro at 25 after finishing 1st and 4th in scoring in his last 2 years. And Latendresse was let go at 22 after improving year after year except his start of the season the year he was traded. No they didn't play like that in Montreal....they didn't have that chance. One day people will realize that confidence is just as important as your actual skills.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ppil View Post
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…
Agree and disagree. I believe that Montreal is a place for vets.....in nets. This team would look great with a Craig Anderson in net. A vet, able to take that extra pressure that being a goalie in Montreal represents, that doesn't speak french (a place I couldn't care less and probably hope the players there doesn't speak french), low profile and just do his job. We kill our goalies in this town. And once they're dead, we ressuscitate them to kill them again. There's no place for distraction in net for our team.

But then, please tell me which fans and media reaction towards Pac, Weber, Latendresse or any other kids you are talking about. Yes, seems that the local boys in this board will have a harder time. Though, the media will cherish them and the local fans will sometimes be harder on them, sometimes loved them no matter what, so in the end, it's equivalent. Then, which media are repeatadly talking about how Weber doesn't progress as much. Yes, I do hear from time to time how MaxPac isn't progressing but for one reason.....because Perron was chosen almost right after. Reason why there's a big fuss over Fischer because Giroux was close by. But the rest of the anglo kids, if the organization let them develop nicely, there wouldn't be a big fuss over any of them. But when the organization demonstrates by making them progress sooner than they should à la MaxPac or Price, then you can understand how the reaction might be a little different. I guess we trust our organization that they are doing the right thing. When they seem like they're not, we are more vocal about it. Though I'm not sure it's what plays in MaxPac head at this time, it's way more about how he sees himself. I mean the kid, himself, said that he judged he was ready for the Pros when he saw how he was playing.....at a development camp. Not rookie camp, not pro camp, development camp. A camp when there's actually no competition. Somebody somewho, should've told him that his performance, as exciting as it was, meant so much. That another year in University without the 2 stars he was playing with, would have been much better for his development. Then, the expectation level by the fans would have went way down.

As far as Price is concerned.....that's another freakin story that was handled in the worst possible way. Everything was done to screw this guy the best way possible. If he ends up having a great year this year, I'll name him in the HOF.....

Whitesnake is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
08-25-2010, 02:40 PM
  #178
CanadienErrant*
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Country: Cook Islands
Posts: 4,956
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SeriousFan09 View Post
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.




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.




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.



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!
Get your facts straight, at least.

Giroux is born in Hearst, Ontario.

Have you ever been in Hearst. IT's more French than some West Island suburbs of Montreal. 90% of the Hearst' population is French speaking. The guy is speaking better French than most players born in Montreal.

He played all his junior hockey in Gatineau. He was dominating the Q.

But, of course, he was not good enough for Les Canadiens de Montréal who likes all their forwards big and strong ().....

Hey, there is nothing wrong having a Franco-Ontarian or an Acadian playing for the Habs. (Franco Ontarians and Acadians ,as well as most French speaking Canadians outside Quebec, are big Habs fans- WHY ? If you can answer that question, you will understand why this team is not just another NHL team.


Last edited by CanadienErrant*: 08-25-2010 at 02:45 PM.
CanadienErrant* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-25-2010, 02:58 PM
  #179
shortcat1
Registered User
 
shortcat1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Downtown Palau, ON
Country: Palau
Posts: 897
vCash: 500
I listened to an interview on CKAC with Bernard Brisset on the topic of the impact of 'Québec' hockey has on the hockey world in general. He said that the center of the NHL universe used to be in Montreal but has been shifted to Toronto. Also, the NHL headquarters used to be in the SUN LIFE building in Montreal but now, it's in New York City. Montreal has been shifted out of its former position of prominence.

He also added that, for a long time, the French-Canadian (Québécois) press was the dominant voice in the hockey world but now, as with the other two developments, the dominant voice in hockey is found in Toronto. Who are the 'respected' voices of hockey in the press now? According to Brisset, people will listen and take the words of Bob Mackenzie and Pierre McGuire with more respect than to French-Canadian commentators. We may not agree with this but, according to Brisset, this is now the way it is.

On top of that, the QMJHL system has come to be perceived as producing a lower quality of 'product' and, as such, has become kind of irrelevant. The result is that the number of players drafted from the 'Q' has diminished over the years.

Now, the first part doesn't necessarily have much to do with the lack of the 'Flying Frenchmen' character of the Canadiens. It does have its impact in the sense that a big focus of the scouting departments of the NHL teams is no longer in 'La belle province'. That doesn't necessarily mean that the talent isn't as good but that the eye is turned elsewhere.

