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

Spacek stinks

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
04-22-2011, 10:11 PM
  #51
Sir Jacques Demers
Registered User
 
Sir Jacques Demers's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 941
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by WhiskeySeven View Post
No it's a misconception. I looked at his stats, he was beyond terrible that series.
Thank you! I've been saying for a while that Spacek was just "okay" in the playoffs last year. The only reason he looked good was because of how much he sucked during the season.

He's just awful in so many ways. He maintains a plus rating often, but that's only because he tends not to make big errors. It seems like every shift he's trying very hard not to embarrass himself.

Sir Jacques Demers is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-22-2011, 10:47 PM
  #52
Miller Time
Registered User
 
Miller Time's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 8,322
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by muzion View Post
Weber has been good this year defensively, just inconsistent. He's have 3-4 great games, then a stinker, another 2-3 good ones, then a game where Martin would lose confidence in him. He'll get better with time.

Moen had possession of the puck and turned it over by trying to put it towards the net, when frankly there was no play. He's the first one to blame on the OT goal.
this is what absolutely irks me...

You can replace Weber's name with Spacek, except make it 1 great game, 2 bad ones, 2 good ones, 2 awful ones... and yet Martin never lost confidence in him.

same can be said about Gomez...

Martin is so quick to show his lack of confidence in young players, it never really gives them a chance to work through the ups/downs that ALL players face in a season (or series for that matter).
being younger players, the result is often that it torpedoes their confidence, and then takes them that much longer to build it back up... in the meantime, their inconsistent play while their confidence is shot simply reinforces Martin's impression...

he gets exactly what he was looking for (can't trust young players), whereas the vets who don't get touched regardless of their poor play have a much easier ride + their confidence is generally harder to shake since they've "been there, seen that" and can handle the ups and downs better than a rookie trying to establish himself.

pure folly for a professional franchise, especially in a cap era where getting quality play out of young players and having them develop and contribute BEFORE they get to UFA's years is a vital component to icing a contending team.

Miller Time is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-22-2011, 11:32 PM
  #53
Des Louise
Formerly E=CH2
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Country: Sri Lanka
Posts: 17,506
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Miller Time View Post
this is what absolutely irks me...

You can replace Weber's name with Spacek, except make it 1 great game, 2 bad ones, 2 good ones, 2 awful ones... and yet Martin never lost confidence in him.

same can be said about Gomez...

Martin is so quick to show his lack of confidence in young players, it never really gives them a chance to work through the ups/downs that ALL players face in a season (or series for that matter).
being younger players, the result is often that it torpedoes their confidence, and then takes them that much longer to build it back up... in the meantime, their inconsistent play while their confidence is shot simply reinforces Martin's impression...

he gets exactly what he was looking for (can't trust young players), whereas the vets who don't get touched regardless of their poor play have a much easier ride + their confidence is generally harder to shake since they've "been there, seen that" and can handle the ups and downs better than a rookie trying to establish himself.

pure folly for a professional franchise, especially in a cap era where getting quality play out of young players and having them develop and contribute BEFORE they get to UFA's years is a vital component to icing a contending team.
Well said. I've been trying to find the words to say just that but never could quite get it. Good post.

Des Louise is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-22-2011, 11:32 PM
  #54
BaseballCoach
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 6,228
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Miller Time View Post
this is what absolutely irks me...

You can replace Weber's name with Spacek, except make it 1 great game, 2 bad ones, 2 good ones, 2 awful ones... and yet Martin never lost confidence in him.

same can be said about Gomez...

Martin is so quick to show his lack of confidence in young players, it never really gives them a chance to work through the ups/downs that ALL players face in a season (or series for that matter).
being younger players, the result is often that it torpedoes their confidence, and then takes them that much longer to build it back up... in the meantime, their inconsistent play while their confidence is shot simply reinforces Martin's impression...

he gets exactly what he was looking for (can't trust young players), whereas the vets who don't get touched regardless of their poor play have a much easier ride + their confidence is generally harder to shake since they've "been there, seen that" and can handle the ups and downs better than a rookie trying to establish himself.

pure folly for a professional franchise, especially in a cap era where getting quality play out of young players and having them develop and contribute BEFORE they get to UFA's years is a vital component to icing a contending team.
Unless you are icing a lottery team, the right thing to do for development's sake IS IN FACT to be "hard" on rookies and sophomores, to make sure they learn the lessons they need to learn to become the best they can be. Hopefully that means they will become BETTER than the vets around them.

But if you cut a young player the same kind of slack you will cut an older player who is more set in his ways, you risk NOT getting the youngster to where he needs to get.

