check this out out of the other 29 teams in the nhl 14 of them have 2 players from habs 4 of them have 1 and 11 have 0 ,and people say we dont trade enuff there are enuff ex habs in the nhl to make to habs teams and people wounder why we havent won a cup since 93 lol
There are so many posters here that are willing to give up youth to get marginal upgrades like Penner but if he didn't pan out (as he didn't for the Oil) management would be crucified for not letting the young players play. How could they, they'd be somewhere else.
Originally Posted by uiCk
thats, just an opinion. and an opinion thats spreading around.
maybe the strategy is to slowly build a contender? imposing a culture of hard work, developping the right players, slowly getting piece by piece, building atmosphere for future UFA's to come and compete here?
thats how i see it.
what seems to be a belief around here, is that the only way to build a contender, is to do a 'garage sale' , draft plenty and high for 2-4 years. Which is, to me, an accelerated way to building a contender, but that includes 2-4 years risking to not make the PO, which IMO would be a shameful strategy for the "mecca" of hockey.
Our drafting is getting better, our development is getting better, i have hard time not seeing how the habs are not improving. Step by Step though, maybe thats what people around here don't like,some people seem to prefer to take the elevator.
It's really sad theres this conspiracy that the habs mangment just wants a few bucks and doesn't care about winning. Such an easy and simplistic way of looking at things, and seems to be catching on to more and more people.
Let me ask you both the same question, if what you're saying is true: Why is it okay then to trade away assets, prospects and draft picks, for pending UFA's? What's valid one way should also be valid the other way, right? We're can't give youth for guys answering needs who are under contract, but we can do it for UFA's? I get in now... I think.
Originally Posted by saints96
i hope so too. they can take the majority of our whiny fanbase and ****** media as well.
I've lived to see as many Stanley Cups as you have fingers. Don't count on it. You call it whining, I call it seeing both sides of the medal instead of being duped into thinking that everything this organization is doing is rose.
What facts? People conveniently forget we were awful until the playoffs, to such an extent Toronto was a goal away from preventing our playoff run. One goal and we could very well have not made the post season. In actuality, that was our worst season total since 2003. We were projected to be swept out with relatively ease by Washington and would have if Halak had not become the second coming of Patrick Roy. Our Cinderella story hinged on the play of a goaltender playing out of this world hockey. With the exception of maybe Ryan Miller, any other goalie in nets during that stretch and the Habs do not topple the Caps. That is not to excuse the contribution of Gorges, Cammalleri, Gill and Gionta but at the end of the day Halak is why we made our run.
We never bothered to give Koivu any winger excluding the rare moments Kovalev was on his wing. He was instead slotted with the likes of Higgins, Latendresse and Ryder, all of who had horrid consistency issues. The one season he was lined up with Tanguay and Kovalev permanently, the trio exploded with something like fifteen points in three games. Now it is unreasonable to expect that continued level of consistency but it indicated what they could do. Unfortunately, Tanguay went down and in the post season that year, Gainey had the genius idea to toss Larague on their line.
As for Markov's record. Our record without him last season was hardly impressive. So why not blame Cammalleri and Gionta? Perhaps the team simply learned how to play without him due to his frequent injuries.
Do you have any evidence to support your claim? No? I thought not. We have no idea what Tanguay demanded and it perfectly feasible he overestimated his value or turned down certain team offers. He had publicly stated he had wished to resign with Montreal but it was rumored Gainey never offered him a contract.
It was not a hidden gem, it was wide spread depth and productivity. I would rather the 60+ point contribution from Kovalev and Tanguay respectively than the oh, 20ish from whoever else we toss on the top six to plug a hole. What about that six million in spare change to add to the line up I posted? Dump Tanguay since you apparently detest him and we have enough to sign Gaborik or we stay with that roster and lure Richards in this coming off season when Kostitsyn's contract expires. Koivu moves to the third line and we have some fantastic depth down the middle. I concede that is wishful thinking even had we kept the old roster and if Gomez was buried, it is possible it happens now. Of course it remains to be seen if this organization will correct past blunders like Gomez.
The point I had made was we have poor management. The fact we could have had a superior roster for less money makes that abundantly clear. Thus, people are upset. One good run in fifteen or so years and we abruptly have turned the page? Alright, if this group can emulate that success and prove it is not an anomaly. I will happily dine over a helping of crow. Likewise, if in five years this team has been ousted in the first and second round just like every other because of lateral moves or certain albatross contracts. What is the excuse then?
FACT 1: regardless of your spin this team went 3 rounds last spring. The so called better team failed in round one by being swept in their centennial playoff run and was rightly disbanded.
FACT 2: Tanguay was passed over by all teams until he was signed for significantly less dollars by Tampa. Even when he came to us he was not wanted anymore in Calgary. He's cheap because his value is zero, not my opinion this is according to those that set the value.
You can't say that Koivu never was given great wingers and that's why he failed and in the same breath say that Gomez is crap when he's given a struggling AK, an out of position Eller and Moen. be consistent in your argument. How is Koivu a victim and Gomez the cause in the same scenario?
Are you saying that Tanguay didn't refuse to play until he was 100%? It was a pretty big deal at the time and pretty clear to me that he wasn't coming back. What kind of hockey player doesn't play hurt during the playoffs?
At any rate, you clearly hate this core that has achieved more in its short time than the former core. Adding parts like Gaborik to that core would have resulted in the same thing all over again. Calling the former core superior is your opinion not a fact. To bring back the players that failed so miserably during a centennial year would have been admitting your organization has no pride. Gainey was right in letting go of a divided room and players that could not lead. The room today is by all accounts much better. Do I know this for sure, no how could I but tell me this group doesn't look tight and stick up for each other.
BTW, I love Koivu and would take him back any day just to see him finish his career here.
I'm still confused why we didn't claim Sturm. Any theories??
Maybe they were trying to use the cap space on a better player(Arnott Penner etc), if you add Sturm it puts us against the cap with Sturm's 3.5 mil hit. Another possibility is they figured with his bad knee he may not be fast enough to play our style of counter attack game. If they had a market to trade AK and they were panning on moving him, I think then Sturm becomes an option.
Would Sturm be a clear upgrade on any of Cammy Gio Pacioretty Pouliot AK Halpern? It's not obvious, the last 2 years he is 47 points 93 GP with mostly top 6 ice time.