How that does impact on the Canadiens is that they, like other teams, want to find the best possible players for their roster. It can be argued that Montreal should look more deeply in its own back yard but, given the changed focus of the league in general, it will affect how the Canadiens scouting department looks at the prospect pool in the hockey 'world'.


Also, as mentioned above, the 'Q' is seen as not developing players as successfully as other leagues and systems. I don't know if that's totally true or not since I'm not an expert in those areas. It must be noted that it's not only the Canadiens who draft fewer players from the 'Q' but the whole league.

The Canadiens are still the team that has drafted or signed the most French-Canadiens (and primarily Québécois) players in the league. Yet, they only have two on their present roster. Is that an indication of bias against French-Canadian (again primarily Québécois) players? I doubt it. It's likely a result of the fact that the other players are adjusting to the speed & skill challenges than the Québécois players.

As it is everywhere, hockey, bottom line, is a business. Business has basically the need to show profit on a continuous basis. One of the best ways to make a profit in any pro sport is to have a successful team on the ice (or field). The Canadiens want to be a successful team like all the other 29 teams. They need to get the best product on the ice, that is the best players. If the best players or best prospect investments are or are perceived to be from a non-QMJHL source well then, of course, the players drafted will tend to come from else where in the hockey 'world'.

So, as fun as it was for me, a French-Canadien Québécois, to watch all those French players on the French channel on TV (from 1960 on through the end of the 1970's), things have changed and I can live with that. As judgemental as this may sound, I don't have a reactionary (or 'dinosaur') point of view.

It's very true that "These things too shall pass away". The Flying Frenchmen presence on our favourite team has passed away. We need to live with it.

shortcat1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-25-2010, 04:08 PM
  #180
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
All that I was saying is that Beauchemin was good. Never was talking about a future HOF here. Same for Robidas who you were mentioning at one point that he was pretty average, yet understand that at one point he was 11th as far as Canadians are concerned. And for having seen some games, Robidas is more than just average. He has become a pretty good player all-around. We are not going to go back to Ribeiro and Latendresse. As "bad" as Ribeiro was, look at his stats and he wasn't that bad. Yet, he was the worst human being on the planet 'cause of that 1 fake seizure he had (like Bégin who's the worst hockey player ever 'cause of this one penalty he had, funny how it doesn't take a whole lot for the locals to be hated...). As far as Lats is concerned, he had a bad start of the year after showing improvement every single year, after working as hard as ever during the summer but was paired with a even more struggling Lapierre and never got his chance offensively. But that's another story where there are 2 camps there as well. The ones who believed he had his chance without being able to prove it....and the other ones.
Latendresse's statistics improved, but never his general work ethic. I can't remember a time he changed a game the team needed changed around by what he did. He always seemed to contribute to games where it was in our favour over games where we needed someone to step up and turn it around. The player on the old team he had the most in common with was Kovalev, if it wasn't 'their night' they weren't really going to commit to the game. Begin, I don't really have anything against him but I don't miss, a hundred guys can do his job. Ribiero, he just never showed maturity and I could care less about his scoring numbers if he can't offer that or show it was growing.



Quote:
Drafting was bad all over from the Q to the rest. Not sure we can pinpoint specifically the Q to mention how we were bad at drafting. As far as the Gagné explanation...this is where I draw the line. You can't be serious. Thank god we got Chouinard 'cause he didn't have that injury history...yet he's 502 points behind Gagné. THIS YEAR is the year when you have to be careful about Gagné. You still would have used him really well before and he would have been able to give you a whole lot in return. So you might NOW look at replacing him sooner than you thought, still the years he would have given to you are irreplacable.
Rather the team had just drafted smartly that year, (Something that was never going to happen under Houle of course) how about grabbing Robyn Regehr? MTL could've used a better network of defencemen than just expecting Markov to carry them around over the last half-decade. Gagne's had some great seasons but honestly, I've grown tired of our roster having players spending a 1/4 to 1/2 the year on IR.