While Guy Lafleur and Larry Robinson played limited minutes or even had a year in the AHL early in their careers, Marcel Dionne was allowed to run loose on a weak team. In the end Lafleur and Robinson learned what it takes to be a winner. Dionne, while just as talented, never got to be a winner.

Yannick Weber has a LOT to learn. Hopefully he learns most of it and becomes better than Jaro Spacek. Setting the bar very high for PK Subban is working, no?

BaseballCoach is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-23-2011, 06:54 AM
  #55
bib
#believe
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Country: United States
Posts: 3,488
vCash: 500
I'm starting to get flashbacks




btw, the more I look at watch Ryder's ot goal, the more it looks like a set play.

bib is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-23-2011, 08:19 AM
  #56
Des Louise
Formerly E=CH2
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Country: Sri Lanka
Posts: 17,506
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BaseballCoach View Post
Unless you are icing a lottery team, the right thing to do for development's sake IS IN FACT to be "hard" on rookies and sophomores, to make sure they learn the lessons they need to learn to become the best they can be. Hopefully that means they will become BETTER than the vets around them.
That doesn't make much sense.

If you are right, why is not always the case ? Why the caveat "Unless you are icing a lottery team" ?

Plus you're generalizing here. Some individuals need to be pushed, some others need to be punished for every mistake, everyone is different. What we need is a coach who will personalize his approach for every player and prioritize the development of our young assets.

Quote:
But if you cut a young player the same kind of slack you will cut an older player who is more set in his ways, you risk NOT getting the youngster to where he needs to get.
I don't think that's true at all. Not in all cases anyway.

Quote:
While Guy Lafleur and Larry Robinson played limited minutes or even had a year in the AHL early in their careers, Marcel Dionne was allowed to run loose on a weak team. In the end Lafleur and Robinson learned what it takes to be a winner. Dionne, while just as talented, never got to be a winner.
Laughable. Lafleur and Robinson played on contender team. There is a lot more entering the equation than how these three players were developed.

Quote:
Yannick Weber has a LOT to learn. Hopefully he learns most of it and becomes better than Jaro Spacek. Setting the bar very high for PK Subban is working, no?
Nah, Weber has been pretty damn solid for a rookie. Not quite as good as Subban, but wasn't taking as many risks.

Setting the bar high for Subban is working.. Have you ever stopped to think the 5 games scratch was a hinder to his development more than anything else? Or maybe that was precisely what the doctor ordered, we'll never know. But I'm going to go ahead and venture that Subban and Weber have very different personalities with very different level of confidence in their own means. And it's not too much of a stretch to assume that both might not respond the same way to the same circumstances.

Have a rigid one approach fits all is going to lose you half your players. Latendresse, O'Byrne and SK were victims #1-2-3. Let's see if Weber is #4.

EDIT:

One thing i wanted to add. It makes no sense for the habs not to make every effort to make sure all of their young players are fully developed because we're simply not good enough to afford wasting assets. If we were a contender I'd not worry about the development of certain young players as much but we're just not there at all and having guys like SK around would definitely help get us there faster. At this point, the habs should leave these players in the AHL as long as humanly possible unless Martin is ready to give them some room to develop with the big team which is almost never the case.


Last edited by Des Louise: 04-23-2011 at 09:06 AM.
Des Louise is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-23-2011, 09:02 AM
  #57
Boris Le Tigre
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
 
Boris Le Tigre's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: More Toast !
Country: Vatican City State
Posts: 5,392
vCash: 500
Spacek is a tremendous two-sport athlete. He is a fantastic swimmer. You just can't get a sense of it that easy... because the water is frozen in hockey.

Boris Le Tigre is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-23-2011, 09:06 AM
  #58
jlgib21*
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 620
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sen Jacques Demers View Post
Thank you! I've been saying for a while that Spacek was just "okay" in the playoffs last year. The only reason he looked good was because of how much he sucked during the season.

He's just awful in so many ways. He maintains a plus rating often, but that's only because he tends not to make big errors. It seems like every shift he's trying very hard not to embarrass himself.
I agree,and I don't see one plus on him being out there. Watch him,.he seems to make a mistake every shift. And how do you feel about him always giving up the puck to avoid hits. He needs to be bought out,traded or sent to the minors after the season. I never want to see him put on the CH sweater again

jlgib21* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-23-2011, 09:23 AM
  #59
BaseballCoach
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 6,228
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by E = CH˛ View Post
That doesn't make much sense.

If you are right, why is not always the case ? Why the caveat "Unless you are icing a lottery team" ?

Plus you're generalizing here. Some individuals need to be pushed, some others need to be punished for every mistake, everyone is different. What we need is a coach who will personalize his approach for every player and prioritize the development of our young assets.

Setting the bar high for Subban is working.. Have you ever stopped to think the 5 games scratch was a hinder to his development more than anything else? Or maybe that was precisely what the doctor ordered, we'll never know. But I'm going to go ahead and venture that Subban and Weber have very different personalities with very different level of confidence in their own means. And it's not too much of a stretch to assume that both might not respond the same way to the same circumstances.

Have a rigid one approach fits all is going to lose you half your players. Latendresse, O'Byrne and SK were victims #1-2-3. Let's see if Weber is #4.
SK was an off-ice issue. He actually got a lot of playing time as a rookie and sophomore, mainly because he HAD a pretty solid game after learning from the Hunters and Don Lever. The problems developed later in SK's case.

But still I wonder if you have thought through what you are saying. Let's assume for the sake of argument that Subban is a confident tough guy who is able to handle the consequences of his mistakes while Weber is a delicate flower that the coach is afraid will not develop right if he pays for his mistakes with less ice time.

What does the coach tell Subban when PK asks why he has to sit out or miss power play time when he screws up but Weber keeps on playing?

Or Plekanec versus Perezhogin? Or Gorges versus O'Byrne?

Or Pacioretty versus SK74?

Isn't it obvious that coddling SK, Weber, O'Byrne and Perezhogin would have an effect on Patches, Subban, Gorges and Plekanec too??

This is where I said that it might matter less when you are icing a lottery team. If you are in a mode where you do not mind failure because it will get you high draft picks, it might actually make sense to play the talented kids despite their mistakes and live with the losses when they play run and gun, or forget to cover their man, or try to make fancy plays at the bluelines, or party too much some nights.

The Habs are not in a position to play like a lottery team. They have to integrate a couple of youngsters every year while continuing to win as much as possible. Five or six youngsters audition each year, and two or three might stick, having shown winner attributes.

Ultimately, there is no room for the lazy, for the mentally weak, for the entitlers, for anyone not ready to battle through adversity for their spot on the team, so that they can then battle through adversity with their teammates for a place in the next playoff round.

I know this is Hockey's Future, but the BEST way to a bright future is to develop the Plekanecs, the Gorges, the Paciorettys and the Subbans and not worry about the party animals, the fat and lazies, the me-me-mes, and the mentally challenged who cannot learn from their mistakes and keep repeating them.

BaseballCoach is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-23-2011, 09:30 AM
  #60
Subban76
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 1,332
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by jlgib21 View Post
I agree,and I don't see one plus on him being out there. Watch him,.he seems to make a mistake every shift. And how do you feel about him always giving up the puck to avoid hits. He needs to be bought out,traded or sent to the minors after the season. I never want to see him put on the CH sweater again
He's on a 35+ contract, is salary will count against the cap next year no matter what unless we trade him, and good luck we that. The only option I see is getting a similar contract in return that can be bought out or shoved in the AHL.

Subban76 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-23-2011, 09:46 AM
  #61
Des Louise
Formerly E=CH2
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Country: Sri Lanka
Posts: 17,506
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BaseballCoach View Post
SK was an off-ice issue. He actually got a lot of playing time as a rookie and sophomore, mainly because he HAD a pretty solid game after learning from the Hunters and Don Lever. The problems developed later in SK's case.

But still I wonder if you have thought through what you are saying. Let's assume for the sake of argument that Subban is a confident tough guy who is able to handle the consequences of his mistakes while Weber is a delicate flower that the coach is afraid will not develop right if he pays for his mistakes with less ice time.

What does the coach tell Subban when PK asks why he has to sit out or miss power play time when he screws up but Weber keeps on playing?

Or Plekanec versus Perezhogin? Or Gorges versus O'Byrne?

Or Pacioretty versus SK74?

Isn't it obvious that coddling SK, Weber, O'Byrne and Perezhogin would have an effect on Patches, Subban, Gorges and Plekanec too??

This is where I said that it might matter less when you are icing a lottery team. If you are in a mode where you do not mind failure because it will get you high draft picks, it might actually make sense to play the talented kids despite their mistakes and live with the losses when they play run and gun, or forget to cover their man, or try to make fancy plays at the bluelines, or party too much some nights.

The Habs are not in a position to play like a lottery team. They have to integrate a couple of youngsters every year while continuing to win as much as possible. Five or six youngsters audition each year, and two or three might stick, having shown winner attributes.

Ultimately, there is no room for the lazy, for the mentally weak, for the entitlers, for anyone not ready to battle through adversity for their spot on the team, so that they can then battle through adversity with their teammates for a place in the next playoff round.