Quote:
Last decade was a problem all around. Thing is first you are saying that the Q WAS the problem to begin with but then you now reply that it was a problem all around. As bad and terrible most of our 1st rounders were in the 90's, you still have 1998 who you ended up with Ribeiro, Beauchemin, Markov and Ryder. And chances are, all 4 could STILL be part of your team. All 4 are proven NHL'ers that gave us great hockey and are still giving good to great hockey TO THIS DAY. And that's 12 years after being drafted. So only 1 year, out of 10ish terrible ones could still, TO THIS DAY, form 1/4 of your team. Yes, I know, salary cap and all.....well even if we would not have been able to retain them, if we would have traded when their value was at their highest, the return would have been more significant than Niinimaa, nothing and nothing.
I couldn't care less about Ryder, he's busted with two teams now and Boston is looking for a way to unload him, either scores 15 goals for you or 30 and that's not something you want to rely on. Ribiero, well he's not exactly Mr. reliable and for people who crow to get AK out of town, those two aren't beacons of what we need. The team's policy of not negotiating during the season saw most of that happen but I suspect Ribiero was more of a 'get him out of town, NOW' effort by Gainey than honest negotiation.

Quote:
Don't worry, I know he's not Québécois. He's still a franco who playing his junior years in Québec, being rejected by all the teams in the OHL. If you know me, you'll know that I like my locals. That I also like my francos but that I also like all the players that played in the Q. Giroux fits 2 out of 3, therefore he's amongst the players I take a closer look to. You can't compare Pouliot to him though. First, to care about Pouliot, he'll have to prove he's worth it. Then, you don't forget he was traded for a popular Québécois. Then, he didn't play his junior years in the Q so the "attachment" to Pouliot is not as much (needless to say some people remember his comment at the draft when he didn't want to be drafted by the Habs, but to me that's irrelevant, he's a Habs now and I hope people are behind him)
Pouliot scored at a pace when arriving in MTL that Latendresse never approached here and showed serious speed and hands that I never saw Lats display, given a full season playing well and he could easily make people forget about Tenderness. Giroux was 2 for 3 but again, the issue is Giroux was the exception of the Q, not the rule. Scouting the Q a ton to maybe find a Giroux and a Perron every 3-5 years...

Quote:
Yes, there's some work to be done as far as our french-canadian Quebec-born talent. Nobody is every denying it. Not sure how you can have such opinions on guys like Caron and Despres while I personnally share your opinion on Paradis but they are what they are. First-rounders. Why judging them already and not accept that at this point and time, they were judged as 1st-rounder material. And yes, there's a LOT of fixing. By far. The Quebec system cannot SOLELY blame everybody but them by what's going on. Far from it and I totally agree with you.
I have issues with guys who have trouble staying healthy in the QMJHL (regarding Caron), the same way I'm not expecting Mathieu Carle to ever be a regular Hab the way he keeps getting knocked out of action in the AHL. NHL's a much tougher game and these guys are not encouraging me by the IR time they're having in the lower leagues.


Quote:
See, I'll repeat by Slovenia/Kopitar example. And I'll mention the numbers drafts that the Detroit scout was able to get relatively unknown players 'cause nobody was used to draft there. I just wish that with the means that we have, we HAVE to be on top of that game. We can't spend money more to get players, we have to spend it so that the draft becomes our main way to attract people. Yes, we were able to do without and 2 years ago, UFA was our way to get people but guess what.....chances are we wouldn't be able to make that kind of move for the next 5 years....so where do you take your players? Habs needs to be on top of drafting as far as quality is concerned. And it has been proven that while being more difficult, you can have top-6 players, top-4 d-men while drafting at our ranks or after us.
Detroit discovered a number of untapped pipelines in their scouting system from the late 80s into the early 2000s because no one had thought to really examine Europe the way they did and discovered first-class talent. Quebec isn't an unknown location, it's just one where scouting hasn't been a priority for almost anyone when you've got 30 teams looking for that next hidden pipeline. I'm all in favour of more extensive scouting but I'm not seeing a lot to say we missed a ton in the Q compared to what we missed out of the rest of the world in the last ten years. Could've had Kronwall and Volchenkov in 2000, picked up Cam Ward in 2002 and well, does anyone want to talk about 2003 again? Suffice to say, Ryan Getzlaf at center would have been great. Shea Weber was in our reach as well. Wolski or Green in 2004. Could have kept Mcdonagh or acquired Lars Eller in 2007 without a Halak trade. 2008, not traded for hometown boy Tanguay by noting his soft style wasn't what was needed and drafted John Carlson with the 1st rounder we would've kept. I know Giroux and Perron were up for drafting in that cycle but I'm trying to illustrate where inattention elsewhere really hurt the team.

We missed way more not watching the rest of the CHL better and Europe. US hasn't panned out as well from early results but our last 3 years of selections have yet to really show what they have to bring yet.

SeriousFan09 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 08:48 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.