I know this is Hockey's Future, but the BEST way to a bright future is to develop the Plekanecs, the Gorges, the Paciorettys and the Subbans and not worry about the party animals, the fat and lazies, the me-me-mes, and the mentally challenged who cannot learn from their mistakes and keep repeating them.
I'm not saying Weber is a delicate flower who needs to keep playing through any mistakes he makes always. I'm merely suggesting that a rookie should get at least as much leeway as a normal vet, possibly a little bit more because get this.. they're rookies, they'll make mistakes. Players need to be equal and treated equally in terms of their performances. When you don't do that you have guys like Gomez who take whole summers off and come to give dismal efforts for the whole season because they're not threatened by anything at all.

There are plenty of examples of young guys being given more chances because they're rookies. Even on teams who aren't bottom feeders. Look at a guy like Cam Fowler who got tons of ice time this year despite being horrible defensively. Ducks still finished higher than we did and developed a young prospect pretty fast by giving him their trust instead of crapping on him for every mistake.

Now you look at SK who had attitude problems... apparently despite the fact he was not a problem anywhere but in Montreal with Carbo a guy who can barely speak English, and Martin who... well never gave him a chance. He goes to Nashville and is their best forward, has an awesome attitude, etc. Before coming to Montreal he was also not a problem at all. Not a problem in Hamilton either. Yet after one training camp, Martin has him all figured out and decides this guy needs to go back in the AHL based purely on attitude. What a joke.

EDIT:

One thing I wanted to add is the habs keep doing the same thing over and over again and we keep finishing 6th to 10th. Instead of developing the talent we do draft, we look elsewhere for answers. In the process we're basically bleeding assets by letting good talent leave, and having to trade picks and prospects away for old useless vets at twice the cost. The habs keep investing in the likes of Gomez, Spacek and Moen instead of the McDos, SKs and Latendresse and it's really slowing the rebuild down to a crawl.


Last edited by Des Louise: 04-23-2011 at 09:54 AM.
Des Louise is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-23-2011, 10:38 AM
  #62
BaseballCoach
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 6,228
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by E = CH˛ View Post
I'm not saying Weber is a delicate flower who needs to keep playing through any mistakes he makes always. I'm merely suggesting that a rookie should get at least as much leeway as a normal vet, possibly a little bit more because get this.. they're rookies, they'll make mistakes. Players need to be equal and treated equally in terms of their performances. When you don't do that you have guys like Gomez who take whole summers off and come to give dismal efforts for the whole season because they're not threatened by anything at all.

There are plenty of examples of young guys being given more chances because they're rookies. Even on teams who aren't bottom feeders. Look at a guy like Cam Fowler who got tons of ice time this year despite being horrible defensively. Ducks still finished higher than we did and developed a young prospect pretty fast by giving him their trust instead of crapping on him for every mistake.

Now you look at SK who had attitude problems... apparently despite the fact he was not a problem anywhere but in Montreal with Carbo a guy who can barely speak English, and Martin who... well never gave him a chance. He goes to Nashville and is their best forward, has an awesome attitude, etc. Before coming to Montreal he was also not a problem at all. Not a problem in Hamilton either. Yet after one training camp, Martin has him all figured out and decides this guy needs to go back in the AHL based purely on attitude. What a joke.

EDIT:

One thing I wanted to add is the habs keep doing the same thing over and over again and we keep finishing 6th to 10th. Instead of developing the talent we do draft, we look elsewhere for answers. In the process we're basically bleeding assets by letting good talent leave, and having to trade picks and prospects away for old useless vets at twice the cost. The habs keep investing in the likes of Gomez, Spacek and Moen instead of the McDos, SKs and Latendresse and it's really slowing the rebuild down to a crawl.
It"s not right to subtly twist the truth again and again.

If you can say we always finish 6th-10th because we finished 10th ONCE, in a year where tons went wrong, and we were still only 3 points out of seventh, then why the F*KC do ignore the time we finished FIRST? Especially since it is more recent than the 10th place finish???

As for the rebuild, it is not "slowing to a crawl", it's basically been done already. July 09 - March 10. The first year after the major roster change, we went to the Conference finals. To prove it was no fluke, we finished 6th this year with 96 points despite MAJOR injury problems.

The Habs brass, I can assure you, does not believe they are in rebuild mode. They are at or just outside the top third of the league, depending on the different teams' relative injury problems.

And by the way, Gomez did not take that much time off, he just didn't get the points he is used to getting. During the only stretch when he had two good wingers consistently, he did put up points. The few times Plekanec has been cool the past two years, Gomez is able to pick up some of the slack. We needed that, and it was not SK74 that would give it to us.

Spacek was a bad signing as to length of contract, and Moen was an ok signing but overpaid. Still, when Markov went down last year, Spacek and Hamrlik held the team together, while surely you can agree that O'Byrne and Hamrlik would not have been able to do the same for almost 40 games. Moen was in our top 9 for the playoffs. Neither will be here past next year, Subban and Patches are better.

We lots of youth playing for us now, 16 out of 26 on the roster, 12 or 13 out of 19 in these playoff games.

28 and under to start the year:
Cammalleri
Plekanec
Wisniewski
Moen

25 and under to start the year:
Gorges
Kostitsyn
Picard

23 and under to start the year:
Price
Subban
Pacioretty
Pyatt

Eller
Pouliot
White
Desharnais
Weber


How much more youth do folks think can be featured??

BaseballCoach is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-23-2011, 11:02 AM
  #63
Miller Time
Registered User
 
Miller Time's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 8,322
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by E = CH˛ View Post
I'm not saying Weber is a delicate flower who needs to keep playing through any mistakes he makes always. I'm merely suggesting that a rookie should get at least as much leeway as a normal vet, possibly a little bit more because get this.. they're rookies, they'll make mistakes. Players need to be equal and treated equally in terms of their performances. When you don't do that you have guys like Gomez who take whole summers off and come to give dismal efforts for the whole season because they're not threatened by anything at all.

There are plenty of examples of young guys being given more chances because they're rookies. Even on teams who aren't bottom feeders. Look at a guy like Cam Fowler who got tons of ice time this year despite being horrible defensively. Ducks still finished higher than we did and developed a young prospect pretty fast by giving him their trust instead of crapping on him for every mistake.

Now you look at SK who had attitude problems... apparently despite the fact he was not a problem anywhere but in Montreal with Carbo a guy who can barely speak English, and Martin who... well never gave him a chance. He goes to Nashville and is their best forward, has an awesome attitude, etc. Before coming to Montreal he was also not a problem at all. Not a problem in Hamilton either. Yet after one training camp, Martin has him all figured out and decides this guy needs to go back in the AHL based purely on attitude. What a joke.

EDIT:

One thing I wanted to add is the habs keep doing the same thing over and over again and we keep finishing 6th to 10th. Instead of developing the talent we do draft, we look elsewhere for answers. In the process we're basically bleeding assets by letting good talent leave, and having to trade picks and prospects away for old useless vets at twice the cost. The habs keep investing in the likes of Gomez, Spacek and Moen instead of the McDos, SKs and Latendresse and it's really slowing the rebuild down to a crawl.
and of course BC is missing the point...

it's a business, not high school basketball.

every player that comes into contact with the franchise is an asset, so regadless of their attitude, it's in the best interest of the franchise to get the most out of every asset (be it on the ice, or in trade). the league is littered with "party-animals, me-first guys, and prima donna's"... either you figure out how to make it work, or you hide it long enough to get something of value for them.

You DON"T alienate them, bury them, and then toss them away for nothing. THat's a last resort as opposed to option #1 as it seems to be of late with this organization.

Miller Time is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-23-2011, 11:07 AM
  #64
BaseballCoach
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 6,228
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Miller Time View Post
and of course BC is missing the point...

it's a business, not high school basketball.

every player that comes into contact with the franchise is an asset, so regadless of their attitude, it's in the best interest of the franchise to get the most out of every asset (be it on the ice, or in trade). the league is littered with "party-animals, me-first guys, and prima donna's"... either you figure out how to make it work, or you hide it long enough to get something of value for them.

You DON"T alienate them, bury them, and then toss them away for nothing. THat's a last resort as opposed to option #1 as it seems to be of late with this organization.
I'm not missing any point on the ice.

As for trades, I agree that the organization should try to get the most for its assets. Thus, SK should have been traded EARLIER, Latendresse as well. We would have got more for them. As for O'Byrne, I actually like the trade. Bournival is an excellent prospect.

Any rebuttal to the point that the Habs have 16 guys 28 and under on the roster and 12/13 out of 19 playing in these playoffs? Or 8/9 out of 19 being 25 and under???

I don't see a youth development problem, just one trade that did not work out and another one that is still up for grabs.

BaseballCoach is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-23-2011, 11:29 AM
  #65
Des Louise
Formerly E=CH2
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Country: Sri Lanka
Posts: 17,506
vCash: 500
We have significantly different assessments of where the team is at (I say mediocre, I don't see how we're even better than the hawks who finished 8th in the west, you say top third) and how much certain players are useful and needed (Gomez, Spacek, Moen, etc).

Quote:
It"s not right to subtly twist the truth again and again.

If you can say we always finish 6th-10th because we finished 10th ONCE, in a year where tons went wrong, and we were still only 3 points out of seventh, then why the F*KC do ignore the time we finished FIRST? Especially since it is more recent than the 10th place finish???
What is the outlier...the 1st place team with zero injuries that barely made the playoffs the following year...or the 10th place finish a mere 2 spots removed from the perennial 8th place we always end up at.

I wonder who's being dishonest and twisting the truth here.

Whatever, let's keep throwing away guys like SK for 1 day of horrible UFAs like Ellis and Boyd, or guys like McDo for 5 years of one of the most overpaid and underachieving player in the league. You guys will always be there to justify moves like this. Hope the habs management doesn't give themselves a pass like this and actively wonders why guys like SK were a problem with us and not with others and what they could have done better to make those guys produce with us, or at least what they could have done to get more in a trade for them.

Des Louise is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-23-2011, 12:04 PM
  #66
LyleOdelein
Registered User
 
LyleOdelein's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Renfrew
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,671
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by E = CH˛ View Post
Whatever, let's keep throwing away guys like SK for 1 day of horrible UFAs like Ellis and Boyd, or guys like McDo for 5 years of one of the most overpaid and underachieving player in the league. You guys will always be there to justify moves like this. Hope the habs management doesn't give themselves a pass like this and actively wonders why guys like SK were a problem with us and not with others and what they could have done better to make those guys produce with us, or at least what they could have done to get more in a trade for them.
The thing is, there's tons of players that are cast-offs from their team that end up succeeding elsewhere. Grabner, Santorelli, MacArthur, Purcell, Parenteau, B. Boyle, Moulson, Leino, Prust are guys that had fine years after being shipped out for little value or let go by their team. St. Louis, Boyes, D. Boyle, Sharp, Savard, Thomas, Laich, Peverley, Glenncross, Versteeg and many other guys have been lost as free agents or throw-ins by teams in past. This story is by no means unique to Montreal.

It's human nature to remember mistakes more vividly than successes. That's why every poker player can remember every single detail of his bad beats but has to think harder to recall his lucky hands (if he can at all). There's a lot of variables that go into developing players and sometimes a change in scenary allows a player to thrive for any number of reasons. That's a fact of life in the NHL and something that every GM lives with.

LyleOdelein is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-23-2011, 12:15 PM
  #67
BaseballCoach
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 6,228
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by E = CH˛ View Post
What is the outlier...the 1st place team with zero injuries that barely made the playoffs the following year...or the 10th place finish a mere 2 spots removed from the perennial 8th place we always end up at.

I wonder who's being dishonest and twisting the truth here.
The honest way is to either count every year, or throw away the best and the worst. You are skating, instead of saying, "sorry I was wrong".

Bottom line: we have been in the playoffs six of the last seven years, and are around 9th in the league in total series played. This is when 47% of the teams do not make the playoffs and only 26% of the teams get to a second round.

These results are NOT mediocre, they are above average. Clearly above average in fact.

What stands out in our memory unfortunately are the PREVIOUS five years, pre-Gainey, when we MISSED the playoffs four out of five years. THOSE were mediocre years, or a tad worse, but still not lottery team bad.


Quote:
Originally Posted by E = CH˛ View Post
I wonder who's being dishonest and twisting the truth here.

Whatever, let's keep throwing away guys like SK for 1 day of horrible UFAs like Ellis and Boyd, or guys like McDo for 5 years of one of the most overpaid and underachieving player in the league. You guys will always be there to justify moves like this. Hope the habs management doesn't give themselves a pass like this and actively wonders why guys like SK were a problem with us and not with others and what they could have done better to make those guys produce with us, or at least what they could have done to get more in a trade for them.
I agreed they did not get enough for SK74. They probably should have traded him earlier when they first realized he was a problem, and before his value dropped like an anchor.

As for the McDonagh trade, we'll see at the end of his career how much of an impact player he is going to be; personally, I was not against the trade when it was made, so it is not fair for me to second-guess it bitterly now, and yes I know my view is in the minority at this time. Trading Higgins was addition by subtraction, so it was Gomez, Pyatt and moving Higgins versus losing McDonagh. Last year, Gomez was our 3rd leading playoff scorer, and Pyatt has already played a role in 11 playoff game wins. Since McDonagh is two years younger, we could start by seeing what impact he has (including the playoffs) in the next two seasons.

I would still take Gomez-Gionta-Cammalleri-Pyatt over keeping Koivu-Kovalev-Higgins-McDonagh overall, and picking up Gomez was a key part of changing our identity. If trading a guy who ends up being a mid-level NHLer was the price to pay, I don't think it was unaffordable.

Anyway, we digress.

As to the thread point, yes Spacek is not playing very well the last two games, but he is not alone. Far from it.

BaseballCoach is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-23-2011, 12:57 PM
  #68
Des Louise
Formerly E=CH2
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Country: Sri Lanka
Posts: 17,506
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by LyleOdelein View Post
The thing is, there's tons of players that are cast-offs from their team that end up succeeding elsewhere. Grabner, Santorelli, MacArthur, Purcell, Parenteau, B. Boyle, Moulson, Leino, Prust are guys that had fine years after being shipped out for little value or let go by their team. St. Louis, Boyes, D. Boyle, Sharp, Savard, Thomas, Laich, Peverley, Glenncross, Versteeg and many other guys have been lost as free agents or throw-ins by teams in past. This story is by no means unique to Montreal.

It's human nature to remember mistakes more vividly than successes. That's why every poker player can remember every single detail of his bad beats but has to think harder to recall his lucky hands (if he can at all). There's a lot of variables that go into developing players and sometimes a change in scenary allows a player to thrive for any number of reasons. That's a fact of life in the NHL and something that every GM lives with.
S. Kost had showed great things with us. The problem was that he was sent back to the AHL without being given a chance out of training camp. It was a ridiculous move. I'm sorry but it was just a stupid thing to do. Guy was 100% ready for the NHL and not willing to take Martin's BS. Guys with character who are confident in their abilities will never accept something like that. They're competitors, and it's natural that he soured on the habs. I just don't see how Martin was able to make the call that SK had to go back to the AHL based on not even a full training camp.

Now you wanna excuse a huge mistake like that by saying that every team makes mistakes... that's a great way to never actually make sure management is accountable for their failures.

And what a failure. We're talking Latendresse, SK, Ribeiro level of failures and not just one of them THREE of them. Find me a team that messed up this big three times. Even if you find one... shouldn't we expect a bit more than being part of a bunch of teams who squander assets left and right ?

Also, maybe I'd remember the good more than the bad if there was more good than bad. Where are our steals ? Gorges ? That's our steal. And it's not like Gorges is an all star. He's a good heart and soul stay at home top 4 guy. We're getting the short hand of the stick more often than not and it's no wonder I remember the bad more.

Des Louise is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-23-2011, 02:07 PM
  #69
LyleOdelein
Registered User
 
LyleOdelein's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Renfrew
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,671
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by E = CH˛ View Post
S. Kost had showed great things with us. The problem was that he was sent back to the AHL without being given a chance out of training camp. It was a ridiculous move. I'm sorry but it was just a stupid thing to do. Guy was 100% ready for the NHL and not willing to take Martin's BS. Guys with character who are confident in their abilities will never accept something like that. They're competitors, and it's natural that he soured on the habs. I just don't see how Martin was able to make the call that SK had to go back to the AHL based on not even a full training camp.
How did SKost respond to getting sent to the AHL? With terrible play. He put up 4 points in his next 23 games and struggled through an inconsistent year of mediocrity.

I'm sure you're thinking "Well Martin never gave him any ice time or opportunity." Actually, Martin did. Sergei averaged over 14 minutes of ice time per game he dressed, which was 3 more than Pyatt (one of Jacque's favourites according to some of the people on here) and just a cut below Moen (and SH time was the major difference here). Next up, "Sergei was stuck with scrubs all year." Wrong again. The kid played over 30% of his ES ice time with Plekanec and had a significant stretch (almost 10%) of his ice time on a line with Pleks/Cammy.

Sergei was given a wake-up call then plenty of opportunity to succeed. He didn't grab it. If he was ready to grab the spotlight last year, it would've happened. It's easy to use hindsight and completely ignore the facts that led to SKost's departure. Sitting back and making statements like "SKost was 100% ready for the NHL...." and blaming Martin is revisionist history at best.

As for Latendresse. He's been adequate and benefitted from his change in scenary but he really hasn't done too much of to improve the Wild. I'm not really sweating his loss at this point.

The Ribeiro trade is a classic example of people cherry picking arguments as well. People like to look back on that and say "We only got Niinimaa...", but ignore the fact that a large part of the rationality behind dealing Ribs was to create an opportunity for Plekanec. Sure, the return could've been higher at the time, but that deal has had a massive positive impact on the Habs even if Janne was a negligible factor. Plekanec is the player he is today because Gainey made room for him in the top 6.

There's a lot of ways to find all-star players. They don't solely come from the bargain bin. Anyways, I must have forgotten SKost and Gui playing in this year's ASG.

LyleOdelein is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-23-2011, 03:28 PM
  #70
Des Louise
Formerly E=CH2
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Country: Sri Lanka
Posts: 17,506
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by LyleOdelein View Post
How did SKost respond to getting sent to the AHL? With terrible play. He put up 4 points in his next 23 games and struggled through an inconsistent year of mediocrity.

I'm sure you're thinking "Well Martin never gave him any ice time or opportunity." Actually, Martin did. Sergei averaged over 14 minutes of ice time per game he dressed, which was 3 more than Pyatt (one of Jacque's favourites according to some of the people on here) and just a cut below Moen (and SH time was the major difference here). Next up, "Sergei was stuck with scrubs all year." Wrong again. The kid played over 30% of his ES ice time with Plekanec and had a significant stretch (almost 10%) of his ice time on a line with Pleks/Cammy.

Sergei was given a wake-up call then plenty of opportunity to succeed. He didn't grab it. If he was ready to grab the spotlight last year, it would've happened. It's easy to use hindsight and completely ignore the facts that led to SKost's departure. Sitting back and making statements like "SKost was 100% ready for the NHL...." and blaming Martin is revisionist history at best.

As for Latendresse. He's been adequate and benefitted from his change in scenary but he really hasn't done too much of to improve the Wild. I'm not really sweating his loss at this point.

The Ribeiro trade is a classic example of people cherry picking arguments as well. People like to look back on that and say "We only got Niinimaa...", but ignore the fact that a large part of the rationality behind dealing Ribs was to create an opportunity for Plekanec. Sure, the return could've been higher at the time, but that deal has had a massive positive impact on the Habs even if Janne was a negligible factor. Plekanec is the player he is today because Gainey made room for him in the top 6.

There's a lot of ways to find all-star players. They don't solely come from the bargain bin. Anyways, I must have forgotten SKost and Gui playing in this year's ASG.
Month #of games - G - A - Pts
February 7 1 5 6
March 14 4 2 6
April 3 1 1 2

14 pts in 24 games, 2 game winners playing 3rd line minutes (14min/game). Was also a +8 during that time. And he can't have been playing with Plekanec at the time because Plek was playing with AK and Cammy while Gomez was playing with Pouliot and Gionta. SK was def. playing with 3rd/4th line guys. I'm curious to know which website you are using for the 30% ice time with plekanec stat, and if true, where it comes from cuz it wasn't at the end of the season. I wonder if it was PK time or something.

Anyway, despite his strong finish, he didn't start in the playoffs. Played 3 min in the first game he dressed, and we know the rest.

EDIT:

The point I tried to make there is that SK did play well at some point. Not when he came back in november, december, he struggled a lot after being recalled. My memory is a little fuzzy on the why there.

But to say SK didn't take the chance he was given and bla bla is non-sense. All you have to do is look at his strong finish to the season playing with plugs. He clearly showed really good things in the last 2-3 months of the season and deserved to play in the playoffs. It's a wonder he could turn his season around at all considering he was sent back to the AHL for no good reason in the first place and that's why a lot of people, including me, are criticizing Martin. Sometimes he really has a gift for destroying the confidence of a player. A guy like SK with as much talent as he has.. I knew from the start he was good player. Everyone had high hopes for him, you can't say otherwise. Yet Martin knew in training camp that SK had to go back to the AHL.. I'm not buying it.


Last edited by Des Louise: 04-23-2011 at 03:43 PM.
Des Louise is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-23-2011, 11:56 PM
  #71
LyleOdelein
Registered User
 
LyleOdelein's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Renfrew
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,671
vCash: 500
I'll stop derailing this thread and say that Spacek played a solid game tonight. As one of his harshest critics in this thread I'll give him his due credit.

LyleOdelein is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-24-2011, 12:00 AM
  #72
WhiskeySeven
Mr. Worldwide
 
WhiskeySeven's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 15,399
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by LyleOdelein View Post
I'll stop derailing this thread and say that Spacek played a solid game tonight. As one of his harshest critics in this thread I'll give him his due credit.
Agreed, he was as solid as he could've been. The team was bad, the system was ineffective but Spacek didn't make any glaring mistakes and had a quiet game. As they say, good for a defenseman.

WhiskeySeven is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-24-2011, 12:10 PM
  #73
Schmautzie
Dave est magané
 
Schmautzie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Greater Boston
Country: United States
Posts: 1,636
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Habitants View Post
although i agree about spacek, what about Gomez!!??

guy was on for 4 goals!

where is that thread about gomez playoff performer now? he was terrible last night.

every time he was on the ice i was nervous, and then facepalm!
Brent Sopel has had a rough series

Schmautzie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-24-2011, 11:40 PM
  #74
lakingshockey
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 167
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Schmautzie View Post
Brent Sopel has had a rough series
I would say that aside from game 4 where he is probably was responsible for the tying goal he has had a good series - blocking shots and doing what he is supposed to. Yes he is -3 but does not mean he was the one that caused the goal and again aside from the one in game 4 he has not been the one missing his assignments unlike some others that happen to be on the ice at the same time - Gomez anyone for starters??

lakingshockey 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 01:39 AM.

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

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